Last edited:
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 DisplayMate Screen Review
- Thread starter dantay
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Haha, cringe worthy. Not enough real gamut-G, though.
Just curious, what activities might you take part in that wouldn't be benefited, or influenced by "having the best screen"? I thought it was widely known that most people use their tablets for watching videos/movies, playing games, browsing the web, and viewing/taking photos.
Only the games part could I see the A7 being a benefit over a better screen.
*Luckily just about the only thing the rMini's screen produces well are are whites, so at least e-reading isn't hindered*
It's more a case that the rest if the tablet is so good that the screen is considered fine enough. Lots of people, myself included, liked everything else about the Mini 1 that the screen was good enough.
I had a Nexus 7. The screen was no great wonder. It was nice, but hardly a deal maker or deal breaker.
But then the iPad has the better aspect ratio for a tablet, a bigger screen, a dramatically more advanced SOC and GPU, better build materials, better cameras, and better battery life during more intensive tasks.
Pick your poison. I got rid of the Nexus 7 and got the iPad rMini.
S
syd430
Guest
So why does every other high end tablet have a more expensive to manufacture screen with a much higher colour gamut if it's not something anyone would ever notice?
Edit: since this is getting so many replies - Keep in mind, other high end tablets include the Air, which has 110% sRGB. No need to talk about competitors.
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe the are trying to differentiate themselves. Whatever their reason, it's not working too well for them.
S
syd430
Guest
Not much else going for them.....maybe.
When I said "other high end tablets", I also meant the Air which has 110% sRGB coverage. So the Air doesn't have much going for it either I guess?
Also, "not much going for it" doesn't address my point. If user doesn't even notice, how would it it make it "more going for it" over than drive up the cost for the manufacturer?
I'll tell you the answer: because there is a difference. Just because the average user can't say "wow, this seems to have 60% less sRGB coverage!", doesn't mean that their experience doesn't suffer (even if they can't pinpoint why).
Last edited by a moderator:
Idk about that. I specifically didn't buy the Mini 1 because I knew the specs were complete ***** and that they would address that, and the screen with the mini 2. That's just me though.
You didn't answer anything in my original post though, you just offered a side-tracked comment.
S
syd430
Guest
I guess that's why they put a 110% sRGB panel in the Air too? Because it wasn't working out for Apple?
"other high end tablets"=/= "other companies"
And how are the other manufactures trying to differentiate themselves? The Nexus 7 and kindle fire were originally competitors to the full sized ipad, which came out with full sRGB coverage before any of these 2 devices.
So... by differentiating, you mean making the same?
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah I've already seen quite a few people here mention how they sat down for the first time to watch a movie on their retina mini and didn't like the experience (because of the washed out colors) and returned it the next day.
I'm also envious of those who are not detail oriented or picky
----------
You literally just said that 3 posts above
Yet all this tech review sites being quoted here and in other threads call the rMini the best small tablet on the market. Even Anand Shimpi said he chose the rMini over the Air. I love my HTC One phone, but haven't found a better tablet experience than the Mini 1, iPad 4, and Air. I've owned several Samsung tablets, including the Note 8.0 and 10.1, and have played with the Nexus 7. When a manufacturer can't say we offer the best ecosystem, I suppose offering a shiny screen and lower price helps.
I thought that Apple products were bought by dopes until my wife and I bought iPad 4's early last Spring. Overpriced, and lacking features. I was especially peeved to see my new iPad 4 didn't include a calculator like my Note 10.1, but then I found out why people like the App Store.
Not much else going for them is my best answer. Actually, not as much going for them is a better answer.
S
syd430
Guest
Yet all this tech review sites being quoted here and in other threads call the rMini the best small tablet on the market. Even Anand Shimpi said he chose the rMini over the Air. I love my HTC One phone, but haven't found a better tablet experience than the Mini 1, iPad 4, and Air. I've owned several Samsung tablets, including the Note 8.0 and 10.1, and have played with the Nexus 7. When a manufacturer can't say we offer the best ecosystem, I suppose offering a shiny screen and lower price helps.
I thought that Apple products were bought by dopes until my wife and I bought iPad 4's early last Spring. Overpriced, and lacking features. I was especially peeved to see my new iPad 4 didn't include a calculator like my Note 10.1, but then I found out why people like the App Store.
Not much else going for them is my best answer. Actually, not as much going for them is a better answer.
This has nothing to do with what I posted. I asked a very specific question. Let me ask it again:
If the user can't notice the difference (which is the exact words the person used) between a 110% sRGB and 60% rRGB screen why does Apple or any other manufacturer use these screens? That includes Apple, which also uses 110% sRGB in the Air and 10 other of their products. So i'm not sure why you're talking about competitors.
You're avoiding the question because you can't answer the question.
Well, we can answer. But we'd be making stuff up. Only Apple knows for sure why. It could be a combination of available technology plus desired battery consumption plus target profit margin. That's an answer. You think I'm wrong? I'm guessing.
1GB RAM? Price Increase? Bad Color!??!?!?
God I was taken to the cleaners
Hopefully you are being facetious. The Retina iPad mini is a fine device. The DisplayMate review focuses solely on the weakest aspect of the device. Consider, instead AnandTech, which pointed out the color gamut differential but on the whole gave the device a good review.
S
syd430
Guest
You're still not getting what i'm saying.
Then why doesn't Apple use the cheaper 60% sRGB in all their products as apparently you can't notice the difference which is what WashupDawg said, which is the person I replied to, which is the person you're defending.
Because they can achieve their target profit margins and desired battery life with the available technology. They are passionate about their products and want to make them as good as they can. If they could fit a 100% gamut screen on the Mini and not have to put in an even bigger battery and also keep their profit, they would have done it. I'm guessing. The 9.7" retina screen technology is more mature. They've worked out the kinks. 7.9", not so much.
What the alternative? They could have put a 100% gamut screen and keep the same battery life but chose not to so they could make more money? Ok.
They could have put the screen and make the same profit but chose not to just to mess with us? (Unlikely)
I'm not sure why you are confused about this.
The difficulty and cost of making the mini display 100% sRGB is no doubt a different matter from doing it in their other devices. The retina Mini is by far the largest display in the 300+ PPI range they have done. Retina macbook is 220 PPI, iPad is only 264 PPI.
Yes, I can see the difference, but the iPad mini with Retina is such a huge jump over the original mini that it's hard to complain. By all rights I was expecting an A6 class processor, and instead we got an A7 on top of the retina upgrade.
S
syd430
Guest
Because they can achieve their target profit margins and desired battery life with the available technology. They are passionate about their products and want to make them as good as they can. If they could fit a 100% gamut screen on the Mini and not have to put in an even bigger battery and also keep their profit, they would have done it. I'm guessing. The 9.7" retina screen technology is more mature. They've worked out the kinks. 7.9", not so much.
What the alternative? They could have put a 100% gamut screen and keep the same battery life but chose not to so they could make more money? Ok.
They could have put the screen and make the same profit but chose not to just to mess with us? (Unlikely)
I'm not sure why you are confused about this.
This again has nothing to do with what I posted. I give up.
You're pretty much just re-enforcing what I said. Which is that there is a difference between 60% sRGB and 110% sRGB, and that manufactures aim to achieve full sRGB coverage if it is viable to do so.
So in other words, there is a difference.
Unlike WashupDawg who said there was no difference unless you compared them side to side. That's the point I was addressing.
Obviously, there is a difference. Most people can't see it or don't care, but there is a difference. And I am sure once Apple figures out how to mass produce it without increasing battery size and while maintaining their profit, they'll release it.
Apple's competitors cram their machines with max spec'd components because compared to Apple, they are lacking the biggest spec of all; desirability.
No amount of RAM, pixels, or gHz can win out over pure unadulterated tech lust. The iPad is unrivaled in that area. eBay is littered with close out tablets from years past, still sealed in the box, for pennies on the dollar. Every iPad for sale over a year old is used, and commands top dollar.
Last edited:
S
syd430
Guest
According to WashupDawg there isn't, which is who I was replying to.
We're are really just agreeing with each other here, really.