Amazon does much more for much less campaign

[Rogifan]

I don't find comparing two devices on your site to be defensive at all. That's simply ridiculous. They're comparing the two and you, as the consumer, needs to choose what you believe is best for you. How hard is that?

The problem is when a company is doing the comparisons it's usually not going to be completely accurate. When Apple announced the mini there was zero focus on screen resolution. Here Amazon is only focusing on those things it feels are superior to the mini. An independent review would point out the good/bad of both devices.

 

[IbisDoc]

Apple marketing:

iPad - "we have a retina display!"
IPhone - "we have a retina display!"
iPod touch - "we have a retina display!"
15 inch MacBook Pro - "we have a retina display!"
13 inch MacBook Pro - "we have a retina display!"


new iPod Mini - "we have iTunes!"


LOL.

 

[comatose81]

The Verge is infinitely better than Gizmodo. They're all just going to use whatever quotes or part of quotes favor their product, but Amazon picking Gizmodo's nonsense borders on embarrassing.

Oh I see. So we'll subjectively judge the subjective opinions of tech sites and use it to subjectively judge the subjectivity of Amazon and Apple's advertising.

Makes sense.

 

[falkedup]

the web browser on the kindle fire hd is slow and choppy and sometimes doesn't render things correctly. I just returned one. that is reason enough to buy the ipad mini for me

 

[nuckinfutz]

Maybe when Apple said the Nexus was made of "cheap plastic"

Is there there really any other kind? High Quality Plastic is an oxymoron.

 

[Bokes]

the web browser on the kindle fire hd is slow and choppy and sometimes doesn't render things correctly. I just returned one. that is reason enough to buy the ipad mini for me

What?
Exchange it.
Web browsing on my Fire HD is faster than my ipad 3.
It renders just fine.

 

[AJAAY]

The problem is when a company is doing the comparisons it's usually not going to be completely accurate. When Apple announced the mini there was zero focus on screen resolution. Here Amazon is only focusing on those things it feels are superior to the mini. An independent review would point out the good/bad of both devices.

Last time I checked, when you are trying to sell a product, of course your going to point out the strong points of your product against the competing product. When is that NOT the case?

 

[mattopotamus]

no matter what anyone says it is very smart advertising. People who are buying gifts or do not know a lot about technology will see that and jump all over the fire HD

 

[convergent]

no matter what anyone says it is very smart advertising. People who are buying gifts or do not know a lot about technology will see that and jump all over the fire HD

I completely disagree. I think people will see the comparison ad, probably pay little attention to the details, and think, "Oh, Apple has a new smaller iPad! Yay, let me go to Apple to get one!!!". They'd be much better off not introducing a competitor on their home page. People are already on Amazon.com, so by running this ad they are giving a ton of free advertising to Apple. Most people realize these comparisons are one sided, and they realize that Apple doesn't make junk.

 

[mazz0]

What's with the "don't get the mini iPad to read on, it'll be rubbish" comments? Reading on the old iPad was good, this has smaller pixels, so will presumably be better!

Also, unlike on iPhone didn't anyone else fine the jump from non-retina to retina on iPad wasn't that amazing? Still good, I'm glad I got my iPad 3, but it certainly didn't make the iPad 1 look bad, and the mini's better than that.

And, as has been pointed out many times before, the iPad mini will be populated by iPad apps, the Kindle Fire will be populated by phone apps.

----------

I completely disagree. I think people will see the comparison ad, probably pay little attention to the details, and think, "Oh, Apple has a new smaller iPad! Yay, let me go to Apple to get one!!!". They'd be much better off not introducing a competitor on their home page. People are already on Amazon.com, so by running this ad they are giving a ton of free advertising to Apple. Most people realize these comparisons are one sided, and they realize that Apple doesn't make junk.

Aye, and they might wonder why Amazon's is so cheap, almost as if the hardware isn't good enough to sell itself...

 

[mattopotamus]

I completely disagree. I think people will see the comparison ad, probably pay little attention to the details, and think, "Oh, Apple has a new smaller iPad! Yay, let me go to Apple to get one!!!". They'd be much better off not introducing a competitor on their home page. People are already on Amazon.com, so by running this ad they are giving a ton of free advertising to Apple. Most people realize these comparisons are one sided, and they realize that Apple doesn't make junk.

I think you would have to be living under a rock to not know about the ipad mini. If you know how to shop on amazon, you know about the ipad mini.

 

[TheWheelMan]

I completely disagree. I think people will see the comparison ad, probably pay little attention to the details, and think, "Oh, Apple has a new smaller iPad! Yay, let me go to Apple to get one!!!". They'd be much better off not introducing a competitor on their home page. People are already on Amazon.com, so by running this ad they are giving a ton of free advertising to Apple. Most people realize these comparisons are one sided, and they realize that Apple doesn't make junk.

I also think Amazon should have avoided going after the iPad market. They can do well on their own without head to head comparisons. They should be focusing on beating all of the other Android tablets, because you're not going to take down Apple unless and until Apple brand loses luster on its own.

 

[convergent]

I think you would have to be living under a rock to not know about the ipad mini. If you know how to shop on amazon, you know about the ipad mini.

I don't agree with you on that. Other than on forums like this, the average folks out there don't pay attention to the latest products from Apple. My sisters both buy stuff on Amazon, and I would bet you that neither one of them has any clue about the iPad Mini. If anything, they'll see the Amazon home page and think, "Wow, I can get an iPad for $329? I thought they were a lot more expensive.".

 

[Dekard]

What?
Exchange it.
Web browsing on my Fire HD is faster than my ipad 3.
It renders just fine.

Yes it's faster but I hated using Silk and/or Dolphin. I hated using the Amazon app limited app store. If I only read kindle books, watched Amazon prime movies and used the internet Kindle Fire HD would have been awesome. But the carousel feature was slow, and I hated it.. and couldn't add silk to the carousel either. It's 'real close' at being an ipad replacement but the lack of functionality for 'me' compared to the full screen apps and function of an ipad is much better for me. I sent my Kindle Fire HD back because of how slow it was and how they pigeon holed themselves by 'nuking' android so much that you have to sideload any Google Apps.

 

[Lynn Belvedere]

Please explain to me how a 1024x768 screen is able to display each pixel of a 720p video.

Let me help you: you can't explain that because it is physically impossible.

Hint: 720p is 1280x720

You are going to have to direct that question to the consumer electronics association, who set the HD standard at 720 vertical lines of resolution. Whether you like it or not, 1024x768 is an HD resolution. Point blank.

Hint: The iPad mini is a device capable of displaying HD content.

 

[GoSh4rks]

You are going to have to direct that question to the consumer electronics association, who set the HD standard at 720 vertical lines of resolution. Whether you like it or not, 1024x768 is an HD resolution. Point blank.

Hint: The iPad mini is a device capable of displaying HD content.

You are misinformed.

Do you know what 720p actually is? 720p is defined as 720 vertical lines at a 16:9 aspect ratio. That comes out to 1280x720.

1024x768 is in no way, shape, or form capable of displaying 720p content without losing pixel detail.

 

[ActionableMango]

You are misinformed.

Do you know what 720p actually is? 720p is defined as 720 vertical lines at a 16:9 aspect ratio. That comes out to 1280x720.

1024x768 is in no way, shape, or form capable of displaying 720p content without losing pixel detail.

1) He is not misinformed. 1024x768 is explicitly listed as an HD resolution. It is the lowest, yes, and it only won't throw out pixels if the content is 4:3, but it's still HD.

2) Even if you don't consider it HD because it won't do 720P 16:9 content, there's no way it can be called an SD device as that ad states. 1024x768 is much, much closer to 720P than 480i, and it exceeds Enhanced Definition (480P). Calling it SD is factually incorrect.

 

[cyrways]

Lol it never even occured to me regular people might think just notice the ipad and then check it out at apple.com. Would be hilarious if it back fired.

 

[ZBoater]

1) He is not misinformed. 1024x768 is explicitly listed as an HD resolution. It is the lowest, yes, and it only won't throw out pixels if the content is 4:3, but it's still HD.

2) Even if you don't consider it HD because it won't do 720P 16:9 content, there's no way it can be called an SD device as that ad states. 1024x768 is much, much closer to 720P than 480i, and it exceeds Enhanced Definition (480P). Calling it SD is factually incorrect.

Athough this is true, the display resolution is more irrelevant - the quality of the CONTENT is more relevant.

If you try to display 720p or 1080p content on the Mini (the only two kinds of HD content I am aware of), you will need to downscale.

Is there 1024x768 content out there? Sure? And so is Bigfoot.

480i/p content (SD) content will display fine on the mini with no downscaling.

I have a ton of DVDs and they are 720x480. Those rip and play fine on a 1024x768 screen. I can download 720p or 1080p content from iTunes, and it will play, but downscaled.

Truth be told, it all looks good to me. There are some people with X-ray vision on this forum that get headaches from the downscaling. Me, it all looks great. It keeps me amused for the 45 minutes to 90 minutes I watch an episode of NCIS or a movie. I'm not expecting an IMAX experience out of an iPad.

As long as Airplay outputs real HD when I want to watch in on my 72" DLP TV, that's all I really care about...

 

[steve dave]

He said that the iPad mini can't display every pixel of a 720p video... it can't.

It is amazing that there are really fanboys now challenging basic math in order to defend apple.

 

[Lynn Belvedere]

You are misinformed.

Do you know what 720p actually is? 720p is defined as 720 vertical lines at a 16:9 aspect ratio. That comes out to 1280x720.

1024x768 is in no way, shape, or form capable of displaying 720p content without losing pixel detail.

I love it when someone is clearly proven wrong, yet still continues typing as if he were right.

Get this straight: 1024x768 is a HD resolution. Period. End of discussion. It's not up to you or I to define what is or is not "high definition. That criteria has already been established by the CEA. If you want to change that definition, like I said, take it up with them.

----------

He said that the iPad mini can't display every pixel of a 720p video... it can't.

It is amazing that there are really fanboys now challenging basic math in order to defend apple.

That's called a straw man argument. Look it up and get back to us.

 

[GoSh4rks]

I love it when someone is clearly proven wrong, yet still continues typing as if he were right.

Get this straight: 1024x768 is a HD resolution. Period. End of discussion. It's not up to you or I to define what is or is not "high definition. That criteria has already been established by the CEA. If you want to change that definition, like I said, take it up with them.

----------



That's called a straw man argument. Look it up and get back to us.

Look, you brought up 720p in the first place. Bringing up that "1024x768 is a HD resolution" is moving the goalposts. I haven't said anything about whether or not 1024x768 is an HD resolution, nor do I care to in this discussion.

Read my posts. Everything that I've said relates to the fact that you CANNOT display 720p video on a 1024x768 screen without resizing.

I do believe you are the one doing the straw man'ing here.

 

[lilo777]

Is there there really any other kind? High Quality Plastic is an oxymoron.

As is high quality aluminum. How much do you think aluminum in iPad costs? $5? probably less. Every iPad case (which BTW is made of cheap plastic) costs much more.

 

[ZBoater]

...Get this straight: 1024x768 is a HD resolution. Period. End of discussion. It's not up to you or I to define what is or is not "high definition. That criteria has already been established by the CEA. If you want to change that definition, like I said, take it up with them.

I'm sorry, but this is a very weak argument. Yes, technically 1024x768 could be described as HD. But there is no content to speak of at that resolution. Most HD content is 1280x720 or 1920x1080, the resolutions that most normal human beings associate with HD. Not even the most inept marketing department would even try to pass off 1024x768 as HD. Apple doesn't do it. Amazon calling the Mini SD is technically inaccurate, but they got their point across very effectively. 1024x768 is definitely higher than SD 720x480. But calling it HD is like calling HSPA 4G.

 

[lianlua]

1) He is not misinformed. 1024x768 is explicitly listed as an HD resolution. It is the lowest, yes, and it only won't throw out pixels if the content is 4:3, but it's still HD.

1024x768 is only HD with non-square pixels. "High Definition" is 720 horizontal lines at 16:9 dimensions. At 4:3 like on the iPad, 1024x768 is not capable of displaying 720 lines in the required 16:9 aspect ratio. If the iPad had rectangular pixels like the corresponding HDTVs, then it would be a different story.

2) Even if you don't consider it HD because it won't do 720P 16:9 content, there's no way it can be called an SD device as that ad states. 1024x768 is much, much closer to 720P than 480i, and it exceeds Enhanced Definition (480P). Calling it SD is factually incorrect.

Close is not good enough. It's not HD, so it is arguably SD. Disingenuous and misleading, but not incorrect. "SD" is not synonymous with ATSC SDTV, or 480i/p.

Get this straight: 1024x768 is a HD resolution. Period. End of discussion. It's not up to you or I to define what is or is not "high definition. That criteria has already been established by the CEA.

720 lines at 16:9 or better qualifies. Period. End of story. 1024x768 at 4:3 does not. Also, while we're getting things straight, the singular of "criteria" is criterion, and the CEA's definition isn't a final authority. If anything, one should look to ATSC and ITU specs, since those deal with actual interoperability issues.

That said, the CEA definition is fine as long as you use the whole definition. The iPad mini is not a high definition device for video playback. It's as simple as that. Doesn't make it bad, doesn't really change the fact that you get a bigger, richer, brighter experience on the iPad and that unless you're playing back properly encoded HD video locally, you're getting compressed video that doesn't have the full pixel-by-pixel information that would make a difference. Just be accurate. There's nothing wrong with the iPad mini's display--there's no need to make excuses for it.