Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mobile Devices & Gadgets' started by badb0y, Nov 2, 2012.
Oh. My. God. A larger screen can show more stuff? STOP THE PRESSES. That extra .85 inches was the PERFECT AMOUNT to increase the size of the screen by. Apple has shown to be perfect once again.
It's not only the size, but also the fact that the ipad mini has a 4:3 aspect ratio while the nexus 7 has a 16:9 or 16:10 (forgot which).
Obviously, if you're going to read a webpage in landscape, you'll see more with 4:3.
What Tim doesn't tell you, is that the Nexus 7 is MUCH better at TV, Movies, Youtube because that's how they do their aspect ratios.
The solution to this, of course, is to view websites in portrait mode.
which looks awkward too in 16:9. How many of you surf on your widescreen monitors in vertical? I understand putting 3 monitors together to take advantage of AMD's Eyefinity, but yes monitor in vertical = fail for reading.
Even in vertical, it's more appealing to have 4:3. Why did everyone tout 16:9 or 16:10 anyway? Becauuse you can split the damn screen in half. What does that give you? 8:10, or 8:9. More squareish.
I think more people use their tablets for casual reading surfing than videos, so to make it only for videos is fail. You can still watch 16:9 content on a 4:3 tablet.
The rumors of Steve jobs and Ive spending months settling on the right size/aspect ratio for the iPad seem truer everyday.
People watch vids on their tablets, but that's not the majority. So....16:9 is not optimal. 16:10 is better but I prefer the iPad aspect ratio.
Something to note, android tabs lose a lot of space from the footer software keys. It's a thick bar for 3 buttons.
Yeah 3.5" screen phone and 10" tablet are the perfect size. I guess that's why Apple made 4" screen iPhone 5 and 7.9" iPad Mini. Apple was tired being right and wanted to make some imperfect products too.
Why is that? Because it closely matches the 16:9 aspect ratio? If you were talking about the iPad 4 vs. Nexus 10, you would be more accurate, but unfortunately, Mini vs. Nexus 7 isn't so cut and dry. The larger screen on the 4:3 Mini actually gives it a larger viewing area when viewing 16:9 content compared to the Nexus 7's 16:10 screen.
Unfortunately, no one ever seems to post the flippin' screen dimensions anywhere as everyone is all about diagonal sizes. So, I did a little math, and got the following dimensions:
Fortunately, Apple provides the overall surface area in inches squared of a 7" tablet and their own tablet, which made this much easier. All you do is solve the following equation for n:
[aspect ratio: width]n * [aspect ratio: height]n = [surface area]
Then you multiply by the respective aspect ratio number again to get the actual screen size.
Now, what we're looking for is actual viewing size in inches. Both of them will use the entire height (i.e. 6.28 and 5.92); however, neither of them will use the entire width, because the Mini is 4:3 (will use 75%) and the N7 is 16:10 (will use 90%). Because of that, the iPad Mini actually uses 3.53" to display the video and the N7 uses 3.33".
So, the effective 16:9 content display size is...
iPad Mini = 6.28" x 3.53"
Nexus 7 = 5.92" x 3.32"
As long as you're willing to deal with the fact that you're wasting more screen real estate on the iPad Mini playing 16:9 content, you're still getting a bigger viewing area as an end result.
you are getting a bigger viewing area, but if you're watching an HD movie e.g. 720p, aren't you also losing quality due to the iPad mini having to downscale to fit the width of 1024 pixels, whereas the nexus 7 or kindle fire can play it with full quality?
I can see that a 4:3 resolution is better for web surfing and general content consumption, hence why the 4:3 aspect ratio for the iPad mini is better suited most of the time than a nexus 7. I can also see the reverse logic to be true for kindle fire vs. iPad mini, since Amazon's strength is selling streaming movies and media, which is better consumed on a 16:10 device, as well as ebooks, which are likely to be read while holding the device vertically
You could argue that but that wouldn't have to do anything with the aspect ratio which only plays a factor in viewing size. The simple point is that the iPad mini is further away from 16:9 but ALSO has a longer diagonal and that overcomes the wasted space.
Yep. That's true as well.
I think it was Amazon that had something that said something along the lines of "the iPad Mini doesn't play hi-def videos." I understand what the statement means, but it felt a little disingenuous to me as it makes me wonder if technologically illiterate folks will think that the iPad Mini is not capable of handling a video that is 1280x720. Although, to be fair... I think iOS will refuse to play that video from the Video app as it isn't a supported resolution. That doesn't mean the iPad Mini's hardware cannot handle it though.
Did you just post this? Please, I'll give you some time to edit it because it seems awfully hypocritical considering the difference in screen size between 4 inches and 4.8 inches is smaller than the difference between 7 inches and 7.85 inches. Aren't you the same people salivating over the GSII screen and the GSIII screens because how big they were? Wasn't bigger better? Or was it bigger is better when Apple doesn't do it?
The rumor was for tablets. Also the mini and iPad shows the same amount of content.
If you look at the majority of tablets out there, the screen is not optimal for its use.
Where did Apple find a 16:5 aspect ratio screen, as seen on the left?
They lopped off the always(?) present software buttons. Because always present software buttons that add no more functionality than hardware buttons are stupid.
They also don't show the status bar on the iPad screen shot. Not sure about the status bar on Android, is it there all the time?
That is just the size of the browser window. On Android there is a notification bar at the top, chrome tabs and search, and soft buttons at the bottom. On the iPad there is a notifaction bar at the top and safari navigation and tabs.
So now the rumor was only for the tablet. Reality distortion field in full effect.
Screen on Nexus 7 is not optimal for its use? I only use landscape for games, videos, and pictures. Rest of the time it's in portrait view held with one hand. Pretty much exactly like how you use your 16:9 iPhone 5... Oh wait, I see the point you're trying to make now. You're unhappy with your iPhone 5 screen as it's not optimal for its use.
My iPad is locked in landscape mode and stays there... so I'm not sure why you suggest that I ever use it in portrait mode unless a game requires that I use it.
This 7 inch device has the same resolution as the current iPad.
Look at the screenshots above you.
DisplayMate goes in-depth on the iPad Mini display, get's clobbered by the Kindle Fire HD : http://www.displaymate.com/iPad_mini_ShootOut_1.htm
Yep can't argue with that, it's a pretty bad display lol.
I agree with the title of this thread, we just got a couple iPad mini's at work to develop with, and my only complaint is the screen.
I have been using a kindle Fire HD for the last week, and the iPad mini wins in all hardware aspects except for the screen (and maybe the speakers, the kindle fire has pretty good speakers and I haven't tested the iPad mini too much yet with loud music). If the iPad mini had a retina screen, I would buy one with LTE right now. The hardware on this thing is insane. It's thin and amazingly light. I love the thin bezel too.
iPad mini + Retina Display = no one buying the larger iPad.
The "new iPad"/"new iPad.5" is pretty beefy. I wouldn't surprised if the next iPad gets thinner and lighter, at which time the iPad mini would gain a retina screen.
Exactly as I predicted when the iPad Mini was announced:
Poor quality screen, frame too wide for comfortable one-handed use.
Gizmodo tears into the screen even more: