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.
Photos of 'iPad Mini' Battery Reveal 16.7 Watt-Hour Capacity
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hah! Serious wraps my foot. There isn't as many leaks because people are less interested about it compared to the iPhone 5, that's all. The only thing that's in serious wraps is the iMac.
Great post history you have there.
You aren't the first noob to join just to start spewing "facts". Yes let's wait and see.
You're getting into Comical Ali territory if you still think this isn't happening.
NO retina, NO sale. I find it hard to believe that all the latest Apple products introduced recently (iphone/ipod touch/macbook pro) all have retina displays, but this will take a step back and not feature one. I'm planning on getting one, but if no retina, I will wait until Virgin Mobile gets the iPhone 5 and just get that. Not going backwards with tech.
Maybe that's Apple's way of getting you to drop $500 on the "good" iPad.
But the "entry-level" iPad Mini will be there for those who don't need Retina... and who want to save a buck while still having all that iOS goodness.
I'm with you. I was perfectly happy with my iPad 2, I know lots of people who are still happy with there's. The moment my launch day iPad 3 arrived though, that was that. No way am I spending money on new tech that has <200ppi. It's as expected though, never expect retina on this - Apple were never going to introduce a new res, in between the two, and 2048x1536 on a smaller screen is utter fantasy at this point, doubly so on an iPad that's to be positioned as a cheaper option.
"People familiar with Apple's plans" ≠ Apple.
Jim Dalrymple ≠ Apple
They are all still educated guesses. Hopefully they are right though.
I hope Craig Ferguson does this with the Microsoft Surface.1536x1152 would be ideal, even though unlikely. The only hope at this point would be the fact that it will be supposedly centered around reading. Reading+non retina doesn't make a lot of sense.
If Apple really wanted you to buy an iPad, they'd not have a inbetween iPad. Can't but what does not exist. And it seems to be working for Apple now. If Apple are to release this inbetween iPad, then it's obviously for a reason. Simply cause there is no iPad of this size would not cut mustard for Apple. it'd have to be a real reason.
The same complaint was with the iPhone 4.
THE iPHONE 4? APPLE WOULD NEVER NAME ONE OF THEIR PRODUCTS THIS. NEVER. TRUST ME.
Then, it happened. So.
That is *your* opinion, and is completely counter to the entire Apple ethos. They don't produce products to be cheaper, they don't produce products to compete with others (because Apple missed the boat), they don't play catch up. They aren't a price-oriented product company, so if they do turn and head in that direction (that's a big *if*), it's a huge turn and one that signals a very different Apple in years to come.
If Apple is true to Apple, they will produce this Mini with superior specs, and they will charge for it. People will see the price and say, "but look at that device, it's got much higher resolution, still longer battery life, excellent cellular connectivity, it's fast, and on and on...". That's Apple, and that's what I expect from Apple if they are true to themselves. Copying products out there in an inferior way and selling for more money (but still at the cheap end of the market), that's not Apple at all.
First of all, I totally agree re: Apple not being a cheap oriented company. I said cheaper, not cheap, spot the difference.
All I'm really interesting in is a retina smaller iPad, and I don't see how that is even remotely possible right now. For the mass market, a smaller iPad will by necessity be cheaper than the full sized iPad. Given the nature of iOS and it's fairly rigid adherence to specific resolutions*, you're left with two options - 1024x768 and 2048x1536. If it's cheaper (not cheap) than the iPad, we are very unlikely to see a 2048x1536 screen, which points directly towards 1024x768. I'm really surprised people are actually expecting retina. Of course, a res halfway between the two is an extremely slim possibility, but it's just that, extremely slim, and surely too shortsighted a move for Apple given a year from now cheaper 2048x1536 displays will be viable and keep iOS development simple.
*Yes yes, I know the 5 is 1136x640, a change from the "rigid adherence" mentioned above, but we're talking about iPads here.
Last edited:
Hahaha $100 less than the full-sized iPad. Laughable. It will either come in at $249 or $299. Either way, it will be significantly cheaper than the full-sized iPad. I'm guessing start at 8GB to have it start as low as possible, price-wise. I would buy an 8GB. Here's the thing, with iCloud, and Home Sharing, most people only need an 8GB for a Wifi only device. I will only use it at home, using Home Sharing for most media consumption. Now, they could easily make the 3G or LTE version start with 16GB because obviously if you are going to take it out you will need the additional storage.
I remember putting a bunch of music on my iPad 2 and I literally opened the Music app like once or twice, and just found myself thinking why the hell did I put music on this? With Home Sharing there is no need for music on these Wifi only devices which you keep at home.
so basically, what would be the realistic battery life of this new ipad mini ?
most idevices do not exceed 6-9 hours of use (depending on intensive use or use of wifi)
wonder why Apple does not try to extend this length to approaching a full day
most idevices do not exceed 6-9 hours of use (depending on intensive use or use of wifi)
wonder why Apple does not try to extend this length to approaching a full day
I think it is a good name, makes the most sense. iPad Air as someone was saying is next to retarded I think. Macbook Air makes sense as it is physically much lighter (hence light as air). Yes, it is physically smaller, but they also come up to 13" screen size like the Macbook Pro. I know Apple's marketing isn't stupid enough to call it an iPad Air, whatever they call it.
Educated guess? No. When Jim Dalrymple says "yep", take it to the bank. He doesn't guess when he says that. He knows more than he is at liberty to discuss.
----------
What about iPad Nano?
It will be marketed as 10 hours just like all the devices, whether you read into what this possible part leak means or not, the device will last roughly 10 hours. There is an obvious trade off for battery life, they could make them last incredibly long, but that would sacrifice adding better, faster chips etc. People want a solid battery life with great specs, a smart trade off.
----------
I don't know about iPad Nano, it just sounds too small. iPad Mini sounds bigger to me, I don't know, then again they keep changing the physical size, and screen size of the iPod Nano and still call it that, so yeah... haha
I believe it is due to trying to have a good balance between battery life and the battery's physical size. Besides, that 6-9 hours of use usually covers 3 days for me on my ipad2. I only charge the thing 2-3 times each week.
And my point is that "cheaper" still leads with price. That never describes Apple's target market.
Think of the market that wants a *smaller* device with superior specs. This market doesn't buy based on price, they buy based on features and functions, and in this case, especially it's about form factor. This is how Apple normally competes and differentiates itself from other companies, and if they keep with this philosophy with the new device, it should be great.
The whole screen resolution, I haven't figure that out at all, but then again, I'm not a product manager. I see their dilemmas (related to fragmentation) and wouldn't want to make some of their decisions in this regard (unless they have simply figured out a way to shrink down the iPad 3's resolution to this smaller form factor, which would be fantastic).
Given the focus on ebooks and media, this seems a really important part of the future in devices, meaning that this is quite an important product - what they do with it had better be excellent from the start, not some old tech rehashed in a new shell, inferior to others already on the market for a higher price. That would surprise me. Can't wait to find out, though!