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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old May 27, 2013, 06:35 AM   #1
Pug72
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: England
16:9 Ratio iPad/mini

I think going 16:9 with the iPhone 5 was fantastic. Long portrait for reading, Twitter, etc. and the perfect for viewing video content in landscape mode.

Works great in a portable handheld device, but would it work with the iPad & mini?

I think it would but it's maybe an awkward shape for a tablet.

Would be good for movies, no over sized black bars top and bottom, plus I think gaming would benefit too. With thumbs/hands on screen for controls there would still be plenty of viewing area in the centre.


What do ya reckon?
Pug72 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 06:49 AM   #2
sparky1499
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Glasgow, UK
I think not.

16:9 is rotten for the web and book IMHO.
__________________
15" MacBook Pro (Early 2011), 2.0GHz i7 Quad, 4GB RAM, 500GB iPad Air 16GB Wifi+4G White iPhone 6 64GB White
sparky1499 is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 07:18 AM   #3
MindsEye
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2010
16:9 is pretty much the one thing i cant stand about my iPod touch they truly had a great aspect ratio with 3:2.

It honestly baffle me that people prefer to have such a great disparity between what they see horizontally compared to vertically. Good for video shot in that format but little else.

Recently sampled the Surface Pro. Great device and its resolution alleviates some of the problems i have with it but holding it horizontally just felt so unnatural and awkward.
MindsEye is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 07:28 AM   #4
darngooddesign
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
No thank you. Since I hardly watch videos on my Mini 16:9 would be awful.
__________________
128 giggity... giggity... gigg-i-ty
Lego Apple Store
darngooddesign is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 09:10 AM   #5
Nightarchaon
macrumors 65816
 
Nightarchaon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
iPad Mini 16:9 yes please, supurb for video, iPad Full size, no, keep the aspect ratio as is.
__________________
iWatch in action http://media.joe.ie/wp-content/uploa...ael-Knight.jpg
MacBook Pro/iPad Mini/TV1/iMac/iPhone5
Nightarchaon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 11:11 AM   #6
darngooddesign
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightarchaon View Post
iPad Mini 16:9 yes please, supurb for video, iPad Full size, no, keep the aspect ratio as is.
Why would you prefer the smaller iPad for videos instead of the larger screen?
__________________
128 giggity... giggity... gigg-i-ty
Lego Apple Store
darngooddesign is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 11:36 AM   #7
Lacas
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post
Why would you prefer the smaller iPad for videos instead of the larger screen?
Most videos are 16:9 or 21:9(which is closer to 16:9 than to 4:3).
On the iPad mini currently you see big black boxes around the video that are either smaller or not there at 16:9
Lacas is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 12:08 PM   #8
Miguel Cunha
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Braga, Portugal
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post
Why would you prefer the smaller iPad for videos instead of the larger screen?
Portabilty.
Miguel Cunha is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 12:20 PM   #9
Pug72
Thread Starter
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: England
Hmmm, I think it would suit the mini more.

Maybe a thin bezel on the short sides and thicker on the length would be better for holding and easier on the eye. Squarer but keeping a 16:9 ratio.


Seems so far most peeps here aren't convinced it'd be a good idea.
Pug72 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 12:22 PM   #10
darngooddesign
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacas View Post
Most videos are 16:9 or 21:9(which is closer to 16:9 than to 4:3).
On the iPad mini currently you see big black boxes around the video that are either smaller or not there at 16:9
You see the same on the full iPad. But the full iPads screen is much better for videos because its larger. The actual video size would be the same between a 4:3 and 16:9 Mini.

And for web browsing and magazine/comics reading 16:9 is inferior.
__________________
128 giggity... giggity... gigg-i-ty
Lego Apple Store
darngooddesign is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 12:31 PM   #11
Internaut
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: All over the place but mostly Somewhere in England
When I watch a movie in full 16:9 on the iPad Mini, a lot of screen real-estate gets wasted. I get more total screen real-estate on my Nexus 7, in this respect.

However, I don't see Apple changing the aspect ratio of its iPads, since the the 4:3 aspect ratio is generally more useful.
Internaut is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 12:33 PM   #12
AppleRobert
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by MindsEye View Post
16:9 is pretty much the one thing i cant stand about my iPod touch they truly had a great aspect ratio with 3:2.

It honestly baffle me that people prefer to have such a great disparity between what they see horizontally compared to vertically. Good for video shot in that format but little else.

Recently sampled the Surface Pro. Great device and its resolution alleviates some of the problems i have with it but holding it horizontally just felt so unnatural and awkward.
I will not buy the Touch because of that aspect ratio and I don't care how cheap I would be able to get one down the road.
AppleRobert is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 12:36 PM   #13
sracer
macrumors 68000
 
sracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Internaut View Post
When I watch a movie in full 16:9 on the iPad Mini, a lot of screen real-estate gets wasted. I get more total screen real-estate on my Nexus 7, in this respect.

However, I don't see Apple changing the aspect ratio of its iPads, since the the 4:3 aspect ratio is generally more useful.
True. I watch mostly classic TV shows and movies, so 4:3 is perfect.
sracer is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 01:02 PM   #14
Lacas
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post
You see the same on the full iPad. But the full iPads screen is much better for videos because its larger. The actual video size would be the same between a 4:3 and 16:9 Mini.
What you're saying does not make sense. Let's Take a 16:9 video, an iPad and the Surface. They're approximately the same height in landscape. On the iPad you have 2 options, letter boxing and stretching to fit.
If you letterbox you lose about a third of the height of the screen and use the full length. That is objectively less space than on the Surface where you lose neither length nor vertical space.
If you stretch to fit, you lose about a third of the video in either direction to make use of the full height. For 21:9 videos both have black bars, but again it is less notable on the 16:9 screen.
I do think my iPad is better for browsing and holding, though I personally prefer books on the Surface (epub, djvu and other dynamic formats) but PDFs are more pleasant on the iPad. Personally I think the iPad mini would work great in 16:9/16:10, while the regular iPad should remain 4:3(16:9 on a 10" machine is unwieldly)
Lacas is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 01:13 PM   #15
blackhand1001
macrumors 68030
 
blackhand1001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
16x10 like the nexus 7 is much better than 16x9 in my opinion.

I have my navbar set to go on the side in landscape (like on the phones) and that makes it even better.

__________________
Macbook 2008
HP Dv7t - 2.53 ghz, 9600m GT, WSXGA+, 120gb ssd, 250 gb 7200rpm
Core i7 3770k, 8gb ram, 2x 120gb sdd raid0, 500gb hdd, GTX 460
Moto X Dev Edition (VZW) Nexus 7

Last edited by blackhand1001; May 27, 2013 at 01:23 PM.
blackhand1001 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 03:00 PM   #16
Defender2010
macrumors 68000
 
Defender2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Whilst I like the current screen ratio on the iPad, the iPhone 5 looks much better when using AirPlay mirroring as it fills the whole tv screen naturally. I use AirPlay mirroring a lot and never reach for the iPad due to this reason.
__________________
W2P KLD talking...what's your handle, WR2 GFO?
Defender2010 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 03:57 PM   #17
darngooddesign
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacas View Post
What you're saying does not make sense. Let's Take a 16:9 video, an iPad and the Surface. They're approximately the same height in landscape. On the iPad you have 2 options, letter boxing and stretching to fit.
If you letterbox you lose about a third of the height of the screen and use the full length. That is objectively less space than on the Surface where you lose neither length nor vertical space.
If you stretch to fit, you lose about a third of the video in either direction to make use of the full height. For 21:9 videos both have black bars, but again it is less notable on the 16:9 screen.
I do think my iPad is better for browsing and holding, though I personally prefer books on the Surface (epub, djvu and other dynamic formats) but PDFs are more pleasant on the iPad. Personally I think the iPad mini would work great in 16:9/16:10, while the regular iPad should remain 4:3(16:9 on a 10" machine is unwieldly)
Comparing a 16:9 and 4:3 iPad, mini or otherwise, if the long dimension is the same all you would be loosing are the black bars. Therefore the videos size would be the same.

As far as books and magazines, only ebooks with dynamic text would look good on a 16:9 screen. Printed pages of magazines and comics are not formatted for widescreens so you'd end up with black bars when looking at a full page.
__________________
128 giggity... giggity... gigg-i-ty
Lego Apple Store

Last edited by darngooddesign; May 27, 2013 at 04:02 PM.
darngooddesign is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 04:10 PM   #18
Brittany246
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Northern Virginia
I have a nexus 7, and I don't like the aspect ratio at all. It's 16:10, and I would probably hate 16:9 even more. It reminds me of an oversized phone. I like the 4:3 aspect ratio of the iPad, and I think it's perfect for a tablet.
Brittany246 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 04:50 PM   #19
Lacas
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post
Comparing a 16:9 and 4:3 iPad, mini or otherwise, if the long dimension is the same all you would be loosing are the black bars. Therefore the videos size would be the same.
I'm sorry but that is wrong and does not make sense. The 4:3 device would need to be bigger to view the same sized image. The image is lazy but should get the point across.

Quote:
As far as books and magazines, only ebooks with dynamic text would look good on a 16:9 screen. Printed pages of magazines and comics are not formatted for widescreens so you'd end up with black bars when looking at a full page.
I hope the irony of that statement is not lost on you.
In fact magazines and comics are published in 16:10 to the best of my knowledge.
Lacas is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 07:30 PM   #20
darngooddesign
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacas View Post
In fact magazines and comics are published in 16:10 to the best of my knowledge.
If magazines are formatted in 16:10 why does a page fit perfectly on my 4:3 screen? If they weren't formatted at 4:3 then there would be black bars above and below magazine pages when viewed in portrait. Now some magazines are formatted taller, earlier Emigre and Cinefex for example, but the majority of magazines are formatted close to 4:3.

You are correct that comics are formatted a little taller so they look better on a taller screen, but they're not exactly 16:9 so you'd end up with some black bars on either type of screen.



Here you can see how much wasted space there is displaying a magazine page on a N7 vs iPad 4. A widescreen Mini wouldn't have software buttons on the screen so you see even more of a black bar.

Now when viewed in landsscape the N7 has black bars on the left and right of the two-page spread while the iPad has black bars above and below the spread, but at that size screen I doubt anyone is really reading like that, but in portrait the 4:3 screen wins out.
__________________
128 giggity... giggity... gigg-i-ty
Lego Apple Store

Last edited by darngooddesign; May 27, 2013 at 08:25 PM.
darngooddesign is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 07:53 PM   #21
darngooddesign
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacas View Post
I'm sorry but that is wrong and does not make sense. The 4:3 device would need to be bigger to view the same sized image. The image is lazy but should get the point across.
In my lazy image we have a widescreen Mini that displays the same sized video image as a regular 4:3 Mini. I assume that Apple would keep the height the same and just reduce the width to achieve a widescreen iPad. Otherwide the widescreen Mini would only differ from the full size one by width. If the Mini weren't that widescreen the video image size would stay the same but you'd have small black bars.

But I hardly watch videos, so web browsing is far more important to me, and there is a ton of evidence showing how the Mini's screen displays significntly more of a webpage in landscape and almost as much as the N7's in portrait due to the lack of software buttons and much less browser chrome.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	pic-border-460.jpg
Views:	81
Size:	91.9 KB
ID:	413992  
__________________
128 giggity... giggity... gigg-i-ty
Lego Apple Store

Last edited by darngooddesign; May 27, 2013 at 08:22 PM.
darngooddesign is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 08:22 PM   #22
Rodster
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: May 2007
16:9 format?

Rodster is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 08:35 PM   #23
Tortri
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post
In my lazy image we have a widescreen Mini that displays the same sized video image as a regular 4:3 Mini. I assume that Apple would keep the height the same and just reduce the width to achieve a widescreen iPad. Otherwide the widescreen Mini would only differ from the full size one by width. If the Mini weren't that widescreen the video image size would stay the same but you'd have small black bars.

But I hardly watch videos, so web browsing is far more important to me, and there is a ton of evidence showing how the Mini's screen displays significntly more of a webpage in landscape and almost as much as the N7's in portrait due to the lack of software buttons and much less browser chrome.

After looking at that 16:9 iPad I gave the "why?? Why would apple destroy the iPad like that?" Look. :-)
Tortri is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2013, 06:36 AM   #24
Nightarchaon
macrumors 65816
 
Nightarchaon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post
Why would you prefer the smaller iPad for videos instead of the larger screen?
because the iPad mini fits in my pocket, so i carry it to and from work, its superb for watching Netflix etc whilst on the train for 1hr 30mins each way.

The iPad i had to carry, used up a hand, could be put down and forgotten and was just too large to carry about day to day.

A slightly longer, but just as wide iPad mini would also continue to fit easily in my pocket, and mean i could watch movies without borders.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by darngooddesign View Post
I I assume that Apple would keep the height the same and just reduce the width to achieve a widescreen iPad.
Nope, they should do the same as the iPhone 5, keep width, extend hight
__________________
iWatch in action http://media.joe.ie/wp-content/uploa...ael-Knight.jpg
MacBook Pro/iPad Mini/TV1/iMac/iPhone5
Nightarchaon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2013, 08:07 AM   #25
darngooddesign
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightarchaon View Post
Nope, they should do the same as the iPhone 5, keep width, extend hight
Doing that would make it almost as big as the full iPad5, which eliminates most of the portability benefits of the mini. If they have widescreen iPads they should take the existing iPads and decrease the widths.bthe iPhone is different because it was already pretty small.

The current mini only fits in some of my pockets so a slightly narrower one would fit in more of them, but as I've said widescreens are worse for what I mostly use my iPad for so I don't want one.

If apple releases one, hopefully it won't replace the 4:3 iPads.
__________________
128 giggity... giggity... gigg-i-ty
Lego Apple Store

Last edited by darngooddesign; May 28, 2013 at 09:34 AM.
darngooddesign is offline   0 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
Bad Signal-to-Noise-Ratio with 2012 Mac mini Maakuus Mac mini 2 Mar 15, 2013 05:28 PM
iPad mini aspect ratio is awful raptorstv Wasteland 39 Dec 1, 2012 04:33 PM
iPhoto (Mac) syncing pictures to iPad in wrong ratio Gonky iOS 6 1 Nov 26, 2012 12:40 PM
The aspect ratio of next week's iPad mini and iPad (with Lightning) will be... Redbeard25 iPad 1 Oct 16, 2012 01:56 PM
Why does iPad not have a wide screen ratio? Jackintosh iPad 63 Jul 6, 2012 03:04 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:21 AM.

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

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