iPad Mini: it's real

[runawayprisoner]

App devs would riot. They have to rebuild assets for every screen res, new UI layouts, etc.

And each resolution an app supports means more bigger downloads. Suddenly that 16GB starts to look inadequate.

Actually, most devs are already used to the way Apple abruptly throw out new form factors.

I mean... at this point, we have 320 x 480, 640 x 960, 640 x 1152 (actually seen as 320 x 576 internally), 768 x 1024, and 1536 x 2048.

It can't get worse.

But I think Apple's main reason for staying the resolution is not due to devs, but due to legacy support. They need the screen at 768 x 1024 if they want to leverage iPad apps.

 

[boomhower]

To expensive for me. For those that want one for the smaller form factor it's not horrible but for those wanting a cheap iPad it just seems to expensive. I wanted to get two for the kids but at that price I'll get them used/refurbed iPad 2's for less money. For that price I'd like to see built in 3G and/or Retina and/or more storage. Just a base 16GB for $329 is to much to me, even for Apple. They will sell millions though.

 

[manly]

Actually, most devs are already used to the way Apple abruptly throw out new form factors.

I mean... at this point, we have 320 x 480, 640 x 960, 640 x 1152 (actually seen as 320 x 576 internally), 768 x 1024, and 1536 x 2048.

It can't get worse.

It can absolutely get worse, look at Android fragmentation and the dearth of tablet-optimized apps for Android 4.

To date, Apple's decisions have been to minimize display fragmentation.. from the iOS programmer's POV, you have only 320x480 and 768x1024 and pixel-doubled assets seamlessly load for Retina displays. Extending the y-axis by 176 pixels is very much inline with this "strategy".

But I think Apple's main reason for staying the resolution is not due to devs, but due to legacy support. They need the screen at 768 x 1024 if they want to leverage iPad apps.

these two reasons are actually intertwined. If they had chosen say 1366x768, existing apps would run "letter boxed" but devs would need to create new layouts/assets to properly fill the screen.

 

[Ichinisan]

... 640 x 1152 (actually seen as 320 x 576 internally) ...

Really? I think you mean for web-based rendering.

 

[CZroe]

For technical reasons, the only practical way to increase DPI is to quadruple the pixels (same resolution as iPad 3/4 in a smaller area, higher DPI than iPad 3/4). That's just overkill for 7.85 inches.

No, they could shrink the screen more to kill two birds with one stone. "New iPad mini 2G: Has higher DPI screen and room for your thumb all in the same package size!*"
*note "package size" - no mention of reduced screen size.

 

[Ichinisan]

No, they could shrink the screen more to kill two birds with one stone. "New iPad mini 2G: Has higher DPI screen and room for your thumb all in the same package size!*"
*note "package size" - no mention of reduced screen size.

Don't count on it.

 

[CZroe]

It'd then be the same pixel density as the iPhones two generations ago. It's not overkill at all.

Laughable. 4x1024x768 is iPad 3 retina resolution. Shrinking that is proportionally higher DPI than iPad 3 and MUCH higher than iPhone 4/4S retina.

 

[Doppel]

I have a 2. This seems a decent device for $329. $299 would make it a really nice buy, though (if my ipad died--I certainly won't be replacing it).

 

[TheStu]

Laughable. 4x1024x768 is iPad 3 retina resolution. Shrinking that is proportionally higher DPI than iPad 3 and MUCH higher than iPhone 4/4S retina.

I think that it has the same DPI as a pre-retina iPhone, I think they just cut a larger panel out of the process that they were using for the iPhone 3GS. So, upping it to Retina should make it the same DPI as a retina iPhone.

*I just double checked. Yes, the iPad Mini's DPI is 162, the iPhone 3GS was 164. That is according to their statement of it being 7.9".

 

[Ichinisan]

I think that it has the same DPI as a pre-retina iPhone, I think they just cut a larger panel out of the process that they were using for the iPhone 3GS. So, upping it to Retina should make it the same DPI as a retina iPhone.

*I just double checked. Yes, the iPad Mini's DPI is 162, the iPhone 3GS was 164. That is according to their statement of it being 7.9".

...and "7.9" is really just rounding "7.85," so you're probably right. I bet it's exactly the same DPI as iPhone/iPhone 3G/iPhone 3GS.

 

[TheStu]

...and "7.9" is really just rounding "7.85," so you're probably right. I bet it's exactly the same DPI as iPhone/iPhone 3G/iPhone 3GS.

It makes the most sense to just take the existing process used for the 3GS, and whilst dropping the 3GS, just cut larger panels out of the sheets. The process should be incredibly mature and have super high yields at very low cost at this point. Certainly compared to the retina grade panels, but if they are basically just using big iPhone screens, then stepping the Mini up to retina shouldn't be that hard.

I don't have an problem with the Mini's specs as is, it is basically just a small iPad 2, and I don't really have any complaints about my iPad 2.

 

[BD2003]

I think that it has the same DPI as a pre-retina iPhone, I think they just cut a larger panel out of the process that they were using for the iPhone 3GS. So, upping it to Retina should make it the same DPI as a retina iPhone.

*I just double checked. Yes, the iPad Mini's DPI is 162, the iPhone 3GS was 164. That is according to their statement of it being 7.9".

Yep. Doesn't sound so crazy anymore, does it?

It'll be out next year.

 

[CZroe]

I think that it has the same DPI as a pre-retina iPhone, I think they just cut a larger panel out of the process that they were using for the iPhone 3GS. So, upping it to Retina should make it the same DPI as a retina iPhone.

*I just double checked. Yes, the iPad Mini's DPI is 162, the iPhone 3GS was 164. That is according to their statement of it being 7.9".

So, iPad retina is lower DPI than iPhone 4, 4S, and 5? Wow. Didn't realize that.

Yep. Doesn't sound so crazy anymore, does it?

It'll be out next year.

No one ever though feasibility of production was what made it crazy. It's introducing a new resolution into the iOS ecosystem that needs to be addressed.

 

[TheStu]

So, iPad retina is lower DPI than iPhone 4, 4S, and 5? Wow. Didn't realize that.


No one ever though feasibility of production was what made it crazy. It's introducing a new resolution into the iOS ecosystem that needs to be addressed.

Correct. The way to measure 'retina' is based on viewing distance, and arc-minutes, and all kinds of stuff. Basically, they can get away with calling it retina because they say 'well, people hold their iPad's further away from their eyes, so the pixels needn't be as tiny'.

Whatever, the screen looks really good, I don't really care if retina is marketing fluff or not. They can call it whatever they like, just make it look good and work well.

 

[runawayprisoner]

It can absolutely get worse, look at Android fragmentation and the dearth of tablet-optimized apps for Android 4.

To date, Apple's decisions have been to minimize display fragmentation.. from the iOS programmer's POV, you have only 320x480 and 768x1024 and pixel-doubled assets seamlessly load for Retina displays. Extending the y-axis by 176 pixels is very much inline with this "strategy".

Not to turn this into another "why Android tablets fail" debate, but as I've developed some Android apps, I can only say that the true problem lies with the way Google handles tablets, not with "fragmentation".

these two reasons are actually intertwined. If they had chosen say 1366x768, existing apps would run "letter boxed" but devs would need to create new layouts/assets to properly fill the screen.

Like I said, it's not a big deal.

New layouts are actually pretty easy to whip up in XCode if you started your layout in codes instead of in Interface Builder. Fixing the layout/asset takes just about 1-2 days at most... and that's if I'm lazy.

The main delay is actually with Apple's approval process. It takes roughly 2 weeks at a minimum to push any sort of update.

Really? I think you mean for web-based rendering.

Really. And it's not just for web-based rendering. It's the internal resolution seen by APIs. 320 x 576 with a scale factor of 2.

 

[manly]

Like I said, it's not a big deal.

New layouts are actually pretty easy to whip up in XCode if you started your layout in codes instead of in Interface Builder. Fixing the layout/asset takes just about 1-2 days at most... and that's if I'm lazy.

The main delay is actually with Apple's approval process. It takes roughly 2 weeks at a minimum to push any sort of update.

It's not a big deal precisely because Apple has been firm about just 2 logical display resolutions (iPhone and iPad) and using pixel-doubling automagically.

If Apple had instead made different decisions such as a 720p iPhone and a WXGA iPad mini, it would start to become more unwieldy for app makers. As an aside, personally I think Apple should've gone with 720p for the new iPhone instead of a strange 1136x640 that nobody else uses. But I can't fault them for insisting on simplicity and legacy compatibility.

I'd bet you've done a lot more Xcoding than I have, but you have some of this stuff backwards. Why would you hand code your UI if you can visually lay it out with IB?

 

[runawayprisoner]

It's not a big deal precisely because Apple has been firm about just 2 logical display resolutions (iPhone and iPad) and using pixel-doubling automagically.

No. It's 3 logical display resolutions not counting the scaling factor.

320 x 480 for legacy iPhones.
320 x 576 for iPhone 5 and iPod Touch 5.
768 x 1024 for iPad and iPad Mini.

Add scaling factors and DPI-dependent scaling (exact physical measurement on screen) and you have just as much fragmentation on iOS as you do now on Android.

I'd bet you've done a lot more Xcoding than I have, but you have some of this stuff backwards. Why would you hand code your UI if you can visually lay it out with IB?

I'd hand-code my UI if I have to deal with contents dynamically loaded from network... which I do... in every project that I handle now. You never know when an image you are loading from network is bigger than your layout.

Also using hand-coded interface allows me to incorporate my own APIs into the design of the app to circumvent the limitations imposed on Apple's APIs. For instance, Apple has not made an official API that can display rich text (colored, bolded, italicized, etc...), and anyone wanting to display multiple types of text in the same dialog box needs to make their own text class. Simply put: have fun writing your own "Microsoft Word" app.

Also it's easier to manage resources and free up memory when necessary... as opposed to having to account for things by repeatedly counting. That's not good when you are trying to conserve CPU usage.

Last but not least, the flow of the app is clearer in code to me. Interface Builder has way too many unnecessary connections and links that I have to individually assess and analyze... It's good enough for apps that are not too complicated, but not for apps that do more advanced stuffs. You definitely won't want to make a game in Interface Builder. I've been there... done it, and now I swear off Interface Builder like the plague.

As an aside, too many views and windows created in Interface Builder can cause XCode to crap out eventually.

 

[badb0y]

Tonight's the night, shouldn't be too much of a problem getting my hands on one as it seems like a lot of people were disappointed by it lol.

 

[Ichinisan]

Tonight's the night, shouldn't be too much of a problem getting my hands on one as it seems like a lot of people were disappointed by it lol.

It's exactly what I expected and the price I expected. I'm getting it.

Strangely, I think white looks best. I definitely do NOT prefer a white face on any iPhone. A white-faced iPhone looks terrible with the speaker, Facetime camera, ambient light sensor, face proximity sensor (all that mess). The iPad just has a tiny Facetime camera, so it looks fine with a white face.

 

[rsutoratosu]

White is sold out for 11/2 delivery.. not bad

 

[TuxDave]

I think that it has the same DPI as a pre-retina iPhone, I think they just cut a larger panel out of the process that they were using for the iPhone 3GS. So, upping it to Retina should make it the same DPI as a retina iPhone.

*I just double checked. Yes, the iPad Mini's DPI is 162, the iPhone 3GS was 164. That is according to their statement of it being 7.9".

Heh, when you put it in that context, then it's a definite pass on the iPad mini. Call me a PPI snob but high resolution displays are REALLLLY nice. I can't go back to seeing pixels.

 

[Aikouka]

Heh, when you put it in that context, then it's a definite pass on the iPad mini. Call me a PPI snob but high resolution displays are REALLLLY nice. I can't go back to seeing pixels.

I'm kind of torn. I'd like to get the iPad 4 as a replacement for my iPad 2, but the technophile side of me would really like an iPad mini as well! I'd prefer if it had cellular connectivity since it appears to be easier to carry around, but how much space will I need? I have about 12GB of music, which means I would need at least 32GB or just not put my music on it. iPad 4 64GB with Cellular + iPad Mini 32GB with Cellular = !

EDIT:

Although, my plan is to just buy it from the store if anything. I get 5% cashback at Best Buy this quarter and I always get 5% off at Target. Although, Target in my area only seems to carry the AT&T models or at least that's all I ever saw for the iPad 3.

 

[cheez]

Yeah... It's just an icon so I don't really mind it much but... it does look obviously... pixelated next to everything else.

I'll take pixelated over blurry any day any week any year any decade etc etc etc.

 

[Aikouka]

I'd bet you've done a lot more Xcoding than I have, but you have some of this stuff backwards. Why would you hand code your UI if you can visually lay it out with IB?

I haven't done any iOS programming, but I have done quite a bit of GUI coding outside of iOS. One thing that surprises most people is that when it comes to Java, I do all of the GUI coding by hand. It partially comes down to the tools not working well -- relative placement does not work well in a WYSIWYG environment without actually executing it. It can get a bit tedious when you're really anal about looks. Some of it is that I prefer more control over what I'm getting.

 

[Gunslinger08]

I think if they had released this with a high res screen and slightly better internals, I probably would have bought one. I'm really considering a Nexus 7 to tinker around with, but the lack of Android tablet support/apps really makes me want to stay with iOS. I just don't need to spend $500 for something to play around with, especially since my wife already has an iPad 3.