Apple gives iPad mini the Retina treatment | Hacker News Reader

Apple gives iPad mini the Retina treatment

arstechnica.com

68 pointscoloneltcb70 comments

How many people who don't skim tech blogs are going to be confused by the difference between "Mini" and "Air"? Both their current iPad lines include a diminutive in their titles.

The smallest MacBook is the Air, but the biggest iPad is the Air? That makes sense. =\

When the MacBook Air was first introduced it was more expensive than the other MacBooks, it was only after a few product cycles that it fell in price and ate the lower end of the MacBook line and became the affordable product.

Probably setting the stage for the iPad Pro: 12" screen, triple linear pixel density of the original (3072 X 2304), A7X or A8 chip, comes with optional keyboard/battery cover/case, first or second quarter 2014. (I can dream, can't I).

Its not about biggest though, its "thinest"

The iPad Mini and iPad Air are the same thickness (or thinness if you are in Apple PR). It's a strange naming scheme, especially considering their laptops. The Mini should have been the Air in the first place.

The marketing goal is differentiation from people's mental conception of the base product.

They named the one iPad Mini, because they want people to think "smaller than the iPad".

They named the other iPad Air because they want people to think "lighter than the iPad".

Which suggests two interesting points: 1. the public at large has a mental concept of how much "the iPad" weighs. 2. enough people think it's 'too heavy', to justify a rebranding to make them reconsider. A simple marketing story of "the new one is thinner / lighter" wasn't considered sufficient.

Alternately, the new one is indistinguishably lighter / thinner so they tacked on "air" to make it more obvious

145g is about one-and-a-half iPhone5s.

People will notice.

  > The smallest MacBook is the Air, but the biggest iPad is the Air?

When you frame it like that, it might sound confusing. However, the word "Mini" implies size. The word "Air" implies weight (or bulk). Both MacBook Pro and MacBook Air come in 13" sizes. However, if they introduced a MacBook Mini, I don't think you'd expect that to be 13" as well. Ergo hoc procter & gamble postdoc: Mini == size, Air == weight.

But the Air is the heavier model...

  > But the Air is the heavier model...

MacBook Pro 13": 1.57 kg

MacBook Air 13": 1.08 kg

If you're referring to the iPad, the "Air" name implies that it's the lightest of the full-sized iPads. Next year, they could introduce an iPad Air Mini which would clearly be a smaller version of the lightweight iPad Air.

>The smallest MacBook is the Air, but the biggest iPad is the Air? That makes sense.

The biggest iPad is smaller than the smallest Macbook.

It's easy, Apple's "mini" products don't have a display, keyboard, or mouse... oh wait.

No problem where there are so many Apple Stores around with so many demo units they encourage you to use at length.

Who cares what it's called, walk into the store and play with them all until you find the one you like best.

Interesting that Touch ID didn't make an appearance on any of the announced devices.

Perhaps they wanted to see a period of time with real-world use with the touch sensor on the 5s before going all-in across their entire platform.

If that were the case they wouldn't have first used it on their most popular product (and their most profitable). You don't test out crazy ideas on your golden egg.

>>You don't test out crazy ideas on your golden egg.

You could consider the idea "crazy" if it was a major change that had the risk of actually hurting your golden egg's success. As things stand though, Touch ID is simply a new feature that has the potential to become more important as time goes on.

From that perspective, testing it out on your golden egg makes perfect sense, since the product's popularity ensures the new feature will get the widest exposure possible. More usage data = more ideas for how to improve the feature.

I'd say it's because unlike your iPhone you don't take it out of the house as much.

..And iPad isn't very personal device usually either. Although, multiple fingerprints would be excellent way to open different user profiles if there was a support for that anyway. I think they'll do this in the next version, and support 5 finger prints for each user.

Rumor is that they have supply-chain problems with the TouchID sensor.

Given how Retina and Lightning went through similar staggered rollouts, I think this is probably just "The Apple Way" to introduce new tech across product lines.

Without an API for third-party apps, Touch ID is a non-starter. Just another example of Apple snatching lame from the jaws of awesome.

i believe they are saving it to be something that is (currently) exclusive to the iPhone 5s, as a differentiator.

So you buy a phone instead of a tablet? That doesn't make any sense.

I buy a tablet (mini with LTE) instead of a phone. Absence of Touch ID won't stop me.

no... in the same way that siri was an iPhone 4s exclusive before going to the rest of the lineup. the way that retina was an iPhone 4 exclusive before moving to the other devices, the way that touch-id is now.

Wait, I thought the whole point of retina was to be a set PPI based on optimum viewing distance. Are we now expected to believe that the new iPad Mini and the iPad Air have different optimum viewing distances that happen to result in the exact same resolution?

I think it is a set PPI or above, since 'retina' was marketed as the point at which the eye couldn't detect the pixels. Presumably anything more dense would be considered the same. Since the 10" is a so-called retina display, it stands to reason that a 7" display with the same resolution also is retina.

Okay, that makes sense. I take it the screen sizes are also close enough in size that font size difference problems will be minimized? I've been wondering how Apple is going to respond to the need to sell better hardware while keeping their design targets minimal, which IRC is a major developer selling point for them in comparison to Android.

Well, in this respect it's the same situation the old iPad mini was in a year ago, and I haven't heard of major problems.

Retina is "anything past what the eye can discern pixels for"

Just like smooth is "anything the hand can't feel bumps on"

When they announced the silly-sounding 'iPad Air' renaming I instantly got excited, hoping for some incredible, maybe 12", iPad Pro. While that left me a bit disappointed, it might be a clue that they're looking into making something bit bigger/more powerful - e.g. remember the iPad in the OR? I imagine there, for instance, a bigger/more powerful iPad could come in handy.

By the way, two (large-ish) hands fit on a 12" display beautifully.

I don't really see the point in tablets. At least not if you already have a lightweight laptop and a smartphone. Most people that have tablets seems to just have them lying around. Having a decent touchpad helps too.

Having had the 5S for a few weeks now, all I can say is: why did no iPad get the TouchID treatment? I've been enjoying that feature immensely!

I wouldn't want to have to use my fingerprint every time I unlock an iPad.

Now brace yourself because this might blow your mind. How about switching it off.

My thinking is that people don't carry their iPads around every single day like their iPhones.

You're much more likely to lose, or have your iPhone stolen than your iPad.

Since it can't fit in your pocket I find the iPad is much easier to lose than any phone is.

Does this mean that iPad Air will have 264 ppi screen for a next couple of years? Or the Air is going to get 528 ppi screen?

They also gave it the A7/M7.

This makes Apple's product line extremely confusing, and I would predict that the Mini will be the biggest seller by far.

$399 iPad 2 $399 new iPad Mini with A7 & M7 / 2048x1536 display $499 new iPad Air with A7 & M7 / 2048x1536

The Mini seems like the better device of the two, for less! And I don't understand why anyone would consider the iPad 2.

Another thing to consider-- older people may prefer a physically larger screen and not care about the resolution. That way, they get the "cheaper" iPad, with a 10 inch screen.

"Older people" in this case being people who are 30 or older.

The only thing I can think of is it's for corporate or educational buyers who standardized on it for some reason. The 30 pin connector perhaps?

Apple has continued sales of old devices to corporate/educational buyers without making them publicly available in the past. The eMac and original iPad were both available to education markets far longer than public markets.

The eMac was, but that's because it had it's origins in education. That was also 8 years ago and Apple has changed.

I can't find any corroboration for your assertion about the original iPad. Every source I can find says it was discontinued immediately in favour of the iPad 2. Selling off old stock to the education market isn't the same.

My memories of the iPad 1 might be hazy—though I had friends in education that purchased them well after the iPad 2 was available. Perhaps they were getting bulk orders of refurbished (or third party refurbished) units.

The main point is that it's not unreasonable to think Apple would keep products around for enterprise/education markets without selling them publicly, or at the very least without mentioning them during a high profile keynote.

Deleted comment

> And I don't understand why anyone would consider the iPad 2.

The 30 pin connector comment was in reference to this.

If they had introduced the 7" mini before the full-size model, I don't think the bigger one would have been very popular. Once you go to the mini, it's hard to go back to the larger model, it just feels way too big.

I watch movies/netflix on mine, 10" (especially a lighter model) is not too big for me, or watching with another person.

Agreed. Also lighter (0.7 pounds http://www.apple.com/au/ipad/compare/). It does mess up their line-up to push the mini two generations ahead. Maybe sales were lagging? Maybe they really wanted to standardize on A7 64 bit and rogue graphics? Regardless of line-up problems, it's a fantastic device.

I think the reason to buy an iPad 2 (or indeed an iPad 5) is for the larger display.

  > And I don't understand why anyone would consider the iPad 2.

My guess is corporate and government/education use. They want to extend their existing fleets, with the same hardware as it is vetted and known and supported (by their IT departments, etc). Having a single SKU is likely seen as a big benefit to them.

I find that refurbished iPad3s are the better deal over iPad2. I think the iPad2 really needs to be at 299

Apple doesn't want to sell you an iPad 2. They want you to pick up an iPad 2 and then an iPad Air and buy the iPad Air.

By that logic they should have kept the iPad 3 which feels like a brick compared to the rest.

The iPad 3 is probably expensive to make.

I would imagine that the iPad 2 is typically purchased in bulk for business or educational uses and is not used by the average consumer.

>The Mini seems like the better device of the two, for less! And I don't understand why anyone would consider the iPad 2.

Bigger screen without paying $500?

Plus the iPad 2 is a phenomenal device that is just now starting to look dated.

What makes the Mini seem like the better device? Do you just mean if you ignore screen size?

It's the same resolution display in the Mini Retina and the Air so the $100 gets you physically larger pixels. It is an interesting line-up for sure (also that the Air is the big and heavy model...).

On a tablet, bigger doesn't equal better, and a very common sentiment is that the Mini is the ideal size, with the iPad full-sized being unwieldy for many uses (any situation where you hold it in your hand). So I'm not ignoring screen size, but quite contrary am saying that smaller, in this case, for many purposes == better. Obviously that is to a point, but for common uses the iPad Mini is very close to perfect.

To put it another way, now that Apple has equalized the hardware (same resolution, processor, accouterments), they could legitimately pitch the Mini as the more expensive, premium device (fitting more capabilities in a smaller space). Of course they couldn't only because they originally intro'd the mini as the discount device, but had they not it would be a legitimate angle.

The full-sized iPad is still a must if you want to use it to read PDFs (eg, tabletop RPG books), but otherwise I'd agree that the Mini is generally a more attractive option.

They are pixel to pixel the same in display so it really does not make much of a difference--no more of a difference than reading glasses would make at least. In your case perhaps that's worth the $100 and extra bulk, but you can tell where Apple thinks the future is.

The iPad Air is insanely light, which might change the equation. Based on weight, I might pick the Mini over the old full-sized iPad despite preferring a larger display. Now, all bets are off.

But the iPad Air is still 40% heavier than the Mini. When you're holding it in your finger, the larger length levers it to feel much heavier from an angular pressure perspective.

It is an amazing device in either form, it just seems like at most they should be the same price when the more compact variant is every bit as capable.

If you think the 8" screen is big enough then sure. But I happen to like the larger display. Could Apple charge more for the iPad Mini based on some kind of "smallness premium"? Well, in general 7" tablets are selling for dirt cheap, so it wouldn't play well.

You'll see the mix of iPad sales tilt back to the iPad Air after the next quarter. iPad Mini will still sell more but that % of sales will drop. The big reason why most people got iPad Mini over iPad was because the iPad was just way too heavy to hold compared to the Mini, that's not an issue anymore.

Very true, but it still feels reasonable to me for the larger version, which is likely more expensive to create, to be priced higher, even if more people genuinely prefer the smaller size regardless of price.

Don't forget the old mini at $299...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com