Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

All iPads 16:9 Ratio iPad/mini

zephyrnoid

macrumors 6502
Jan 12, 2008
255
0
Geneva Switzerland
I addressed this a Loooooooong time ago, prior to the Mini release.
I ended up with a Nexus7 and stick by my points.
- Sharper screen trumps bigger screen for readability, even of smaller pages!
- .6" narrower formfactor has indeed, allowed the N7 to fit in pockets that forbid the Mini.
- I saved $200 by going the N7 route and have yet to spend the difference in airtime :D
By the time the N7 is 'old news' MAYBE Apple will have my predicted, iPadMicra released.
See ya in about 6 months!
 
Comment

Nightarchaon

macrumors 65816
Sep 1, 2010
1,393
29
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.

The mini fits in my pockets because of its width, not its hight, taking the iPhone 4 to iPhone 5 method of just extending hight would both make sense (in terms of not needing to change anything for developers).

This extended screen size would also be better for me for reading books/web pages, slightly more information on screen. Making it narrower is pointless, they might as well just make the iPhone larger if your going to shrink the mini anymore.
 
Comment

darngooddesign

macrumors G3
Jul 4, 2007
9,840
654
Atlanta, GA
The mini fits in my pockets because of its width, not its hight, taking the iPhone 4 to iPhone 5 method of just extending hight would both make sense (in terms of not needing to change anything for developers).

This extended screen size would also be better for me for reading books/web pages, slightly more information on screen. Making it narrower is pointless, they might as well just make the iPhone larger if your going to shrink the mini anymore.

Extending the height will make it too tall for a lot of pockets; it would be too tall for the hip pockets of both my cargo shorts and front pockest of my suit slacks. Making the screen taller displays less web page information on the screen in landscape.

I keep a lot of the same photos on both my iPad and iPhone 5, and they aren't shot in widescreen so I end up with black bars when viewing the same photos on my phone.

I do agree that extending the height would be the easiest of developers unless they just keep 768 pixels as the width of the narrower screen, but that might make the hit targets too small.

This is another subjective topic, one aspect ratio is the best for everyone so whereas widescreen would be best for some, I hope they don't go widescreen because 4:3 is better for the things I use my iPad for.
 
Last edited:
Comment

Nightarchaon

macrumors 65816
Sep 1, 2010
1,393
29
Extending the height will make it too tall for a lot of pockets; it would be too tall for the hip pockets of both my cargo shorts and front pockest of my suit slacks. Making the screen taller displays less web page information on the screen in landscape.

I keep a lot of the same photos on both my iPad and iPhone 5, and they aren't shot in widescreen so I end up with black bars when viewing the same photos on my phone.

I do agree that extending the height would be the easiest of developers unless they just keep 768 pixels as the width of the narrower screen, but that might make the hit targets too small.

This is another subjective topic, one aspect ratio is the best for everyone so whereas widescreen would be best for some, I hope they don't go widescreen because 4:3 is better for the things I use my iPad for.

Making the screen taller displays more information in both portrait and landscape views, your adding real estate not removing it....(unless you make the device thinner and keep the hight, then you are removing real estate, which is why increasing hight to hit 16:9 is a better solution than thinning the width) see the iPhone 5 for how this works.. as for bars either side of pictures, meh, that doesn't bother me, having video shrunk to a tiny band across the middle of the screen because the screen isn't the correct aspect ratio does bother me.

ultimately, its down to what you use the screen for, for me, its video, and id like the screen to reflect that most video is 16:9 nowadays.
 
Comment

darngooddesign

macrumors G3
Jul 4, 2007
9,840
654
Atlanta, GA
Making the screen taller displays more information in both portrait and landscape views, your adding real estate not removing it...

I remember people discussing this when the Mini first came out and its' screen was compared to the N7. While you are correct that you are adding information, since iOS full screens its apps you will actually see less of a webpage at 16:9 when compared to a 4:3 screen. While I made this image when the Mini came out, you can see the same webpage on a N7 and iPad. The iPad on bottom displays more of the webpage.

Now if iOS windowed its apps things would be different, because I could display more information on my MacBook when compared to the 12" Powerbook it replaced.

https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=380683&d=1354285805

ultimately, its down to what you use the screen for, for me, its video, and id like the screen to reflect that most video is 16:9 nowadays.

Exactly, we all have different needs and mine favor a 4:3 screen. I have always said that if you primarily use your iPad for videos then 16:9 makes more sense.
 
Last edited:
Comment

scapegoat81

macrumors 6502a
Oct 7, 2012
730
143
Philly
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.

This.
Is why I'm hoping on a 16:9 Mini 2 this fall. Well, either that or the new 5S will do. ;)
 
Comment

scottw324

macrumors 6502
Mar 5, 2012
452
1
While i use my iPad to watch a lot of video content I hope to God they never come out with the 16 x 9 version iPad or iPad mini. I also use my iPad for homework and surfing the Internet and emails things like that so by switching to a 16 x 9 I actually lose real estate to view content.

So far I love the iPad mini's small factor.
 
Comment

scottw324

macrumors 6502
Mar 5, 2012
452
1
I addressed this a Loooooooong time ago, prior to the Mini release.
I ended up with a Nexus7 and stick by my points.
- Sharper screen trumps bigger screen for readability, even of smaller pages!
- .6" narrower formfactor has indeed, allowed the N7 to fit in pockets that forbid the Mini.
- I saved $200 by going the N7 route and have yet to spend the difference in airtime :D
By the time the N7 is 'old news' MAYBE Apple will have my predicted, iPadMicra released.
See ya in about 6 months!

I have two different sized tablets. One is a Coby android tablet and the other one is the iPad mini tablet. As you can see from the pictures below the Coby is exactly the same length as the iPad Mini but it's not as wide as the iPad mini. Coby is formatted more as a 16:9 style screen versus the iPads 4:3 type screen.
Even though the Coby is smaller and technically more pocketable not to mention I can also use a memory card microSD in order to put additional content on it the iPad Mini is what I use more. The Coby android tablet I mostly use for my daughter so that if she breaks it no big deal put her games on it she can watch TV on it watch her movies that's pretty much about it. Overall I'm not really super impressed with the android operating system it does have its perks but not enough to steer me away from iOS and my iPads.



 
Comment

Dorkington

macrumors 6502a
Apr 5, 2010
685
22
I prefer 4:3 for this format, personally. 16:9 is pretty bad for landscape use unless watching a movie. 4:3 works for both landscape and portrait, the only downside being, letter boxing when watching movies.
 
Comment

scottw324

macrumors 6502
Mar 5, 2012
452
1
I prefer 4:3 for this format, personally. 16:9 is pretty bad for landscape use unless watching a movie. 4:3 works for both landscape and portrait, the only downside being, letter boxing when watching movies.

I completely agree. While I am not a fan of the letter boxing I would rather deal with that as the trade off for video content than lose my 4:3 ratio for everything else like Internet, email, PDFs for school and work, kindle app books, etc...
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.