Go Back   MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPad

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 29, 2012, 01:52 PM   #101
Lara F
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Televisions aren't meant to be used as reading devices anyway outside of the Guide and subtitles, though as others said the greater distance makes it okay. Unless you're playing old Nintendo games like Final Fantasy IV and VI from the Virtual Console. :P

If the Mini only had streaming video apps, it'd be perfectly fine as is with no need for retina.
Lara F is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 02:03 PM   #102
chleuasme
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lara F View Post
Televisions aren't meant to be used as reading devices anyway outside of the Guide and subtitles
Yes, but then that is the content, how it is produced and designed that define the use distance for an HDTV. And then, allow us to call them 'retina' (btw, i can surf the web on my TV with my internet box plugged on it, with the standard accelerometer-equiped remote control for the cursor. The definition of TVs is also changing).
On a tv, you mainly only consume content [for the moment], and watch it. On a device like the iPad, you also deal with an OS UI and apps to produce content. These constraints define a distance of use, and it's not the pixels size that define at what distance you're supposed to use the device, compared with TVs.
I just don't find accurate the comparison with a TV screen.
chleuasme is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 02:41 PM   #103
terminator-jq
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
The funny thing is that Apple is currently having problems keeping up with the demand of the iPad mini due to a lack of screens. According to a few sites, Apples screen makers for the iPad mini will not be able to keep up with demand until early 2013.

I think that little bit of info should destroy the rumor of a retina mini in March. If Apple can't make enough regular screens to keep up with demand, what makes people think they can produce enough retina 7.9" screens to launch a product in March.

As for next year, it may happen, but I doubt it. The screen tech for a high ppi 7.9" screen is hear. However, the hardware may not be. I'm sure anyone who used an iPad 3 will understand. If Apple rushes to make a retina mini, it may have problems like:

- overheating

- thicker body

- lower battery life

- more expensive

Anyone who understands product engineering will know that the iPad mini is an engineering masterpiece. Every little bit of space inside the mini is used efficiently. I just find it hard to believe that by October 2013 tech will have advanced enough to make an iPad mini with a retina screen, the same battery life, the same thickness or slimmer and still cost the same price.

I find it more reasonable that next years mini will be similar to the jump from iPad to iPad 2, or the jump from iPhone 4 to iPhone 4S. So it will probably have an A6, an 8mp rear camera, a 2mp front camera, and a few more small changes.

A retina iPad mini is coming, but I think a 2014 launch is more probable. Apple never sacrifices design for features. The iPhone 4S probably could have had 4G but it would have been a thicker phone with worse battery.

Sorry for the long post. It just kinda bothers me that some of you guys can't enjoy the iPad mini for what it is. Yes the screen could be sharper, but overall it's a great device, and the screen is actually pretty good.
terminator-jq is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 04:07 PM   #104
kinster
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
You forgot to put a '?' at the end of your title?
kinster is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 07:31 PM   #105
lianlua
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by chleuasme View Post
And at the 2880x1800 native resolution, OS X would still be rendered in what you'd still consider as a retina screen?
Yes. The pixels don't change size just because you scale a UI. If I'm sitting 16 inches or more from the MacBook Pro, it's by definition a retina display, period, whether that's a comfortable working distance or not.

It happens to be that good user experience means scaling an interface for the expected working distance, but that's totally separate from "retina" vs. "non-retina".
Quote:
You'd either have to use your rMBP with a magnifying lens la Brazil to be able to read anything on screen, and then see no benefit with the higher pixel count other than more screen real-estate
None of which has anything to do with the "retina" standard. The screen is a retina display regardless of the content on the screen.
Quote:
'retina' is defined by pixel density and distance of use. It's the software that defines what is the distance of use.
No. Distance is distance. Your eyeball to the screen. That's it. You're conflating designing good user experience with the display's hardware capabilities.

HiDPI mode helps to make a retina display useful, but has no bearing on retina density. It doesn't matter what the content is at all. Scaling the image has nothing to do with it. Whether you're reading large text or small text has nothing to do with it. Whether you've zoomed in on a giant image or scaled up a thumbnail has nothing to do with it.
Quote:
That's an opinion. Subjective.
It's not an opinion that an 800x600 canvas would be an absolute loss compared to a 1024x768 canvas.
Quote:
I see no problem to trade quantity of datas displayed to gain comfort to use/read/interact with a mini tablet.
There's a huge problem with that.

Forcing an 800x600 or some other arbitrarily smaller canvas on the iPad makes it impossible to use as much space, for the sake of the questionable benefit of forcing some UI controls to render more smoothly. It offers zero benefit for video, a net worsening for images (non-retina artwork that gets scaled up rubs lots of people the wrong way), and does nothing to fix the text situation.

The inverse is not true. With a larger workspace, you do have to option to get smoother text (just enlarge it) or zoom in on the images if you want to. On your proposal, you'd be forced to work with that enlarged text and would lose 40% of your workspace, and the only things that would actually get a visual upgrade are the buttons, icons, and text labels. There's no way that Apple would offer an 800x600 effective tablet at this size and force consumers to give up usable space for no meaningful gain.

I can't imagine anybody would want bigger toolbars eating into more of their usable space. I especially can't imagine Apple doing it after how much they highlighted the work area of the mini. But you're right that if someone did have that opinion, it might be worth the trade to them. Fortunately for the rest of us, their numbers are small if they exist at all.
lianlua is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 07:53 PM   #106
lianlua
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lara F View Post
Televisions aren't meant to be used as reading devices anyway outside of the Guide and subtitles, though as others said the greater distance makes it okay.
The content doesn't matter. Whether letters are 1/10" tall or an inch tall is irrelevant.

What matters is whether I can put a letter on screen and you can tell me how many pixels are in it at the distance you're using it just by counting them.
lianlua is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 08:45 PM   #107
chleuasme
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
Yes. The pixels don't change size just because you scale a UI. If I'm sitting 16 inches or more from the MacBook Pro, it's by definition a retina display, period, whether that's a comfortable working distance or not.

It happens to be that good user experience means scaling an interface for the expected working distance, but that's totally separate from "retina" vs. "non-retina".
At 1 meter, the 110 ppi screen of a MBP is retina.
It's the way I'll use it that defines the distance of use, and it tells me it's not retina at the normal distance I'm supposed to use it.
The way I use it is defined by the content and interface I will display on screen.
Software [and size of the screen] defines the distance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
None of which has anything to do with the "retina" standard. The screen is a retina display regardless of the content on the screen.
Yes, if you reach at least 250-300 ppi, unless you get the microscope out, pixels are too small at any minimal reasonable use distance. But you were the one talking about HDTV.
If I watch a 32" 1920x1080 TV program at 2.5 meters, it can be called retina as you said.
But if I use it as a computer screen, i will have to get closer, and it definitely won't be retina anymore: pixels appear now too big.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
It's not an opinion that an 800x600 canvas would be an absolute loss compared to a 1024x768 canvas.
Well, yes.
But the screen is smaller.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
Forcing an 800x600 or some other arbitrarily smaller canvas on the iPad makes it impossible to use as much space, for the sake of the questionable benefit of forcing some UI controls to render more smoothly. It offers zero benefit for video, a net worsening for images (non-retina artwork that gets scaled up rubs lots of people the wrong way), and does nothing to fix the text situation.
For videos, I will use as much as possible of the 1600x1200 pixels of the screen, the same 264 ppi as the 9.7" iPad. The screen is smaller, the video is smaller.

With Safari on an iPhone, [roughly] web pages are rendered on a larger virtual resolution than the screen, then the user can zoom in or out. I'm not sure how it is on the iPad, but I suppose you can use the same technic on the iPad, I don't need to consider my screen as a 800x600 screen.
On my desktop, I can change the width of my Safari window, and text or images do not resize.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
The inverse is not true. With a larger workspace, you do have to option to get smoother text (just enlarge it) or zoom in on the images if you want to. On your proposal, you'd be forced to work with that enlarged text and would lose 40% of your workspace, and the only things that would actually get a visual upgrade are the buttons, icons, and text labels. There's no way that Apple would offer an 800x600 effective tablet at this size and force consumers to give up usable space for no meaningful gain.
Well, at 1600x1200 you get everything sharper, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
I can't imagine anybody would want bigger toolbars eating into more of their usable space. I especially can't imagine Apple doing it after how much they highlighted the work area of the mini. But you're right that if someone did have that opinion, it might be worth the trade to them. Fortunately for the rest of us, their numbers are small if they exist at all.
As my basis is the workspace should be proportional to the surface of the screen, I need screens with same pixel density on the two iPad models for consistency in the UI.
If you absolutely want 1024x768 as a minimum for the mini (and 2x later), then make a larger iPad at 326 ppi, 9.8" 2560x1920. Still supposing Apple offered the right tools to achieve adaptable UIs, of course.

Last edited by chleuasme; Nov 30, 2012 at 01:13 AM.
chleuasme is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2012, 09:27 PM   #108
Noctilux.95
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: LA
Are there any competing tablets in the 7"-8" that currently have retina type resolution?
Noctilux.95 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 12:50 AM   #109
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by terminator-jq View Post
The funny thing is that Apple is currently having problems keeping up with the demand of the iPad mini due to a lack of screens. According to a few sites, Apples screen makers for the iPad mini will not be able to keep up with demand until early 2013.

I think that little bit of info should destroy the rumor of a retina mini in March. If Apple can't make enough regular screens to keep up with demand, what makes people think they can produce enough retina 7.9" screens to launch a product in March.

As for next year, it may happen, but I doubt it. The screen tech for a high ppi 7.9" screen is hear. However, the hardware may not be. I'm sure anyone who used an iPad 3 will understand. If Apple rushes to make a retina mini, it may have problems like:

- overheating

- thicker body

- lower battery life

- more expensive

Anyone who understands product engineering will know that the iPad mini is an engineering masterpiece. Every little bit of space inside the mini is used efficiently. I just find it hard to believe that by October 2013 tech will have advanced enough to make an iPad mini with a retina screen, the same battery life, the same thickness or slimmer and still cost the same price.

I find it more reasonable that next years mini will be similar to the jump from iPad to iPad 2, or the jump from iPhone 4 to iPhone 4S. So it will probably have an A6, an 8mp rear camera, a 2mp front camera, and a few more small changes.

A retina iPad mini is coming, but I think a 2014 launch is more probable. Apple never sacrifices design for features. The iPhone 4S probably could have had 4G but it would have been a thicker phone with worse battery.

Sorry for the long post. It just kinda bothers me that some of you guys can't enjoy the iPad mini for what it is. Yes the screen could be sharper, but overall it's a great device, and the screen is actually pretty good.
Different technology and different supplier. LCD technology is moving like a freight train now with different technology leap forking each other, IGZO tech will be the key for retina iPad mini and Sharp will be the supplier. The suppliers for IPad mini are LG and AU Optronics.
xofruitcake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 01:21 AM   #110
thadoggfather
macrumors 68040
 
thadoggfather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Sharp will be the supplier if they don't collapse before then financially.

I really hope they stay in the game for 2013 because IGZO will be nice to have around in general.
thadoggfather is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 05:48 AM   #111
FrozenDarkness
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by xofruitcake View Post
Different technology and different supplier. LCD technology is moving like a freight train now with different technology leap forking each other, IGZO tech will be the key for retina iPad mini and Sharp will be the supplier. The suppliers for IPad mini are LG and AU Optronics.
For sure apple will use IGZO one day but sharp hasn't been rumored to be producing any for iPads term size and resolutions don't fit. I'm still holding out hope it'll find it's way to the next full iPad in order to fit it into the ipad mini form factor.

However, iPad minis problem are not just the screen, it's also power itself.
FrozenDarkness is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 30, 2012, 06:27 AM   #112
corvus32
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: USA
An IGZO display and a die shrunk A6 (or custom 28nm (or smaller) SoC) would go a long way towards energy savings.

A larger battery may not be necessary.
__________________
Asus Maximus VII Impact mITX motherboard / Intel i7-4790K / MSI GTX 980 Gaming OC / 8GB G.SKILL TridentX 2400MHz CAS 9 RAM
iPad Air (128GB) / Apple TV (3rd Gen)
corvus32 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 01:15 AM   #113
Awakener
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
According to another insider Mini retina will happen in a few months. Added to the previous rumor about AUO manufacturing panels it's becoming more likely:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/n...all-new-design

Last edited by Awakener; Dec 1, 2012 at 01:15 PM.
Awakener is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 07:03 AM   #114
FrozenDarkness
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awakener View Post
According to another insider Mini retina will happen in a few months. Added to the previous rumor about AUO manufacturing panels it's becoming more likely:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/n...all-new-design
If you believe a stock analyst predicting an ipad retina next march, I have a bridge to sell you
FrozenDarkness is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 09:14 AM   #115
rockyroad55
macrumors 68040
 
rockyroad55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Phila, PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awakener View Post
According to another insider Mini retina will happen in a few months. Added to the previous rumor about AUO manufacturing panels it's becoming more likely:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/n...all-new-design
You know my comment was a joke right? It was in response to someone talking about a news headline. That's why my comment was in quotes and a smiley face.
__________________
The funniest thing about this particular signature is that by the time you realize it doesn't say anything it's too late to stop reading it.
rockyroad55 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 10:17 AM   #116
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by terminator-jq View Post
The funny thing is that Apple is currently having problems keeping up with the demand of the iPad mini due to a lack of screens. According to a few sites, Apples screen makers for the iPad mini will not be able to keep up with demand until early 2013.

I think that little bit of info should destroy the rumor of a retina mini in March. If Apple can't make enough regular screens to keep up with demand, what makes people think they can produce enough retina 7.9" screens to launch a product in March.

heh heh because Ipad mini screen is not a regular screen. And Ipad mini retina (if Apple produce it) LCD panel will come from a different supplier, Sharp with IGZO technology. Apple suppliers are the one who produce all the components. One supplier has problem producing one component does not give us insight as to whether a different supplier will have problem with a similar component using different technology.


http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/...gf2_technology

Quote:
Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo with KGI Securities said in a research note issued on Friday that the so-called "iPad mini" will feature industry leading "GF Ditto," otherwise known as GF2, touchscreen technology. He said that Apple will be the first company in the world to commercialize and mass produce GF Ditto technology.
.....
Difficulties in manufacturing the iPad mini allegedly led to an internal delay in launching the device, according to Kuo. He believes that shipments of the smaller iPad will begin in the first half of October, and the device will become available to consumers in late October.
xofruitcake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 10:32 AM   #117
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenDarkness View Post
If you believe a stock analyst predicting an ipad retina next march, I have a bridge to sell you
May be if we predict an Ipad mini next march, it will be more believable?

Joking aside, March sound about right. Apple has the technology to produce a Ipad mini retina today but it won't be a very desirable device. Apple use the a-si technology for the IPad 3/4 for the 2048x1536 display it need extra backlight, extra battery etc. etc. So an Ipad mini with a-si and 2048x1536 display will weight about 1.0lb to 1.1lb vs 0.68 lb today.. I don't think many people will like it.

Sharp announced IGZO display that supposedly can cut down 10 inches display power need by 33% and 5 inches display by 80% (see the video). The question is whether Sharp can produce IGZO at 7.9 inches screen with resolution of 2048x1536 and what battery/weight saving it can give to a device like Ipad mini. Sharp already announced their first tablet, AQUOS SLT21,using IGZO technology in Japan for Dec shipping. So March is not completely out of the question. The weight Ipad mini retina using IGZO is going to be an interesting question. Would we have a deal if it weight 0.75lb or 0.8lb instead of 0.68lb? I think Apple can get it to 0.68lb but I will be happy to take one with 0.75lb..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4sFCLikvyI
xofruitcake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 01:22 PM   #118
Awakener
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenDarkness View Post
If you believe a stock analyst predicting an ipad retina next march, I have a bridge to sell you
Rumors can be wrong, but if they keep coming something is up.
If they are planning for March the technology exists. March sounds soon but makes sense because Mini will look bad compared to competition.
Awakener is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 02:27 PM   #119
AttilaTheHun
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Awakener View Post
Rumors can be wrong, but if they keep coming something is up.
If they are planning for March the technology exists. March sounds soon but makes sense because Mini will look bad compared to competition.
I think the problem is not the screen I have the ipad 4 and the mini
so what look bad on the mini look bad on the ipad 4 too
it's look like some pages was programed on low resolution for faster speed or what ever.
if the mini get retina screen it will be havyer so for what i use the mini the screen is just good
use it mostly when i am on the way, at home i like to use my MBP or the ipad 4
AttilaTheHun is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 04:23 PM   #120
lianlua
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by chleuasme View Post
At 1 meter, the 110 ppi screen of a MBP is retina.
But you don't typically use a 15" laptop display at 1 meter.
Quote:
The way I use it is defined by the content and interface I will display on screen.
Software [and size of the screen] defines the distance.
No, distance is distance. You are conflating two distinct concepts: UX and resolution.
Quote:
If I watch a 32" 1920x1080 TV program at 2.5 meters, it can be called retina as you said.
But if I use it as a computer screen, i will have to get closer, and it definitely won't be retina anymore: pixels appear now too big.
Which is why 32" computer monitors aren't sold at 1280x720 or 1920x1080, but 32" TVs are. The intended use of a product is a factor in usability, but not a factor in the panel's retina distance.

All displays have a retina distance. Those which have a value of d that is less than the minimum intended working distance are "retina" class displays. Even if you never turn them on or never display anything but a screen-filling letter "R".

That's all there is to it. Retina displays from Apple also make use of HiDPI modes to balance high resolution and UI widgets at the normal working distance, they also use high-end IPS technology, they also carry industry-leading color gamut and accuracy, and so on. But none of those extras are part of the retina classification itself. They're just all packaged together.

Saying otherwise is like arguing that because Bluetooth 4.0 Macs also have 802.11n that 802.11n is part of the Bluetooth 4.0 requirements just because they're part of the wireless stack together.
Quote:
With Safari on an iPhone, [roughly] web pages are rendered on a larger virtual resolution than the screen, then the user can zoom in or out. I'm not sure how it is on the iPad, but I suppose you can use the same technic on the iPad, I don't need to consider my screen as a 800x600 screen.
Yes, you do. The screen size can never drop below the canvas size. That's the function of the canvas. You would get illegible small sizes because the threshold would be larger, negating the additional physical pixels.
Quote:
Well, at 1600x1200 you get everything sharper, too.
No, you don't. You can't get anything sharper than a UI point other than the three media types already identified, none of which are served by shrinking the canvas size other than UI controls, the least important content of all.
Quote:
If you absolutely want 1024x768 as a minimum for the mini (and 2x later), then make a larger iPad at 326 ppi, 9.8" 2560x1920.
That's right. And doing that with the larger iPad will open up the third layout in the future.
lianlua is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 1, 2012, 06:25 PM   #121
chleuasme
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
All displays have a retina distance. Those which have a value of d that is less than the minimum intended working distance are "retina" class displays. Even if you never turn them on or never display anything but a screen-filling letter "R".
Yes. Yes. And yes!

But you then agree that to give the 'retina' stamp, you have to define the "minimum intended working distance", meaning you have to define the usage, which include content and software supposed to be displayed on the screen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
Yes, you do. The screen size can never drop below the canvas size. That's the function of the canvas. You would get illegible small sizes because the threshold would be larger, negating the additional physical pixels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lianlua View Post
You can't get anything sharper than a UI point other than the three media types already identified, none of which are served by shrinking the canvas size other than UI controls, the least important content of all.
Not sure to understand this
chleuasme is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2012, 12:08 AM   #122
lianlua
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by chleuasme View Post
Yes. Yes. And yes!

But you then agree that to give the 'retina' stamp, you have to define the "minimum intended working distance", meaning you have to define the usage, which include content and software supposed to be displayed on the screen.
Not really. Content and software is far too variable to be a factor; retina distance does not change with content. The pixels are the same size no matter what you paint on the screen with them. On-screen content is just not part of the definition. The working distance determines the appropriate content size ranges for the best UX, not the other way around. There just aren't any more ways to say this.

The working distance is based primarily on ergonomics. A display should ideally occupy somewhere between 25 and 30 degrees of the field of vision. Larger sizes feel uncomfortably close for most, like sitting in the front row of the movie theater.

That range on the iPad mini is about 12-15 inches. That's the working distance, regardless of content.
lianlua is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2012, 01:44 AM   #123
guitarmandp
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
I don't know if I want Retina if it means the mini is heavier. I love the lightweight of the mini
guitarmandp is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2012, 01:47 AM   #124
icemanzzz
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
I am looking forward to retina on the iPad Mini.

Wanted to get the current one but still stoping myself. My iPad one needs to retire already..
icemanzzz is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2012, 07:40 AM   #125
jvmxtra
macrumors 65816
 
jvmxtra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
I currently still am on ipad 2 and still chugging along fine. I do however want form factor of ipad mini.. just hope for retina but it does sound like march is completely out of the question... Perhaps in october? but I also do not want unwanted extra heat retina will bring.. 2014 retina w/ awesome battery(or same) and running cool ipad mini perhaps?
__________________
--still apple fan but it's getting difficult...
jvmxtra is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPad

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iPad Mini: Gift for 10-year-olds: Kindle Fire HD, iPad Mini, or iPad Mini Retina? dmk1974 iPad 31 Dec 4, 2013 06:30 AM
iPad Mini: How much for Ipad mini retina next year nov? jaywood iPad 9 Nov 17, 2013 05:20 PM
iPad Mini: Case for iPad mini (not retina) - 9 year old boy? caesarp iPad Accessories 9 Nov 14, 2013 11:38 PM
iPad Mini: Chances of iPad mini retina this year? joachimnb iPad 51 Sep 4, 2013 07:25 PM
All iPads: Tough choice next year if Retina iPad gets more Mini-like? PDFierro iPad 27 Nov 25, 2012 07:42 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC