iPad mini screen actually show less than a Nexus?

[zhenya]

Allow me to clarify. When I say more detail I mean things like type are sharper. When I say more things I mean things you don't see otherwise.

So because both browsers scale up to fit the width:

In portrait the Nexus has a taller screen. Both screens show the same amount of the website widthwise but you see more things vertically. You don't have to scroll as much to see the same content.

In landscape the Nexus screen is wider but shorter. So both screens show the same amount of things widthwise, but the Nexus shows fewer things vertically.

The Nexus still has more resolution in landscape than the mini - its resolution - 1280x800 - is greater in both orientations than the Mini's 1024x768. You will see more in width and height on the Nexus, regardless of how you hold it.

Even though the screen is physically narrower on the Nexus, you'll still have 32 more pixels of 'stuff' on your screen.

 

[sc4rf4c3]

Watch when Apple comes out with a 5.5" screen or a Note competitor. Some of you guys will suddenly say that the iPad mini is too big heavy for your own needs. .

 

[zhenya]

Because they are the same screen size....

The aspect ratio has a lot to do with it as well. Use the N7 in landscape and you don't get to see a while lot before scrolling. Screen size does play a role - while the increased resolution of the N7 would should more content than the same resolution in a 7" iPad mini, the increased screen area of the 7.9" mini makes up for that difference and surpasses it.

No, you will see 32 pixels more worth of content even in landscape mode on the Nexus than on the mini. The physically larger screen DOES NOT mean less scrolling. The fact that it has lower resolution means MORE scrolling with the mini.

 

[jrswizzle]

This is where Apple fan hypocrisy comes in. 7mo ago people were screaming that their eyes were bleeding from having to look at that inferior non-retina screen but now its all about downplaying the importance of retina and slamming competitors by deflecting a lower ppi. Apple sure makes it hard to be a robot.

----------


Same here. Retina would be nice but I value portability more. Im fine with the Mini and ill gladly replace it next year for a retina version.

I am one Apple fan who is disappointed by the lower screen resolution BUT ultimately understand why they did it that way. AND I'm also not a spec-junkie and know that resolution and ppi aren't everything when it comes to a display.

Hence why the iPhone 5's screen is superior to the iPhone 4S - even though they both carry the same ppi and effectively the same resolution. The iPad mini will the be the first mass-produced device with the new GF2 tech - which I'm willing to bet has advantages other than being much thinner and lighter than anything else out there.

My guess - (and I can't wait to see these in person to judge for myself) - the iPad mini's screen is superior to the iPad 2 and comparable to the N7 and Fire HD. The Nook HD - that one can take the 7" display-cake, but who wants to be stuck in THAT ecosystem?

 

[darngooddesign]

The Nexus still has more resolution in landscape than the mini - its resolution - 1280x800 - is greater in both orientations than the Mini's 1024x768. You will see more in width and height on the Nexus, regardless of how you hold it.

Even though the screen is physically narrower on the Nexus, you'll still have 32 more pixels of 'stuff' on your screen.

I don't think you get it. Compare the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 5 because the 5 has a taller screen and higher resolution, albeit much greater resolution. When looking at the same website, you see the same amount of content width-wise but that content is much sharper. All those extra pixels don't give the site any additional width, they do show you additional site content at the bottom of the screen. And in landscape you actually see less of the bottom of the site.

Tablets are not like regular computers when it comes to this. The move from 1024x768 on th iBook to 1280 x 800 on the MacBook did actually give you additional width,For example I could put my iChat buddy list next to the browser, but it did not in and of itself increase the sharpness because the browser didn't scale up to fit the width of the screen.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Debate about pixels and scales is nice, not really that important. Speaking only for myself, but the browser is probably the least frequently used app (excluding some of the built-in apps that i never use like newsstand).

It's all about the apps. So what if the nexus 7 can show a little bit more at one glance, when it lacks competent tablet apps for several of my top used apps: yelp, espn, ebay, facebook, twitter; and there are many many more android apps that do not have a good tablet ui.

The nexus 7 can have 1000ppi and I still wouldn't consider it, because it's all about the apps.

 

[jrswizzle]

No, you will see 32 pixels more worth of content even in landscape mode on the Nexus than on the mini. The physically larger screen DOES NOT mean less scrolling. The fact that it has lower resolution means MORE scrolling with the mini.

lol NO! The browsers scale to the dimensions....

Good lord....pull out your phone and go to the macrumors front page....do you see more content on your computer screen or your phone?

I'll agree that the percentages Schiller used were misleading in that they were all about screen area and not necessarily how much more of the webpage was viewable but it was clear the mini showed more of the webpage than the N7....

For some things this may not be the case - for web browsing, you're wrong. The things you see will be sharper (though more than just ppi goes into that) but you won't see more on the N7.

 

[Ashin]

Because Phil "the shill" Schiller bent the truth?

Please don't tell me you actually believed the keynote...

Apple's tactics are getting really slimy now - they actually made it seem like you can completely fullscreen without anything else visible, and made it seem like the Nexus 7 had huge bars covering up stuff (which unlike the iPad you actually can fullscreen)... cold hard maths will show you the Nexus is the same, if not better in screen size

 

[jrswizzle]

Debate about pixels and scales is nice, not really that important. Speaking only for myself, but the browser is probably the least frequently used app (excluding some of the built-in apps that i never use like newsstand).

It's all about the apps. So what if the nexus 7 can show a little bit more at one glance, when it lacks competent tablet apps for several of my top used apps: yelp, espn, ebay, facebook, twitter; and there are many many more android apps that do not have a good tablet ui.

The nexus 7 can have 1000ppi and I still wouldn't consider it, because it's all about the apps.

Case-in-point: ESPN Fantasy Football....the iPad app is amazing. If I wanted to see the simple phone app, I'd check my phone for it....thanks N7.

 

[zhenya]

I don't think you get it. Compare the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 5 because the 5 has a taller screen and higher resolution, albeit much greater resolution. When looking at the same website, you see the same amount of content width-wise but that content is much sharper. All those extra pixels don't give the site any additional width, they do show you additional site content at the bottom of the screen. And in landscape you actually see less of the bottom of the site.

It depends on how a given site does its scaling. Move beyond websites though and the game changes, although I have found in looking into the Nexus 7 that despite having a 1280x800 screen, it does not do 1:1 pixel mapping so effectively has a usable size of 960x600, which combined with sites chosen that scale in Apple's favor explains the images.

lol NO! The browsers scale to the dimensions....

Good lord....pull out your phone and go to the macrumors front page....do you see more content on your computer screen or your phone?

I'll agree that the percentages Schiller used were misleading in that they were all about screen area and not necessarily how much more of the webpage was viewable but it was clear the mini showed more of the webpage than the N7....

For some things this may not be the case - for web browsing, you're wrong. The things you see will be sharper (though more than just ppi goes into that) but you won't see more on the N7.

Again, it depends on how the particular site scales. I hate fixed width sites on my computer, because I always have my browser full screen. Macrumors is always set to fluid HD for me to make it use the entire screen.

I should note that I intend on replacing my iPad 1 with a Mini so it's not like I'm anti-Apple here - I just want to make sure that what they are saying is true.

 

[RobNYC]

lol NO! The browsers scale to the dimensions....

Good lord....pull out your phone and go to the macrumors front page....do you see more content on your computer screen or your phone?

I'll agree that the percentages Schiller used were misleading in that they were all about screen area and not necessarily how much more of the webpage was viewable but it was clear the mini showed more of the webpage than the N7....

For some things this may not be the case - for web browsing, you're wrong. The things you see will be sharper (though more than just ppi goes into that) but you won't see more on the N7.

And this is what I thought. If you compare an iPhone 3G and an iPhone 4, the 4 has more pixels. The screen sizes are the same so even with more pixels, you don't see more stuff on the screen, it's just much sharper.

That;s why I sort of didn't understand the criticism in that Gizmodo article. Sure, the Nexus and Kindle HD were sharper displays, but the extra screen space in the mini would show a little more of a web page than a smaller screen, just at a lower resolution.

 

[thedarkhorse]

funny how they remark about screen real estate being the issue... even if it were retina it would have the exact same real estate, it would just render at 4x the resolution like the retina ipads that already exist.

The only ios products that have increased screen real estate from their original are now the iphone (5) and new ipod touch.

 

[zhenya]

And this is what I thought. If you compare an iPhone 3G and an iPhone 4, the 4 has more pixels. The screen sizes are the same so even with more pixels, you don't see more stuff on the screen, it's just much sharper.

That;s why I sort of didn't understand the criticism in that Gizmodo article. Sure, the Nexus and Kindle HD were sharper displays, but the extra screen space in the mini would show a little more of a web page than a smaller screen, just at a lower resolution.

It depends in part on how the site scales. Otherwise the Guggenheim example in the presentation was misleading in part because Apple did not allow the Nexus browser to go full screen (which it does) before clipping the screen shot, and in part it's true because the Nexus doesn't really use its full 1280x800 resolution, but rather has an effective resolution of 900x600. That's what makes the pictures look so convincing.

 

[darngooddesign]

There are alternate iPad browsers which do full screen as well so he point remains that the Nexus shows less in landscape.

 

[BFizzzle]

I found the ipad 3 to be too heavy for my needs

We need to get you working out then. start with some .5lb dumbells work your way up to 1.5 lbs

 

[zhenya]

There are alternate iPad browsers which do full screen as well so he point remains that the Nexus shows less in landscape.

True, but the real reason is that the Nexus, like all Android devices is not doing 1:1 pixel mapping like the iPad mini is. Its 1280x800 resolution screen translates into 213ppi, but 961x600 dp (density independent pixels, relative to 160ppi, which is how Android handles multiple screen sizes and resolutions). As a result it has less effective screen real estate than the Mini. Another side effect of this is that it places the Nexus in a kind of 'in-between' state between very high resolution phones and their full-sized 10" standard tablet sizes, as the dpi it uses isn't a standard target for developers. As a result, some apps get scaled up, some get scaled down; few are native to this resolution. See this article for more info.

When you start to delve into the details of how this is all handled, you really start to understand why Apple has been so adamant about keeping stable screen resolutions - in the iPad line you now have only two - 1024x768 at 1:1 mapping and 2048x1536 at 1:2 mapping. Dead simple for developers and the results are predictable for everyone involved.