iPad Mini's lack of retina is common sense

Discussion in 'iPad' started by jabingla2810, Oct 25, 2012.

  1. jabingla2810 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #1
    Let's say Apple did stick a retina screen on the iPad mini, the same resolution as the iPad 3rd Gen.

    To run at that resolution well you would have needed an A5X chip at least, so for the sake of argument, lets say they stick in an A5X chip.

    The same A5X chip that makes the iPad run fairly warm, warm enough for a lot of people on the internet to moan about anyway.

    So now you have a retina screen and an A5X chip, but to get that 10 hour battery life we will need that 42.5 Wh battery.

    Let's forget cost for a moment.

    This 42.5 Wh battery is the same battery that made the 9.7" 3rd gen iPad heavier and thicker than the iPad 2.

    Imagine fitting that into a 7.9" tablet?

    You thought people moaned about the weight and heat of the iPad 3rd gen... imagine if Apple put all that into an iPad Mini.

    Coming back to cost.

    Clearly what we have in this scenario is a 7.9" version of the 3rd gen iPad in every way, same screen, processor, battery, camera's etc.

    This product, apart from being thicker than a 3rd Gen iPad (that battery has to go somewhere), would be just as heavy, probably even hotter, and would be even more expensive. Miniaturisation costs a lot of money, and although Apple do a pretty good job of constantly making things smaller it still costs money.

    For example, to get the device thinner, speakers must be smaller, but to not sacrifice on sound quality, you need much better quality smaller speakers.

    If this was the real iPad mini it would be far more expensive than the 3rd/4th Gen iPads.

    But even then, forgetting about cost of parts, the impossible engineering feat to get it into a smaller device, the weight issues and the heat issues that everybody is already complaining about, even if they released the product described above, you lot would still be crying that it didn’t get the A6X chip.
     
  2. ipoddin macrumors 6502a

    ipoddin

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #2
    Please. You know next year apple will have "somehow" managed to fit a retina display on the mini 2 at the same thickness and no impact on battery.
     
  3. KylePowers macrumors 68000

    KylePowers

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    #3
    Exactly. Early adopters this year and those waiting out for the 2nd gen will bite the bullet when they magically release the iPad Mini 2 with retina display. Utterly obvious.
     
  4. ZBoater macrumors G3

    ZBoater

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Location:
    Sunny Florida
    #4
    We'll be enjoying our iPad minis all this time and then get the retina one. Don't understand what the fuss is about...
     
  5. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    #5
    A year is a lifetime in the technology world. My 2-year-old iMac has a 3.06 i3 processor. Crappy dual-core, I know!

    Don't forget that every change people think was so easy to make would've meant a sacrifice in something. People are already complaining about the price, and you want to stick a retina display on there? Well bump up the processor. Oh, that means more cost. More powerful battery? More cost.

    If you want a retina display, drop $499 on an iPad. If you want a smaller tablet, get a mini. Apple can't satisfy everybody (as if that isn't obvious every day on here).
     
  6. jabingla2810 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #6
    Exactly.

    Next year or the year after, maybe they can do a retina without sacrifices for the same money, but not this year.

    ----------

    In a years time maybe. But not now.

    Remember the iPad 2.

    It had dual core, same battery life AND it was much thinner!

    Time will change fix these issues i've stated, but right now Apple made the right sacrifices to keep the price down.
     
  7. ghsNick macrumors 68020

    ghsNick

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    #7
    The resolution on the Mini is between the iPad 2 and Retina Display iPad so I don't know what hte problem is?

    Barely any Apps on the iPad 3 had Retina Capability so I don't mind that it doesn't have Retina. Retina Apps will be ready when iPad Mini 2 comes out.
     
  8. dancj macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    #8
    It's almost as though technology will have advanced in that time!

    ----------

    "Barely any"? What apps are you using?

    Almost every app that shows text does it with retina display and a huge number of all apps are using retina display for the graphics as well.
     
  9. Yr Blues macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2008
    #9
    same ppi as the iPhone 4 4S and 5

    not too difficult
     
  10. Andrew K., Oct 26, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2012

    Andrew K. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    #10
    Hahaha! Exactly.
     
  11. ttexxan macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    #11
    Agreed dont know what the big issue is?? Its a smaller screen and going to look fantastic!! People will love it. If apple puts out a retinal screen 3 mo from the release will still trade up with no gripes!! It technology and they will always hold back to make more money on releases!! Just Trade up. Look at it as a small loan being able to use the product.
     
  12. MrXiro macrumors 68040

    MrXiro

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #12
    I don't know... they'd have to make it fatter for the extra battery and those screens cost more. I feel like they want the Mini to be their budget model so that involves putting in the lower end parts (last gen chips, lower dpi screens, smaller batteries) just to cut a few corners and make some extra $.

    Next year I bet the iPad Mini just gets the A6 and NFC... something like that.
     
  13. ipoddin macrumors 6502a

    ipoddin

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #13
    Yeah, because they haven't been able to solve it yet for a 4" display on an iPhone or a 9.7" display on an iPad. :rolleyes:
     
  14. SporkLover macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    #14
    You would have made a perfect early iPhone adopter! You could have come to apples rescue when folks on the sideline were asking why the iPhone didn't include features other phones of the day included (gps, 3G, flash camera, mms, etc).

    The truth is that the interior of an iPad is not very different than an iPhones.... The only outsized components are the screen and battery. If Apple really wanted a retina screen they would have included it... But they did need to leave room for improvement.
     
  15. dancj macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
    #15
    That'll be the 4" iPhone display that has a fifth of the number of pixels as a retina iPad (and costs more than an iPad mini) and the iPad with a much lower number of pixels per inch than a retina iPad Mini would have (and also costs way more and has a much bigger battery).
     
  16. iEvolution macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #16
    LOL @ OP trying to justify why Apple didn't put retina in.

    This is simple, why put in a more expensive retina display when you can rip off the general public with a 1024x768 resolution screen? Plus they can introduce the iPad Mini in March with Retina and get even more money.

    People are stupid that is why Apple didn't put the retina display in.
     
  17. ZBoater macrumors G3

    ZBoater

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Location:
    Sunny Florida
    #17
    I'm glad you were able to solve all the heat/battery/space issues for fitting a Retina display on a Mini. You should go work for Apple.
     
  18. CapnJackGig macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2011
    #18
    Yeah, because no other mini tablet maker has been able to stick a high PPI screen in theirs....oh wait, they almost all are.
     
  19. ZBoater macrumors G3

    ZBoater

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Location:
    Sunny Florida
    #19
    Make up your mind. High PPI or Retina?

    Because to put a retina display on a Mini that won't break 275,000 iPad apps it would have to be 2048x1536. They kept it 1024x768 for a REASON. 275,000 reasons as a matter of fact. A lot of reasons that NO OTHER TABLET can even come close to.
     
  20. CapnJackGig macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2011
    #20
    Uh huh and next year's Mini will have one and all the uber fans will pretend they said it couldn't be done. It would be sad if it weren't so predictable.
     
  21. iEvolution macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #21
    Retina is Apple's buzz word for high pixel density.
     
  22. ZBoater macrumors G3

    ZBoater

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2007
    Location:
    Sunny Florida
    #22
    Did you see the battery inside the Mini when they showed the innards at the keynote? That thing is TINY THIN! To put an A5X processor and a 2048x1536 screen into that little box and have it anywhere near 10 hours of battery life for around $300 will be an engineering miracle.

    Despite all the Apple bashing, Apple can do it, but they are not magicians. It will take time and the market is pushing them to come out with stuff sooner than they would probably like. This evil conspiracy that they intentionally hold back on features to squeeze more money out of people is ludicrous. Only on a tech forum would such theory have legs. In the real world, people just don't pay attention. They just want an iPad. A little one or a big one.

    ----------

    It is a specific density at a specific viewing distance to be precise, so would you be happier with a 1280x768 or 1920x1080 screen that NONE of the existing 275,000 apps could use?

    There's Retina and then there's crazy.
     
  23. ThatsMeRight macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2009
    #23
    Next year Sharp's IGZO display technology is ready for mass production. It wasn't this year. And it isn't ready just yet. It could, however, make it in the fifth generation iPad (in March, if there's going to be a new iPad than).

    Next year they'll be able to get the Retina IGZO display - which is going to be less expensive than what it would cost now. Since we're talking about IGZO, this means power usage will go down drastically (just for the display itself). Also, IGZO lets through more light so we don't need double the amount of LEDs (like is needed for a Retina display).

    A5X chip costs will go down (or by than, A6X) and will be 32 nm so it will use less energy.

    In one year, a lot can change. IGZO technology isn't ready just yet and the A5X is still quite expensive. No IGZO technology means double the amount of LEDs (is double the amount of power usage for backlight), higher energy usage for the display itself. Also, a 45 nm A5X chip uses a lot of energy. So the result: expensive components which require a really expensive battery.

    Next year? Cheaper, smaller, more energy-efficient components which don't require an expensive, high-capacity battery.

    Honestly, Apple will be able to create a Retina display iPad mini (and standard 9.7" iPad) for much lower costs.
     

Share This Page