iPad Mini: I just returned my Mini and here is why

[Noctilux.95]

I was waiting to purchase the back ordered Mini 16 GB wifi for my GF when I noticed Apple was selling refurbished iPad 2's for $319. Pulled the trigger.
Hope she wont be pissed.

[D.T.]

Originally Posted by Noctilux.95

I was waiting to purchase the back ordered Mini 16 GB wifi for my GF when I noticed Apple was selling refurbished iPad 2's for $319. Pulled the trigger.
Hope she wont be pissed.

Hehehe, well, you should probably get her the Mini. The form factor is probably her main consideration ... plus you get a bit better display PPI, much better front and rear cameras, Siri, better Wifi and the slick lightening connector.

Just my $0.02

[thegreati]

I love the iPad mini. Super portable. Great cameras. Works great. Why over scrutinize it?

[supremeMilo]

Originally Posted by Quixotic3

Steve would not have...

Steve released the first iPhone without 3G, he released the iPhone 3GS which was the exact same as the 3G, he released the 4 with an antenna problem and he released the 4S without LTE.

Nothing has changed since Steve left, except there is no longer a reality distortion field...

[AlyseM]

I never even got a mini because it seemed so lack luster.

[Steeley]

I must be the only skeptic around here; if you ask me it doesn't include a retina display or better camera because it'll give users more incentive to upgrade when they're included in the second generation. Apple leave out the obvious all the time only to include it one generation down the track. It's about maximizing sales.

[BasicGreatGuy]

Originally Posted by Steeley

I must be the only skeptic around here; if you ask me it doesn't include a retina display or better camera because it'll give users more incentive to upgrade when they're included in the second generation. Apple leave out the obvious all the time only to include it one generation down the track. It's about maximizing sales.

What proof do you have, that the technology is present right now, so that Apple should have included a retina display etc., while keeping the current form factor of the newly release Mini?

[Binarymix]

Originally Posted by BaldiMac

If the iPad mini had the same resolution as the 3rd and 4th gen iPad, it would be the same pixel density as the iPhone 4, 4S, and 5 (326 ppi).

Yeah, I was off. But it'd still need a A5X, or A6X to power it, which can't be done in the current form factor.

[eldo33]

Originally Posted by Dick Whitman

I absolutely love my Mini. I love how thin and light it is and yet I love the size. I love how the device is not super small and crammed like most 7" tablets. The Mini truly is an iPad. Yes the screen on the 4 is beautiful but it comes at a thicker, heavier, larger, and more expensive cost.

i have IP5 and the mini seems to get more attention since I bought it on the release date. IP5 has only been for hot spot for the mini. Holding it for reading in bed is light and thin, so perfect.

If they have retina on next model, it better be light and thin like this version else I wouldn't even consider it. The resolution is perfect for its size right now.

[nerdybooboo]

with the current technology, an iPad mini with retina display means it has to be bulkier, thicker and more pricey, so you might just as well get an iPad 3 or 4.

But who knows (or do we already), they will invent a new battery that can take us to that 'perfect' iPad screen experience and compact size in a couple of years, if not 2013!

Now who will pre-order the next iPad mini?

[Awakener]

Originally Posted by nerdybooboo

with the current technology, an iPad mini with retina display means it has to be bulkier, thicker and more pricey, so you might just as well get an iPad 3 or 4.

But who knows (or do we already), they will invent a new battery that can take us to that 'perfect' iPad screen experience and compact size in a couple of years, if not 2013!

Now who will pre-order the next iPad mini?

Slightly thicker, maybe about 3oz heavier. The technology is in iPhone 5 and iPad 3/4, so yes it could be scaled to the mini for similar battery life and cost matched to its size.

Originally Posted by ScottNWDW

The screen has the same resolution as it's iPad 2 cousin, which is still selling quite well even though there is a Retina ipad being sold along side it. Since the resolution is the same and the screen is smaller the pixels are closer together and it looks even better than it's larger counterparts so they release it with the non-retina display.

No, it doesn't "look even better than it's larger counterparts". iPad 2 looks much better than the mini.

[nerdybooboo]

Originally Posted by Awakener

Slightly thicker, maybe about 3oz heavier. The technology is in iPhone 5 and iPad 3/4, so yes it could be scaled to the mini for similar battery life.

yeah totally, those are $200 to $400 more than the current iPad mini too.

[kappaknight]

Originally Posted by Quixotic3

Retina screen aside it should have had a better camera, more memory and a faster processor like the iPhone 5. Would you buy a a computer with two year old technology pay more and be happy with it because it has an apple emblem on it? that is what a fanboy would do.

Talk about missing the forest for a tree. I've been using the mini since launch day and have already used this way more than my iPad 2 due to its size. Is it possible to cram better tech in it today? Sure, but why? I don't have any complaints on the speed, the camera or the screen. Better yet, with the current tech that's in there, I don't have complaints about its weight, battery life or heat either.

For me the experience is spot on and best of all, I can type on this way faster than my iPhone or full sized iPad. If you use it for reading and focus on the apps and content, the spec envy goes away. At the end of the day, it's about what you can do with it, not what's inside it.

[glen e]

I use the mini for keynote on the road and don't need RESOLUTION...Some of us have other needs besides squinting at it trying to find problems...

[Awakener]

Originally Posted by nerdybooboo

yeah totally, those are $200 to $400 more than the current iPad mini too.

One is also a phone, the other is much larger. Watch, if mini retina comes in a few months or a year it will still be $329.

[nerdybooboo]

Originally Posted by Awakener

One is also a phone, the other is much larger. Watch, if mini retina comes in a few months or a year it will still be $329.

yes, it will be. It is marketing 101.

[dthree36]

To each their own... just vent.... you can take solace in another several dozen posts that are on this board. Just look and you will see you are not alone. I just wonder how many more of these post will surface as people are let down by their expectations.

[BaldiMac]

Originally Posted by Awakener

One is also a phone, the other is much larger. Watch, if mini retina comes in a few months or a year it will still be $329.

How would that change the point that it is not practical and too expensive right now?

[GeorgieAcevedo]

im returning mine tomorrow, i dont know one day i like it, one day i don't. so im just going to return it.

[rockyroad55]

Look OP. Lets face reality here. Steve is dead and you or anyone else wouldn't have known what he would have done. The mini is selling great and that's all that matters.

[eyehop]

Dumb move on Apple's part. Once you introduce retina, why go backwards? It looks outdated from the moment you open the box. I could see doing it for say $150 or $199 tops or less, but at $330 it's pretty ridiculous.

[rockyroad55]

Originally Posted by eyehop

Dumb move on Apple's part. Once you introduce retina, why go backwards? It looks outdated from the moment you open the box. I could see doing it for say $150 or $199 tops or less, but at $330 it's pretty ridiculous.

Phil said the mini is an alternative to the iPads that are currently available. You make the choice for which one you want to buy. If you want retina, get an iPad 4. The mini's main selling points are size and portability with the ability to run full ipad apps.

And judging by sales and product availability, I would say its doing quite well.

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by eyehop

Dumb move on Apple's part. Once you introduce retina, why go backwards? It looks outdated from the moment you open the box. I could see doing it for say $150 or $199 tops or less, but at $330 it's pretty ridiculous.

And that's why you're not CEO of this company. They're selling out at $330 per device, and you think *that* is stupid? Wow.

[kas23]

Originally Posted by smiddlehurst

Oh for gods sake... no it couldn't have been a smaller iPad 4! Do people not realise how ridiculous that statement is from an engineering point of view?

This has been talked about so much over the last couple of weeks it's ridiculous but really it's simple:

iPad Mini: 200mm x 134.7mm x 7.6mm, 308g, 16.3-watt-hour battery.
iPad 4: 241.2mm x 185.7mm x 9.4mm, 652g, 42.5-watt-hour battery.

See the bit in bold? That's how much power you need to run a retina-equipped iPad with an A6X SoC. You'd save a tiny bit with a smaller screen but nowhere near enough to make a significant difference. The iPad 4 has a volume of 421,034 cubic mm in which to fit the necessary components and battery pack, the iPad mini has 204,744 cubic mm. Half the volume. Or, to put it another way, you'd need an iPad Mini 15.63mm thick to give the same volume. Of course it isn't that simple but it gives you an idea of the scale of the problem. Plus, of course, it'd weigh twice as much as well.

If you want a retina display in a mini you're going to have to wait for new screen tech and, almost certainly, a new SoC. Oh, and a new battery tech wouldn't hurt either. This may, note MAY, be available next year it may take a little longer. If you want a mini this year then this is the compromise you make to get this form factor. Simple isn't it?

Maybe you explain this non-existant screen technology thing a bit clearer to me. I see both larger (iPad) and smaller (iPod) devices having better pixel densities. Heck, I even see the Kindle Fire and Nexus 7 having way better screens. But, the screen technology for a better screen on the mini "doesn't exist". So, which is it? Are my eyes deceiving me when I see the Fire and Nexus screen killing the mini's? An optical illusion perhaps?

So, it will need a bigger battery. Ok, your point? The Fire and Nexus must have bigger batteries. (Those exist too, right?)

Thickness? Weight? Ok, that's fine. It would have been thicker and heavier. Apple never puts out a perfect gen 1 device. Just like they'll do with the mini next year with the screen ("now with retina!), they could have made it "thinner" and "lighter" as marketing ploy for 2013. They've done that trick many times. Heck, if Apple wanted to they could have even skimped on the battery and used the "now, with 30% greater battery life" marketing tool in 2013.

My point is that the technology does indeed exist. It's on the market as I write. There would have been trade-offs though. Ones that they did not want to make. Instead, to pad their margins, they put a ****** screen in instead. But, it was a decision they made, not one that technology forced upon them.

[canesalato]

Originally Posted by Quixotic3

I so wanted to love the Mini. I pictured myself casually pulling the mini out of a coat pocket at some coffee bar and surfing the web or maybe playing some angry birds. In reality the mini is too big and I had all of the same problems toting it around that I did with the normal size iPad ***but that is Not why I returned it. The screen... well I can honestly say that not having the retina was not a huge deal at first... I am old my eyes aren't what they used to be... but it kept bothering me for some reason... oh yeah, no... I got it ... the price. The reason I buy the best is... to... get... the best and I feel that my MBP retina is hands down the best laptop out there, and I feel that if I called apple support they will have an answer for me ( a company so far that isn't trying to do more with less...) so why Apple did you cheap out on the mini? It could have been the best thing ever just like all of your other products and at the premium that I paid over it's competitors it should have been. It should have had a better screen, better camera that did at least what the iPhone 5 camera does, more ram, and if you couldn't fit it in the size you released then you shouldn't have released it, Steve would not have...

iPhone 5 is 730 euros
iPad mini is 330 euros.
You can't pretend them to be the same in terms of camera, speed and screen quality.
Of course price isn't everything and surely they COULD fit everything in the mini form factor if they really wanted to, but it would have been hotter, thicker, heavier because IGZO displays are not available yet. Wait...you want a more powerful, faster, thicker, heavier iPad with a great display? It's called iPad4. That's what I've bought for myself. Of course it's also more expansive. Tech is about compromises. Steve would not have? Nonsense!
iPhone 3g had a s hitty plastic case, 128mb of RAM and a very poor battery life. It was a first generation iPhone with a 3g module and a far worse build quality.
The first iPad was heavier than the third and forth generation, yet it had no camera AT ALL to save costs. And it came with a ridiculous 256 mb of RAM and a single core, slow a4 processor.