iPad mini iPad mini reviews: screen leaves something to be desired

[ped]

Frankly I think Apple went the wrong direction. I for one want a LARGER than 10" tablet not a smaller one. Why is it we use 15", 17" or even larger monitors and laptop screens but people balk at a tablet that size? I know it reduces portability but you already can't put a 10" tablet in your pocket so what's the difference if we make, say, a 13" or 15" tablet? Lots more screen space makes for a much better user experience when using apps with small details.

 

[darngooddesign]

The Mini has the same PPI as the pre-retina iPhones.

 

[AttilaTheHun]

Surely those of us that only have an iPad 2 aint gonna notice any difference in the screen quality?

Think it'll only be an issue if you've been Retina'd?

use to drive a BMW 740i, now I have only Honda civic,(no job)
what shall I tell you Honda it's not BMW
and the mini is not ipad4

 

[jedolley]

Bet you the mini next year will somehow manage to have a better screen and more ram.

I don't want to sound like a hater or a member of the tinfoil hat brigade, but I think you can make a good argument that Apple parcels out features and hardware to gently encourage people into the yearly bi-yearly upgrade path.

I don't know if they purposely hold back features or components. Regardless of what their strategy is, it's common sense to assume the next version will be better, it kind of has to be. Apple is not forcing you to buy their products, if you want to wait for the next version, you have that choice.

 

[zhenya]

Frankly I think Apple went the wrong direction. I for one want a LARGER than 10" tablet not a smaller one. Why is it we use 15", 17" or even larger monitors and laptop screens but people balk at a tablet that size? I know it reduces portability but you already can't put a 10" tablet in your pocket so what's the difference if we make, say, a 13" or 15" tablet? Lots more screen space makes for a much better user experience when using apps with small details.

Because portability is everything. Very few people have a tablet as their only computer.

I would expect the mini to outsell the full sized iPad by a large margin.

 

[darngooddesign]

...and the mini is not ipad4

He specifically said iPad 2, not 4.

 

[AttilaTheHun]

Frankly I think Apple went the wrong direction. I for one want a LARGER than 10" tablet not a smaller one. Why is it we use 15", 17" or even larger monitors and laptop screens but people balk at a tablet that size? I know it reduces portability but you already can't put a 10" tablet in your pocket so what's the difference if we make, say, a 13" or 15" tablet? Lots more screen space makes for a much better user experience when using apps with small details.

let see you going to the bathroom with a 15" tablet

 

[Shaddow825]

So we care about HD video/RD on an iPhone 4/4S/5 and even an iPad 3, but yet we don't care about it on an iPad mini? So which is it, we do care about RD or we don't?





There are many that care about the quality of the screen. Those that might use the iPad to show pictures, video clips, watch movies, read books...etc. Apple has been telling us RD is important, right?

I care about it when it makes sense. I was on the fence about the ipad2 after going retina with my iphone4. Then I saw how big the ipad3 was over the 2, and said I would buy the next retina ipad. Then the 4 showed up and was the same size. I went with the mini because size mattered more to me. Unfortunately all those graphics processors and pixels take a lot of battery, and with the retina display I think the mini would have been more like, 'it looks nice, but it's not too mini in it's brick-like heft compared to its (slightly) bigger brother' type reviews. And Apple would have had no devices for the people looking for something smaller. And with most of the reviews implying or outright saying that even with the display, they will be using it more than their old ipad, the reviewers even seem to feel this way as well.

Every one of those articles has another quote in it that shows that the display ultimately didn't really matter.

The cnet's closing thought was 'I will say this: when you see it, you'll desire it." Not, when you use it, feel it etc. but see it. How bad can the display be if they think just by seeing it you will desire it.

 

[zhenya]

I don't know if they purposely hold back features or components. Regardless of what their strategy is, it's common sense to assume the next version will be better, it kind of has to be. Apple is not forcing you to buy their products, if you want to wait for the next version, you have that choice.

It's that Apple has very strict in-house requirements for profit margins, and they have been adamant about minimizing the number of display resolutions developers have to work with. 2048x1536 7.9" panels don't appear to even be available. If they were, they'd be very expensive and require the use of an A6x chip to be competitive. If the Mini had the same resolution and chip as the full sized iPad, it'd have to be even more expensive and then the bigger iPad would have little reason for existence.

 

[jclardy]

Heres the thing...iPad mini is $329. Next year, if Apple adds retina to the mini then I can sell my current mini on craigslist for around $250 or so and buy the new one (7% sales tax here so a new mini goes for $350 after tax.) So I will have essentially "rented" the Mini for $8 a month this year.

And that is if I even feel the need to upgrade.

But lets look at the actual situation - if Apple put retina into the Mini this year.

New specs:
A5X - needed to push the graphics on the retina display
1GB RAM - needed to handle uncompressed 2x graphics
Retina display - 324 PPI -> Better than iPad 3/4
10 hour battery (Not sure how they would keep this without making it heavier)

All for $329. I think in the end this would piss off a lot of iPad 3 owners who would have preferred a smaller sized tablet, given they launched in October rather than waiting till Spring. Now they have a holiday season based upgrade cycle for the Mini and can blow everyone away with the retina display next year.

I think the main problem with the above is that it becomes much harder to justify the $170 upgrade to the 9.7" iPad, even with the processor upgrade.

 

[QCassidy352]

I switch between an iphone 5 and iPad 2 and have no issues. Sure higher res would be better, but 163 ppi really isn't bad.

 

[Hello...]

Really who cares, in less than a year or another iPad going to be out so you can change then, I don't see why everybody's getting their feathers Ruffled over this.

 

[MacManTexas56]

For many going to the iPad mini, they are coming from an iPhone4/4S/5 and/or iPad3 and/or MBP RD. Those that spend a lot of time reading emails, books, magazine, journal articles...etc. on the iPad mini might have an issue with the blurry/fuzzy/less that optimal/less than perfect screen.

Apple is all about designing and selling the best product bar none. Not sure sure they hit the mark on the screen. After all, the screen is what you are interact with the whole time. YMMV.




The issue is that Apple has now set the standard with the iPhone4/4S/5 and/or iPad3 and/or MBP RD. That is what people are use to. When iPad 1 came out there was no RD. With iPad 2, there was no RD except for the iPhone 4. The iPad2 represented the best screen in a tablet at the time.

the people that care about retina are not the avg joes that will snatch these up. why do you think the iPad 2 is still around? people still buy it like crazy and it doesn't have retina.

 

[DreamSTi]

Heres the thing...iPad mini is $329. Next year, if Apple adds retina to the mini then I can sell my current mini on craigslist for around $250 or so and buy the new one (7% sales tax here so a new mini goes for $350 after tax.) So I will have essentially "rented" the Mini for $8 a month this year.

And that is if I even feel the need to upgrade.

But lets look at the actual situation - if Apple put retina into the Mini this year.

New specs:
A5X - needed to push the graphics on the retina display
1GB RAM - needed to handle uncompressed 2x graphics
Retina display - 324 PPI -> Better than iPad 3/4
10 hour battery (Not sure how they would keep this without making it heavier)

All for $329. I think in the end this would piss off a lot of iPad 3 owners who would have preferred a smaller sized tablet, given they launched in October rather than waiting till Spring. Now they have a holiday season based upgrade cycle for the Mini and can blow everyone away with the retina display next year.

I think the main problem with the above is that it becomes much harder to justify the $170 upgrade to the 9.7" iPad, even with the processor upgrade.

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

 

[advan031]

I thought the iPad 2 screen was terrible. The pixels were clearly obvious to me during almost all my usage. After reading the mini reviews I expect the same results unfortunately. Luckily for some people on here they can't tell a difference but for me it sounds like I'm waiting till next year for a mini.

Yeah, maybe it's my bad eyes. Going from iPhone 3G to iPhone 4, the retina display was a drastic change but iPad 2 to iPad 3...not so much.

 

[Bokes]

Those who are choosing to ignore or make excuses for the poor screen have their heads in the sand.

It is a step back or a rush to market.

Both FireHd and Nook HD are both a higher rez.
Most of Apple products now sport a higher rez.

I've actually seen comments claiming Apple simply can't deliver a higher rez in this size(?)- and or- that they may never do it.

Stick with full size retina.
It's perfect.

 

[iDave]

When I moved from the iPad 2 to iPad 3 while I noticed the difference in ppi, I would have been fine with the iPad 2 screen. Who cares about HD video on such a small device? It's not a 50" HD tv we're talking about here.

Um, to me, it's the quality of text that's important. After using a screen that's better than 200ppi, I never want to go back to less. Text seems very blurry on my MacBook Air, for instance.

 

[53x12]

Um, to me, it's the quality of text that's important. After using a screen that's better than 200ppi, I never want to go back to less. Text seems very blurry on my MacBook Air, for instance.

Exactly.

Those who are choosing to ignore or make excuses for the poor screen have their heads in the sand.

It is a step back or a rush to market.

Both FireHd and Nook HD are both a higher rez.
Most of Apple products now sport a higher rez.

I've actually seen comments claiming Apple simply can't deliver a higher rez in this size(?)- and or- that they may never do it.

Stick with full size retina.
It's perfect.

Agreed. Rush to market after stating there was no market for a 7in tablet. Now they have to double back and enter the market they said didn't exist.

But if someone has their head in the sand, you really can't tell them much that they will understand.

 

[advan031]

Those who are choosing to ignore or make excuses for the poor screen have their heads in the sand.

It is a step back or a rush to market.

Both FireHd and Nook HD are both a higher rez.
Most of Apple products now sport a higher rez.

I've actually seen comments claiming Apple simply can't deliver a higher rez in this size(?)- and or- that they may never do it.

Stick with full size retina.
It's perfect.

There's really only one reason why Apple didn't do the retina on 1st gen iPad mini...they want us to upgrade again next year.

 

[iDave]

There's really only one reason why Apple didn't do the retina on 1st gen iPad mini...they want us to upgrade again next year.

No, it's the software.

 

[ucfgrad93]

While I'm disappointed that the mini screen is not retina, I'll wait to see it for myself before I decide if it is good enough for me.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

2048x1536 7.9" panels don't appear to even be available. If they were, they'd be very expensive and require the use of an A6x chip to be competitive. If the Mini had the same resolution and chip as the full sized iPad...

I think the underlying assumption here is wrong. iPad Mini 2 or later with retina won't have to match the resolution of the iPad 3 & 4. Instead, it could use the 3 & 4's apps and scale them down to a resolution between "2" and "3" & "4". That would not create any new work for the developers (they would still target 2048x1536 for retina) and, unlike scaling up from old non-retina resolutions, downscaling from higher resolutions will still look great.

Thus, I imagine the iPad Mini 2 will have a better processor mostly for being able to downscale optimized-for-ipad-retina apps to some resolution between iPad 2 and iPad 3/4. I bet they could target about 80% of 3/4 resolution, still have a specs claim to "retina" and probably get the price on down to where it needs to be (while maintaining the Apple margin).

I think we're wrong to assume that only 2048x1536 can work in a next-gen mini. Else, it would be the highest dpi iPad, exceeding the sharpness of its big brother.

 

[Techwriter]

Oh please. Did the iPad 2 have "poor screen quality" when it was released? It was magical for crying out loud!!!

The Mini will be an increase in screen quality while reducing size and maintaining resolution, cutting weight in HALF, with better cameras. If the iPad 2 was magical, the Mini is freaking revolutionary....

Thank you for the voice of reason.

Is the iPad Mini perfect? Of course not, no tablet is. But with the technology available today, it's an incredible device. It will get retina when the tech is ready, but I'm not waiting 365 or even 730 days for it to get there. I'll take it with it's supposedly "flawed" non-retina screen, but half the weight, and according to one reviewer, 12 hours of battery life, thank you very much.

 

[iDave]

Thus, I imagine the iPad Mini 2 will have a better processor mostly for being able to downscale optimized-for-ipad-retina apps to some resolution between iPad 2 and iPad 3/4. I bet they could target about 80% of 3/4 resolution, still have a specs claim to "retina" and probably get the price on down to where it needs to be (while maintaining the Apple margin).

I think we're wrong to assume that only 2048x1536 can work in a next-gen mini. Else, it would be the highest dpi iPad, exceeding the sharpness of its big brother.

Yes, you may be right. If Apple had been able to do such a thing when designing and releasing iPad mini (1) I expect they would have. But they couldn't, thus the negative reviews of the so so screen.

 

[zhenya]

I think the underlying assumption here is wrong. iPad Mini 2 or later with retina won't have to match the resolution of the iPad 3 & 4. Instead, it could use the 3 & 4's apps and scale them down to a resolution between "2" and "3" & "4". That would not create any new work for the developers (they would still target 2048x1536 for retina) and, unlike scaling up from old non-retina resolutions, downscaling from higher resolutions will still look great.

I don't think that's true, as it's what Android does with mixed results. Down-scaling larger bitmaps still tends to cause some artifacts.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6073/the-google-nexus-7-review/3

This is why when Apple does add additional display resolutions, they've tried hard to stay at exact multiples of existing ones.