Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Photos of 4:3 Display from Apple's 'iPad Mini' Surface

D.T. said:
In fact, the 1600x1200 I mentioned +is+ ~254PPI which would be just about perfect for this device ... though still subject to the major downside of app compatibility - plus factor in the discussion about the ever growing app sizes, I don't think we need a 3rd set of iPad assets in an app!
Click to expand...

They could just scale down the @2x iPad assets in current retina iPad apps to maintain compatibility. Then they would just need to add support for a splash screen image (since those need to be exact sized as they aren't processed at launch time) - so something like a Default-800h@2x.png image.

----------
gnasher729 said:
Technically possible, but software wouldn't run unchanged. Worse, unlike the iPhone 5 where old software runs just fine with a bit of a black gap at the top and bottom, this would give you fewer points, so without any changes many old apps would cut off stuff at the sides. Quite horrible.
Click to expand...

Why would the sides be cut off? Both the current iPad and iPad mini are 4:3, so the ratios are the same. They could just downscale the current @2x assets and it would fit directly. And iOS uses the non-retina values for touch points, so those would be unaffected.
 
nba1341 said:
This is really pathetic if the resolution is really 1024x768. Hoping those are just rumors.
Click to expand...

Don't be so down. Like others have said, while it won't technically be retina resolution, the pixel density will still be higher than the iPad 2 simply because the same number of pixels will be fit into a smaller space. It will be close-to-but-not-quite retina.
Or maybe they'll just tell you how far you should hold it from your eyeballs, to be able to call it retina anyway! :cool:
 
jmpnop said:
People are too unrealistic to expect retina display in a device thats expected to cost nearly half of iPad, let alone technical difficulties. Would be surprised if Apple did it though.
Click to expand...

However one day Apple will introduce the Retina display to the iPad Mini/Air, presumably the one with the same pixel density as the current iPhone. The question is when and how Apple will do it. Will it be introduced for the whole line up or will Apple just do it for the higher capacity models like with the new iPod Touch? And when will it be?
 
I think it will be an 8" diagonal 4:3 screen with 1024x768 which results in 160ppi. It will be marketed as an economy mini iPad and not to take away from the "retina" iPad 3. The price point and spec differential has to be there.

However, I would like for it to have a retina display with the smaller form factor since I am very much used to that now on my iPad 3 and iPhone 5. But assuming the smaller iPad mini costs a bit less, don't you think that will wind up hurting iPad 3 sales?
 
iPad mini (retina)

If there is 4 models then how about this:

16gb non-retina £249
32gb non-retina £319
64gb non-retina £379
64gb retina £449

That way they get to release one retina model but also keep the base model at a low price. I think £249 is the starting price in the UK due to seeing that price linked to the iPad page on the Apple store website.
 
qbricc said:
If there is 4 models then how about this:

16gb non-retina £249
32gb non-retina £319
64gb non-retina £379
64gb retina £449

That way they get to release one retina model but also keep the base model at a low price. I think £249 is the starting price in the UK due to seeing that price linked to the iPad page on the Apple store website.
Click to expand...

iPad Mini:

16gb retina £300
32gb retina £379
64gb retina £479

And they will have Retina, oh and in case you forgot. UK iPhone 5 costs:

16GB: £529
32GB: £599
64GB: £699

New iPod Touch:

32GB: £249
64GB: £329

iPad 3:

16GB: £399
32GB: £479
64GB: £559

So as you can see, not ONE of Apple's iOS devices costs less then £80 to double the memory. Apart from the iPhone which for some reason I'm sure Apple's accountants will explain the difference is £100 between 32GB and 64GB, despite the fact it's £80 between the 16GB and 32GB.

In fact looking at the above my prices match very well. But for it to start from £300 it would have to have Retina and a decent SOC in it.
 
Closer to 8" than 7"

Doing the math to determine the screen diagonal width, we get:

162 ** 2 = 26,244
124 ** 2 = 15,376

26,244 + 15,376 = 41,620

sqrt (41,620) ~= 204.0

204.0 mm / 25.4 mm/inch ~= 8.0 inches.

So, if there really is an iPad mini LCD panel, and if it really is 162 x 124, and if the electrical connections at the edge of the screen are fairly narrow (as they are on the iPhone) then the visible area of the panel should be closer to 8" than to 7". It could even be the oft-quoted 7.85".
 
Looks like the iPad mini screen is laying on top of the iPad XXXL smart cover.


ipad_mini_display_front.jpg

MC942LLA.jpeg
 
If the next iPad Mini offers a 4/3 format, several possibilities can be considered:
- 1024 × 768
- 1200 × 900
- 1280 × 960
- 1400 × 1050
...
 
gto55 said:
If the next iPad Mini offers a 4/3 format, several possibilities can be considered:
- 1024 × 768
- 1200 × 900
- 1280 × 960
- 1400 × 1050
...
Click to expand...

If they want to maintain full compatibility with existing apps then there are only two possibilities: 1024x768 or 2048x1536.
 
Missing my point

apolloa said:
iPad Mini:

16gb retina £300
32gb retina £379
64gb retina £479

And they will have Retina, oh and in case you forgot. UK iPhone 5 costs:

16GB: £529
32GB: £599
64GB: £699

New iPod Touch:

32GB: £249
64GB: £329

iPad 3:

16GB: £399
32GB: £479
64GB: £559

So as you can see, not ONE of Apple's iOS devices costs less then £80 to double the memory. Apart from the iPhone which for some reason I'm sure Apple's accountants will explain the difference is £100 between 32GB and 64GB, despite the fact it's £80 between the 16GB and 32GB.

In fact looking at the above my prices match very well. But for it to start from £300 it would have to have Retina and a decent SOC in it.
Click to expand...

My point is not the cost, those prices are just a guess. My point is that we could see both retina and non-retina screen which would add up to 4 different models.
 
No mini

I'm still hoping it's a rumor and the event is for the 13" Retina MBP.

I can only see Apple updating the current iPad to A6(x) and new Sharp displays. Doesn't make sense to launch a non-retina mini unless they kill off the non-retina regular iPad.
 
darkslide29 said:
Like others have said, while it won't technically be retina resolution, the pixel density will still be higher than the iPad 2 simply because the same number of pixels will be fit into a smaller space. It will be close-to-but-not-quite retina.
Click to expand...
No, just...no.
Ever held an iPhone EDGE or 3G or 3Gs in your hand? Well, tell me if you consider that close to Retina.
 
qbricc said:
My point is not the cost, those prices are just a guess. My point is that we could see both retina and non-retina screen which would add up to 4 different models.
Click to expand...

I don't think they will do that. Every new Apple device that run iOS from the last year now is Retina. If they launch a non Retina iPad then as said above, it will look cheap and not half as good, compared to the Fire HD and Nexus 7 if it had 1024x768 you will notice the difference.

But then again the iPad Mini may still be a rumour myth and not actually exist. We still haven't had no where near as many parts leaks as the iPhones have had a week before announcement! Next week could be all about a brand new iMac that has been ignored cause it's not an iOS device, and then a refreshed iPad and the new Retina MacBook Pro 13".
 
APlotdevice said:
If they want to maintain full compatibility with existing apps then there are only two possibilities: 1024x768 or 2048x1536.
Click to expand...
or a customized resolution of 1280x768 as they did for the the iPhone5 to stay in touch with the concurrency whom, for more than 75% of them, offers a resolution of 1280x720.

Even chinese tablets started to offer a FULL HD or Retina definition
RAMOS W30HD
http://www.gizchina.com/2012/10/11/ramos-w30hd-quad-core-tablet-to-be-launched-tomorrow/

CUBE U9GT5
http://www.cube-tablet.com/cube-u9gt5-9-7-inch-retina-screen-u9gtv5-32gb.html
 
apolloa said:
I don't think they will do that. Every new Apple device that run iOS from the last year now is Retina. If they launch a non Retina iPad then as said above, it will look cheap and not half as good, compared to the Fire HD and Nexus 7 if it had 1024x768 you will notice the difference.

But then again the iPad Mini may still be a rumour myth and not actually exist. We still haven't had no where near as many parts leaks as the iPhones have had a week before announcement! Next week could be all about a brand new iMac that has been ignored cause it's not an iOS device, and then a refreshed iPad and the new Retina MacBook Pro 13".
Click to expand...

The iPhone generally seems to get the most leaks. Probably because it's Apple's best selling product, as evidenced by the huge slice it makes up on their profit charts.
 
How about 1536x1152?
It can do 1.5x upscale with smoothing in hardware for existing apps. Upscaling will look fine on such a small display with fine pixels.

Technically it'll be fine, but I still think Apple will go 1024x768 for cost reasons.
 
gto55 said:
or a customized resolution of 1280x768 as they did for the the iPhone5 to stay in touch with the concurrency whom, for more than 75% of them, offers a resolution of 1280x720.
Click to expand...

But then developers would have to optimize their apps for yet another resolution. For a universal app that mean now six different resolutions!
 
0092762 said:
How about 1536x1152?
It can do 1.5x upscale with smoothing in hardware for existing apps. Upscaling will look fine on such a small display with fine pixels.
Click to expand...

Or they could downscale from the @2x versions for retina apps.
 
IOIIOOO said:
And iOS uses the non-retina values for touch points, so those would be unaffected.
Click to expand...

At 1.5 scale factor ? Touch points would be affected. You can't have 1024x768 touch points on a 1536x1152 screen without a few points falling between 2 pixels...

That's the problem with non-integer scaling factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back