iPad Mini: Would Happily Pay $529 for Mini w/ Retina

[macbook123]

Originally Posted by Yr Blues

you can't double the horizontal without doubling the vertical or else you'll have a totally different aspect ratio

and people will be calling for cook's head if it only had 5 hours battery

Multiply both by the same factor is what I meant. 1.5 instead of 2.0.

[magrat22]

Originally Posted by magrat22

Just because they have the technology to make a retina screen for the touch and the 9.7" iPad doesn't mean they can just automatically create it for the mini. As we know with all Apple devices they design to the finest detail so they aren't just going to chop the 9.7" screen to fit the mini. Templates need to be created to make a screen of that size or who knows with Apple maybe they have a separate machine for each device, they make enough of them it would be worth there while. Building a machine to create the screen takes time and money and in business you don't waste an opportunity so if the non-retina was in the works you keep it there as it'll sell anyway and then get prepared for the next version.

I have the mini and am perfectly happy with the screen. Yes I have retina everything else but honestly with 11hrs+ of battery and a device that barely weighs anything it's a compromise I'm willing to make.

Screen isn't that bad: http://imgur.com/a/edDwY

Sorry just noticed MacRumorUser said pretty much the same thing. That's what I get for not reading the whole thread.

[reputationZed]

Originally Posted by clyde2801

Well, time will tell. Apple will either release a retina with an a5x or a6x, and he'll be wrong. Or they'll not release one, and refuse to do so until there's a newer, cooler running chip, and we'll be wrong.

Surely not an A5x. Huge SoC, way to big to be practical in a 7" tablet. I'd be willing to bet the A5x was half the reason Apple killed off the 3rd gen. The next mini will most likely be some variant of the A6 though not necessarily an A6x. Would a 7" retina need a four core GPU? My hope is that by the time the mini gen 2 launches Apple will be producing A6 rev 2's on TSMC's 20nm process.

[Yr Blues]

Originally Posted by macbook123

Multiply both by the same factor is what I meant. 1.5 instead of 2.0.

then everyone's still going to have to remake their apps. all of the diagonal will look like zigzags.

[MacRumorUser]

Originally Posted by reputationZed

. Would a 7" retina need a four core GPU? .

Technically 2048 x 1536 is 2048 x 1536 regardless of it being 7.9" or 9.7" so if a 9.7 requires that oomph, the 7.9" would equally need the same also.

[seajewel]

I wouldn't mind a better processor for more speed either. Def having to wait a while for webpages to load. I know there are compromises required for the weight and battery life but I've no doubt the mini 2 will be great.

[reputationZed]

Originally Posted by MacRumorUser

Look lets get to the facts.

No one is manufacturing a 2048 x 1536 7.9" display just yet.

The iPad 3 & 4 require more powerful processor in order to drive the display. This A5X & A6X abridged processors also requires almost double the capacity battery and size (compared to the mini) in order to provide the 10 hour battery life.

So based on current requirements would you have happily accepted a 7.9" ipad mini that was a lot heavier and thicker than the current ipad mini with possibly dramatically reduced battery life, one that runs a lot hotter (less surface area for heat dispensation as the 3rd gen. and 4th gen. get much hotter than the mini) .

And then despite the extra weight, reduced battery performance would you still be happy to shell out the $529 your thread title boasts ?

The retina display in the mini was not feasible currently.

I've heard a lot of BS from posters on these forums the last few weeks declaring "but the iPod touch and iPhone 5 have retina displays", as justification for why the iPad mini should have had one, regardless of the fact that 1) no one is actually manufacturing one and 2) the iPhone 5 with 1136 x 640 resolution actually has LESS pixels than the iPad mini at 1024 x 768 (some 50k less pixels to be precise).


When & 'IF' apple can gain access to a processor that runs cooler and can still provide enough GPU grunt to drive a 3 million pixel display without requiring large battery or generating extra heat, then the iPad mini will get Retina.

This is not about Apple cutting costs, it's about the practicalities of putting the required hardware to drive a 2048 x 1536 display currently available into the mini's tiny frame. It simply doesnt exist in a form currently or to a the degree where the benefits (screen resolution) are outweighed by the cons (battery life, power requirements, weight etc..).

----------




"Should" doesn't always equal "it was currently possible"....

I tend to agree that the decision to go non retina was for technical reasons and not to meet a price point. However I think it's also possible that the decision was based on a design consideration. A product is usually designed around several goals the designer and engineers want to hit. It's impossible to hit all these goals so the design team needs to set one or two core goals that are more or less laid in stone. Compromises are made with the other goals to ensure the core goals are met. It's quite possible that the core goals for the mini were thinness and lightest possible weight. So even if the retina was possible at this time it may have been rejected if incorporating the higher resolution screen would have resulted in a thicker or heavier mini.

[bidwalj]

I would too but I understand the costs for them may hurt their profit margins. They already have a lower profit margin on this thing compared to other devices they sell.

I also get they want to keep apps working so they couldn't mess with the resolution. What really makes me upset is they didn't even try to laminate the screen like the iphone 5 and make it a bit better. The screen lacks no doubt but they could have done all they can to make it look as nice as possible.

[lianlua]

Originally Posted by Yr Blues

nope, 499 is an ipad 4 with retina

2 inches larger

Yep, and actually cheaper to produce. The iPad mini would need all the same hardware as the iPad 4, but it's got to fit in a smaller space with a much more expensive display. Smaller doesn't mean cheaper.

For comparison (cost estimates from iSuppli)
iPhone 5 326 ppi display assembly: $44 [6.7 sq in] =$6.56 per sq in
iPad 4 264ppi display assembly: $127 [45.2] = $2.81
Nexus 7 216ppi display assembly: $52 [22] = $2.36
iPad mini 163ppi display assembly: $57 [29.6] = $1.93
Retina MBP 220ppi display (LCD+backlight only): $160 [106.6] = $1.50
Non-retina MBP 110ppi display (LCD+backlight only): $68 [106.6] = $0.64

The iPad mini's 326ppi retina display would cost somewhere between $140-190 assuming they could hit the same yields (which they can't yet). They'd be selling it for at least the same price as the iPad 4, only it would also need a much bigger battery than the current mini, so it'd be a lot thicker, too.

Originally Posted by Yr Blues

the ipod touch has retina at the same thickness

THEY FREAKING HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY

The iPod touch is 1/5 the size of the iPad mini's screen. Backlighting that much area takes a ton more power and a different design. The current iPad mini would need a battery 65%+ larger with a retina display. That's a considerable bump in thickness.

The iPod touch with retina display has a battery of just 1030mAh. The non-retina mini needs 4490mAh. A retina mini would suck down around 7500. For comparison, the full-size iPad has an 11,560mAh battery.

[HKPDW]

Originally Posted by AdonisSMU

I wouldve added retina and just charged $399 and discontinued the iPad2

I too, was wondering why Apple didn't just discontinue the IPad 2 and release a $399 retina Mini. Seems like Apple is content selling old tech as long as people continue to buy it...

[reputationZed]

Originally Posted by MacRumorUser

Technically 2048 x 1536 is 2048 x 1536 regardless of it being 7.9" or 9.7" so if a 9.7 requires that oomph, the 7.9" would equally need the same also.

Good point.

[caoap1]

retina ipad mini will not come out until 2014

[AdonisSMU]

Originally Posted by Yr Blues

the ipod touch has retina at the same thickness

THEY FREAKING HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY

and you magically changed OP's 529 number to 399 and included retina

so you're saying they don't know how to include retina (ipod touch) but you would include it at 399

Yeah I see what you are saying but I think Apple was trying to hit a certain price point. It's likely that they couldn't get to a $329 price tag with retina display. The touch is already $300 for retina display and it's half the size of a mini iPad. So we are talking $500 bucks minimum. i would've gotten rid of the lower end iPad 4 and instead done a retina display mini iPad at $500 bucks. At least give people the option to pay more if they are willing to. That's all I am saying.

[AJsAWiz]

Originally Posted by dsa420

Too many variables to know for sure, but seems reasonable.. Technological constraints is a much easier pill to swallow here vs. competitive pricing pressure.

I guess we will never know for sure, would be great to have an "off the record" POV from someone at AAPL.

Makes sense to me also.

[AdonisSMU]

Originally Posted by caoap1

retina ipad mini will not come out until 2014

I hope it comes out in March honestly.

[MrXiro]

Originally Posted by dsa420

Wish they would have followed suit of the MacBook Pro and offered retina and non retina version... I would happily pay a premium to cover the margin needed by Apple to support the retina display in the Mini..

Yes, I just posted another thread about the display cause its ****.... Will keep the Mini regardless cause of the form factor, flame away...

I don't think it's a matter of money that they didn't put the Retina in the iPad Mini... it probably had more to do with the combination of not wanting to cannibalize iPad 4 sales with a smaller Retina Display device and not wanting to stick a fatter back to power the iPad Mini.

I also firmly believe that the iPad Mini is the entry level device into the iPad line with the iPad 4 more of the "pro" of the series.

[dsa420]

Sadly I suspect we won't see retina until next summer. Clearly I have no foundation for this assumption just my hunch.

I hope I am wrong..

[lianlua]

Originally Posted by MrXiro

I don't think it's a matter of money that they didn't put the Retina in the iPad Mini... it probably had more to do with the combination of not wanting to cannibalize iPad 4 sales with a smaller Retina Display device and not wanting to stick a fatter back to power the iPad Mini.

They'd have no problem cannibalizing the iPad 4 sales with a retina mini.

If they could have done it, even at $499, they'd have nothing to lose by doing so. It's a simple matter of it being flat-out undoable right now. They could keep the existing iPad mini at $329 and iPad 2 at $399 (bargain A5 family) and offer a separate retina iPad line in both sizes at higher prices (premium A6 family). They'd make their margin either way, so at the end of the day they wouldn't care which product you bought.

The problem is that right now, a retina iPad mini would cost more than its big brother, which is a non-starter. We won't see a retina mini until they can price it at or below $499. Could be 8 months, could be 2 years.

[macbook123]

Originally Posted by Yr Blues

then everyone's still going to have to remake their apps. all of the diagonal will look like zigzags.

Can you explain this a bit more for me? Why does it look like zigzags for 1.5, but not for 2.0?

[dsa420]

According to a source "close to Apple" the reason retina was not included in current Mini is 2 fold:


"- cost to produce 7.9" retina currently too high for the lower price point of this product
- AAPL's ODM partner could not have retina ready for this launch time frame

Mini 2 will remain at $329 and include retina, with Mini 1 dropping to $279 or $269. "

None of this seems surprising and has been speculated by many others on this board. Just thought I would pass along the information that was shared with me.

[richy d]

Originally Posted by AdonisSMU

I disagree. That wouldve made the device thicker and bulkier. Plus they may not have the tech to fit 2k pixels into a smaller space yet. We dont yet know why the compromises made were made. I wouldve added retina and just charged $399 and discontinued the iPad2

The iphone 5 & ipod touch have retina & are not bulky.

[darngooddesign]

Enjoy your heavier & thicker Mini.