I have? Uh no problem. Don't forget to wait for the next gen if you're thinking about buying!
It will indeed be great. I switched from the 3 to the mini for the portability, and it's great but I'm going back because I don't need portability lol...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPad mini iPad mini 2 will NOT have retina display, stop dreaming!
- Thread starter saintforlife
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
It will indeed be great. I switched from the 3 to the mini for the portability, and it's great but I'm going back because I don't need portability lol...
You're forgetting the most important thing. It's Apple, and they can do whatever the f--- they want. So yes, there will be a retina on the mini.
I'm not sure consumers want retina iPad Minis. We'll find out in the next couple of months. If Apple does launch the next iPad Mini with retina then we know consumers do want it. If they don't upgrade the display, then we know it's not important to consumers and Apple believes the current technology is sufficient for an incredible tablet experience.
So I'm open minded about this.
So I'm open minded about this.
heh
MythicFrost, I had no idea the resolution on the 13" rMBP is even better than the 15" so if I decide to go that route instead of (<probably>) iMac and regular sized iPad again it is good to know this.
Regarding the iPad Mini, I hope it has retina, it probably would not be viable for me even if it did though (I'd prefer the bigger iPad screen for pdfs, reading etc.)
MythicFrost, I had no idea the resolution on the 13" rMBP is even better than the 15" so if I decide to go that route instead of (<probably>) iMac and regular sized iPad again it is good to know this.
Regarding the iPad Mini, I hope it has retina, it probably would not be viable for me even if it did though (I'd prefer the bigger iPad screen for pdfs, reading etc.)
1. Yes they do. Just read the threads
2. What does the second bold remark mean. Doesn't make any sense.
Ah, I see. Technically the resolution of the 15 inch is higher, but the pixel density (which is what matters) is higher on the 13 inch.
I'm hoping for some Retina iMacs myself, but probably not this year.
Yeah, I also prefer the larger screen -- and I had an iPad 3 before I switched to the mini, and will be going back to the 5 xD
agree
Appreciate learning about the pixel density as far as resolution. Retina iMacs would be great. I've grown to like the new design and they are much easier to work on (less glare on the 2012 screens) than my 2010. I am trying to hold out until Retina iMacs are a reality though but it's helpful to know what is out there in terms of portables too.
Yeah, the iPad Mini was great except for the screen.
Appreciate learning about the pixel density as far as resolution. Retina iMacs would be great. I've grown to like the new design and they are much easier to work on (less glare on the 2012 screens) than my 2010. I am trying to hold out until Retina iMacs are a reality though but it's helpful to know what is out there in terms of portables too.
Yeah, the iPad Mini was great except for the screen.
Yeah it'll be pretty awesome -- I'd love to see how games look on the display. Gunna need a beefy GPU though, xD...
It's equally 'wrong' to assume Apple will be utilizing IGZO technology in the next iteration of either iPad
Apple doubled their iPad sales post mini release (almost...11 million to 19+ million year to year sales)...as has been acknowledged already, plenty of folks prefer the larger display just as there is a difference in laptop and desktop display sizes. The 'mini' isn't hurting the large iPad sales. They're augmenting total iPad sales. Big difference
Lol...seriously? The current 'large' iPad is no heavier than a typical hardback book. A 100 or 2 gram decrease would be substantial enough, not to mention the bezel shrink. It's cliché I know, but if you find the iPad 3/4 too heavy, it's time to put some of your income into a gym membership. As well, there are plenty of case manufacturers that supply excellent 'holders' for the iPad. I use a Marware CEO or Executive. Can't remember which but its got a small flap to hold the iPad with a single hand quite comfortably for extended periods of time. That said, with the leaks we've seen thus far, it does indeed look like some weight will be shaved off...though definitely not a half pound. That's not feasible IMO while maintaining battery life...as that battery is the largest contributor to 'weight'
I'm not following your reasoning. I don't think anyone considers one lesser than the other. Profit margins can still easily be maintained as the BOM price continues to drop---SOCs, RAM, and display as well as battery/energy, price points can easily be maintained and allow for the same margins profit-wise. I'm not so sure though that Apple and its board would be against a slightly lower profit margin. IOW, if they're profiting 33.8% per 16GB build, in order to continue outselling the competition...sell even more units and open the doors for emerging markets (China) to make the buy---it makes brilliant business sense. They don't make as much per unit but they sell more units...the 'target' per share is still there.
As the prices fall...the contributor is the increase...furtherance of technology. And efficiency. And power. And memory. The list goes on. Just because they had to 'add' weight to the iPad 3 from the 2 it wasn't significant and it certainly was 'worth' the trade off considering how much better the device has become. The iPad 4 is absolutely 'buttery smooth' and it is all the time! Unless a developer has released a buggy application, it doesn't get any more 'buttery' than the performance Of the iPad 4. Even the current mini is 'buttery smooth'....at least mine is, again, ALL the time!
Nor do I believe your idea that smaller tablets are perceived as lesser quality to the public. A killer tablet is a killer tablet. An iPad mini with a HiDPI display certainly qualifies...again, IMO. Even though more spendy than the competition, the OS is smoother, the Eco system larger (optimized tablet apps), and the build quality better (subjective, I know...but typically metal is held in higher regard than plastic, see the androidcentral forums and the biggest 'knock' other than TouchWiz on the S4). Not to mention the little 'x' factors like post purchase support, timely updates and excellent resale value to name a few (a quick scan of completed listings on eBay show the original 16GB iPad still selling for $160-$220! Interestingly enough...the price is in parity with the 32GB models). They're going on the fifth gen here in a month or two!
While Google is indeed interested (in market share), I'm sure....it's not their goal to make money with their hardware. They're miners. Data miners. It's like the new gold, diamonds and emeralds. That's where Google makes and will continue to make their paper. Folks' info and the ability to guide 3rd party companies your direction!
You most certainly are 'open minded'. I think I know what you mean...but fair is fair. Consumers DO want 'retina' HiDPI displays on their minis
. They now want them on everything. It's funny. While I'm positively blown away by these resolution increases, I think the older generation of computer geeks---35/40 year olds +, that remember the old 80x24 green monochrome screens....and the massive upgrade it was to the ColorMonitor IIe that supported the Apple II 'Double Hi-Res standard...560x192...tend to appreciate these updates a bit more and are possibly a bit more patient while waiting on the 'next big thing' I'll be the first to admit, I was extremely happy this year at CES, the big 'thing' was 4k and 3D has gone along by the wayside! I remember being satisfied when we were able to position the rabbit ears just perfect enough to actually 'see' Gilligan's Island through the static
Sorry. Did it again...
Tl;dr....people do want HiDPI (I'm not find anymore of the word retina...many other companies have now far exceeded Apple's iPhone 4/5 resolutions) displays
....on everything. Are they willing to pay for it? Whole 'nuther ques-chen
Last edited:
Nothing is certain, but it's quite likely imo. Consider the iPad 5's slimmer design: without an IGZO display, they may not be able to achieve that level of thinness without sacrificing battery life. (Also heat may be a problem.)
It's quite light for what it is, but making it even lighter would be better. I noticed a huge difference between the iPad 3 and mini. I would love for the iPad 5 to be as light as the mini, but that won't happen any time soon.
I don't think we will get retina display with the iPad mini. Why would they match the lower end with the upper end with certain key specs? It's what differentiates the markets with the specs.
iPad mini are for casual buys, students, kids. The mothership is for the big gunners (or spoilt kids)
iPad mini are for casual buys, students, kids. The mothership is for the big gunners (or spoilt kids)
I don't think we will get retina display with the iPad mini. Why would they match the lower end with the upper end with certain key specs? It's what differentiates the markets with the specs.
iPad mini are for casual buys, students, kids. The mothership is for the big gunners (or spoilt kids)
What? Don't be ridiculous, man. That's an absurd assumption. It's nothing more than a different size. Just like a 11" vs 13" MacBook Air.
Some people simply prefer a smaller screen size or device, maybe for easier portability, or whatever reason they may have. That doesn't make it "casual" compared to if they bought a large iPad.
Personally, I'd prefer the best screen I can get, no matter what the device. I like my retina iPhone 5 display. My non-retina iPad 1 display looked awful in comparison, as did my 7" Galaxy Tab 2. I sold them both the other day, in hopes of getting a retina iPad mini. I love the size of the iPad mini, but the resolution is the only thing that has held me back from buying one. I hope this gets answered on Tuesday.
Its not just size - the iPad mini 2 will most likely be based on an iPad 3 and as you know iPad 3 does not equal to iPad 5 - so its more than just a display size issue.
You pay for last year's technology for the sake of a smaller format.
You can't compare a MacBook Air...with a MacBook...Air
You have MacBook Air with no retina and then you have MacBook Pro
Notice how the latter has retina but not the former There are key hardware differences for market segmentation for Apple. If iPad mini had retina, it would certainly crash the iPad sales party. These companies have got to come up with ways to have similar products of their own to complete with each other but each have their unique differences that is a drawing factor for consumers. Right now, minus size and retina, I don't think there is anything major to the casual consumer to purchase either/or. Hardware differences are noticed by hardcore fans. No one I know has complained about iPad 2 versus iPad 4. In fact, most can't notice the difference in display until I show them closely
Um, there has already been a rumor saying that the next gen. iPad mini is going to have the same processor as the iPad 5. The new A7x. So that settles the dispute. It's been apparent that Apple thinks the iPad Mini is "Every bit an iPad" just like their advertising and marketing has been trying to convey. They don't have worse specs in there because they want it to be the "worse" tablet.
They have lower specs because they kept it from having a retina screen (which means it doesn't need a better processor to pull the pixels, and also results in fantastic battery life - plus they get substantial profit margins this way, while also testing the mini out in the market), so this time around they will probably just have a lower clocked processor in their line up but it will need to be similar to the iPad 5's in order to be able to run the Retina display it will have. I assume battery life will be similar or a bit worse. Other than that it's going to be better on all fronts, because having a retina display means it needs faster graphics, and processor.
You can't compare a MacBook Air...with a MacBook...Air
You have MacBook Air with no retina and then you have MacBook Pro
There are key hardware differences for market segmentation for Apple. If iPad mini had retina, it would certainly crash the iPad sales party. These companies have got to come up with ways to have similar products of their own to complete with each other but each have their unique differences that is a drawing factor for consumers. Right now, minus size and retina, I don't think there is anything major to the casual consumer to purchase either/or. Hardware differences are noticed by hardcore fans. No one I know has complained about iPad 2 versus iPad 4. In fact, most can't notice the difference in display until I show them closely
You can't say that the you can't compare the MacBook air with a MacBook air, and then right after compare a Macbook Air with Macbook Pro. Those are completely different products, in Apple's line. They have purposely delayed the introduction of Retina in the MBA line. If you're assuming they are going to do this with the iPad Mini this upcoming year again, then I'll tell you why I think you're wrong.
(Side note - I feel like if Google had not introduced a 1080p screen with the Nexus 7 this year, they would try to get another generation with no retina out of the mini, but they have to adapt to competition)
1) The full sized iPad has retina, but they choose to keep selling the iPad 2 in addition to this. That is something substantial in their thought process that many people are missing. Why would they do this? Because they want to accomodate to those in between people. Likely, in your thought process if they need to differentiate the two products (iPad 4, and iPad mini), but there is the older iPad 2 which is still being sold, which is technically in the middle, distorting that image. So that doesn't make sense.
I think that they will continue selling the non-retina iPad mini, in addition to the iPad mini retina, but the retina will be $20-50 more expensive. Either that, or they will simply replace it for the same price.
All I want is:
- Faster CPU (A7?).
- More memory.
- Better camera.
- LED flash.
If the iPad Mini 2 gets that I will be buying one.
- Faster CPU (A7?).
- More memory.
- Better camera.
- LED flash.
If the iPad Mini 2 gets that I will be buying one.
I think it's unlikely that the iPad mini 2 will use the same SoC as the iPad 5. It would make more sense for them to use the A6X in the current iPad 4. Though perhaps it's more profitable for them to use the same SoC across the board.
I could see a retina iPad mini 2 and iPad 5 with the same SoC as their only two options...
I could see a retina iPad mini 2 and iPad 5 with the same SoC as their only two options...
Why would using the same chip, with the mini's underclocked, be an option? That would keep the mini having longer battery life, as it also is now.
I'm not sure I understand the question? Are you asking why using the same SoC as the iPad 5 is an option?
If so, it's potentially because it could cut down costs from only producing the one chip as opposed to two. If not, clarify please.
The retina display of the 9.7" was run pretty smoothly with the A6X, and thats why I feel they will perhaps go with that for the smaller Mini.
With approximately 15in square less of screen area to run, an underclockedA7X or the present A6X might be more than sufficient to run it without affecting battery life.
This. The iPad 3 was underpowered for retina. The iPad 4 is runs great and if they shrink that A6x down for a power saving, it would make a retina mini a great performing device while allowing the iPad 5 to be the flagship product with the new A7x.
- Status