or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple sells out of all iPad mini models as Amazon pans its price
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple sells out of all iPad mini models as Amazon pans its price - Page 2

post #41 of 99

Heh heh! 

 

Enjoy your ads, Kindle users.  Until Amazon yanks your content, anyway...

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #42 of 99
Bezos is mad that he can't make BILLIONS in profits.

Hey, we sold a zillion Kindles!

But we did not make any money though.
post #43 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I love what imore.com did here:
amazon_kindle_fire_vs_ipad_mini_v2-2.jpg

 

They forgot to mention that "dual stereo speakers" is incoherent nonsense also.  

post #44 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by odditie View Post

...This is proof they are steering customers towards one product vs. another…. ...how are we to know they aren't doing the same thing on products they receive a larger profit on and steering consumers to products that are not in our best interest because they will be more profitable because of it.

 

I was not aware that Amazon had made any claim to sell like they were Consumer Reports. Has Amazon supposedly said somewhere that they will steer you to the best quality product or the best price, or that they are anything other than an online department store? If so I would like to know -- I think you are confused about Amazon. I can promise you they are not some 'not for profit' corporation.

 

Jeff Bezos and company are in it for the money so they always prefer you buy something that profits them more as well as contributes to their volume.

post #45 of 99

Crickey, the bezel on that Kindle Fire is HUGE!

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #46 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

Most people claimed they couldn't tell the difference when the iPad 3 came out. 

 

This isn't really a valid argument anymore.

"When the iPad 3 came out," sure, back then.

I felt the same about the iPhone 4 at first, too.

Retina doesn't seem like a big deal at first blush, I'll give you that,

but, after using it regularly for a period of time, there's just no going back.

post #47 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

Jeff Bezos and company are in it for the money so they always prefer you buy something that profits them more as well as contributes to their volume.

 

Profit?  They are losing money hand-over-fist on these, hoping to make it up in content.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #48 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


That sounds like 4 speakers to me.
We haven't seen reviews of this comparison (yet) but Apple's mono speaker in iDevices has been louder and sounding better than the stereo speakers in competing devices. What good are stereo speakers spaced between your ears?

 

If you Google the term you will find that it's (sadly) used fairly regularly by gadget sellers so I think it unlikely that Amazon actually has four speakers in there.  I think it's just the (stupid, illegible, illiterate, ignorant) way people speak nowadays.  

post #49 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

 

 

Here is a quote from Parsigi2 over on 9to5forums:

 

"People are complaining that it's not retina, but I have one thing to say. When the 3rd gen iPad came out, people were all saying "this is the same thing as the iPad 2. You can't even tell the difference between the screens. Nobody was even complaining about the 2's screen." This is seriously what everybody said, and now that the mini is here, people are complaining about the screen. It has a higher PPI than the iPad 2 screen (which everybody said nobody was complaining about, and is not that differentiable from the 3rd gen) but people choose to complain since it's Apple and that's their job."

 

Now, I'm too lazy to write that myself, but he is completely right. People (people being the soccor moms who think they're 'cool' because they have an iPad, or the teachers (*cough* my english teacher *cough*) who think they're f ucking geniuses cuz they can use settings.app)  weren't excited when the iPad 3 was released about the Retina display, why should they be excites/upset about the non-retina display of the Mini?

 

 

I think the issue is that Apple raised the bar on tablet displays with the retina iPad 3....  The competition hasn't matched that yet but they have upped the pixel density on most of the competing devices..   Now, Apple is delivering a lower pixel density with the iPad mini. It may look just fine on that size device , Idk yet, but some criticism may be rightly deserved..   

post #50 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges View Post

 

 

Here is a quote from Parsigi2 over on 9to5forums:

 

"People are complaining that it's not retina, but I have one thing to say. When the 3rd gen iPad came out, people were all saying "this is the same thing as the iPad 2. You can't even tell the difference between the screens. Nobody was even complaining about the 2's screen." This is seriously what everybody said, and now that the mini is here, people are complaining about the screen. It has a higher PPI than the iPad 2 screen (which everybody said nobody was complaining about, and is not that differentiable from the 3rd gen) but people choose to complain since it's Apple and that's their job."

 

Now, I'm too lazy to write that myself, but he is completely right. People (people being the soccor moms who think they're 'cool' because they have an iPad, or the teachers (*cough* my english teacher *cough*) who think they're f ucking geniuses cuz they can use settings.app)  weren't excited when the iPad 3 was released about the Retina display, why should they be excites/upset about the non-retina display of the Mini?

 

 

I think the issue is that Apple raised the bar on tablet displays with the iPad 3....  The competition hasn't matched that yet but they have upped the pixel density and resolution on most of the competing devices..   Now, Apple is delivering a lower resolution and pixel density than most of the smaller 7"tablets with the iPad mini. It may look just fine on that size device, Idk yet, but some criticism may be rightly deserved..   

post #51 of 99
I'm not angry at Amazon for an obviously skewed comparison. An it's expected. If two speakers and a smaller screen is their best foot forward, then Apple has nothing to worry about. If they have to quote Gizmodo... No, the truth is Amazon is going to fight to be number two with Google-Samsung-Asus and whoever else is left playing in the seven inch market. There's a slew of cheap tablets from also-ran makes like Pantech, Coby, and Archos, all running something like Android 2.3.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #52 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

 

I was not aware that Amazon had made any claim to sell like they were Consumer Reports. Has Amazon supposedly said somewhere that they will steer you to the best quality product or the best price, or that they are anything other than an online department store? If so I would like to know -- I think you are confused about Amazon. I can promise you they are not some 'not for profit' corporation.

 

Jeff Bezos and company are in it for the money so they always prefer you buy something that profits them more as well as contributes to their volume.


There is a huge difference between being for profit and changing from being an online retailer that delivers goods & services to the consumer and being a competitor and reseller of your own goods against others. My second statement is not in reference to a change in their practices (when it comes to what options are given in what order), but a change in the perception of their company when they begin to use blatant advertising for their own benefit rather than the consumer.

 

At the end of the day, perception is reality and when I go to amazon.com and it begins to feel like it is a retail store for Amazon products with others also being sold there it makes it appear that they have their best interest ahead of my own. If I go to bestbuy.com and look at tablets it appears that they are not serving in their own best interest.

post #53 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

 

I was not aware that Amazon had made any claim to sell like they were Consumer Reports. Has Amazon supposedly said somewhere that they will steer you to the best quality product or the best price, or that they are anything other than an online department store? If so I would like to know -- I think you are confused about Amazon. I can promise you they are not some 'not for profit' corporation.

 

Jeff Bezos and company are in it for the money so they always prefer you buy something that profits them more as well as contributes to their volume.

 

I agree, in that complaining about Amazon "possibly" getting into an immoral or morally compromised situation with it's customers is something that should have been raised many years ago.  Amazon has been raping it's customers for years.  They have *always* been "morally challenged" in their dealings with customers, their suppliers, and all the industries they infect/affect.  

 

People go to Amazon for the same reason they shop at Walmart, it's cheap.  They already know that the reason it's cheap is because Amazon is screwing over every supplier they can.  They know the quality of the products are sub-par, but they are cheap.  Amazon is about cheap and all the amazonians that follow them are in it for the cheap.  If they were concerned with "correct" behaviour or fairness, they wouldn't shop there in the first place.  

 

It's been this way with Amazon as long as I can remember.  

post #54 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

Your point was almost lost with all that cursing at the beginning of your post. You do have a point. Everyone was saying the iPad 3 was no different from the 2 as far as they could see. Now that mini has the iPad 2 display condensed people are complaining it's not retina. 

Yeah...

Sorry about that. I think....I'm going to take that out...

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply

 

 


Tim Cook using Galaxy Tabs as frisbees

 

Reply
post #55 of 99

Don't think Amazon is doing this because they are scared. They are marketing to the non-Apple crowd - those who are predisposed to consider non-Apple options (e.g. Android) first and some of those on the fence.

 

We need to be fair here - there are features on Kindle that are superior to iPad Mini (screen resolution) and Amazon is smart to point them out. There are also features on iPad Mini that are superior. Amazon would be dumb to point them out.

 

This marketing strategy is designed to redirect attention away from Nook and Nexus 7.

post #56 of 99
Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post

It's also untrue to say the iPad is standard definition because it is a higher pixel density than the iPad 2

 

It's… true insofar as we have to use the definition of HD.

 

16:9 720 is the minimum for "HD". 1080 is "full" HD. Now, I don't agree that the former is HD at all anymore, but they still call it that. If 720 is HD, then so is 481. It's higher than "standard", ∴ "HD".

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #57 of 99
"Sales of the Kindle Fire HD were up three times what they were in the previous week"

That's easy to do with you sell 100 of them and then sell 300 of them the following week.
post #58 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeJay2012 View Post

Gizmodo due to past 'indiscretions', probably does not have access to Apple devices before the public does.  I am sure if Gizmodo had a chance to obtain a 'stolen' iPad mini a few weeks ago, they would have had time to see what a wonderful experience it provided over a discount Kindle Fire.

Gizmodo buys stolen tech. Ballsy.

Even if Cook let them back into the party they would likely continue to shit on Apple over the banning and because 'Apple is shite' articles get more page hits because Team Android comes to egg on the 'rabid iSheep' etc

The two things to look at here are battery life and what, under Apple's published math, would a display of that size need to be retina. The res might be close already but getting it all the way could be a battery killer. Apple would never do that. Compared to Amazon et al that might spec wank with a higher than needed resolution that is just wasted because the device down scales higher quality video to 720p AND that display might eat battery to the point of it not coming close to lasting all day. That is a big detail for many. Then add the lack of apps so you can use it for Amazon media and perhaps ten games and email and for many it's a no go.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #59 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post

Gizmodo - the site that knowingly and illegally held a stolen iPhone prototype and was prosecuted for same offense and has since been banned from Apple announcement events has come out against a clearly superior Apple product? What a surprise!

Don't forget they paid a felony amount of money for it and tried to extort information from Apple to return it.

And bragged about the payment etc on their site.

But alas they were not prosecuted. The 'thief' was, but Chen etc were not because it was deemed not worth it to proceed. In other words, the DA looked at the costs of going further against what they could recover in fines etc and the math was too big a hit. Giz tried to play it as the State saying they were innocent but their confession was already out there. A number of blogs crapped on them for being so stupid with how they published the info. And Giz is taking that out on Apple as well

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #60 of 99

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post

Gizmodo - the site that knowingly and illegally held a stolen iPhone prototype and was prosecuted for same offense and has since been banned from Apple announcement events has come out against a clearly superior Apple product? What a surprise!

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by TeeJay2012 View Post

Gizmodo due to past 'indiscretions', probably does not have access to Apple devices before the public does.  I am sure if Gizmodo had a chance to obtain a 'stolen' iPad mini a few weeks ago, they would have had time to see what a wonderful experience it provided over a discount Kindle Fire.

 

Gizmodo buys stolen tech. Ballsy.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


Even if Cook let them back into the party they would likely continue to shit on Apple over the banning and because 'Apple is shite' articles get more page hits because Team Android comes to egg on the 'rabid iSheep' etc
The two things to look at here are battery life and what, under Apple's published math, would a display of that size need to be retina. The res might be close already but getting it all the way could be a battery killer. Apple would never do that. Compared to Amazon et al that might spec wank with a higher than needed resolution that is just wasted because the device down scales higher quality video to 720p AND that display might eat battery to the point of it not coming close to lasting all day. That is a big detail for many. Then add the lack of apps so you can use it for Amazon media and perhaps ten games and email and for many it's a no go.

 

2-yr old history suggests Gizmodo might have a gripe against Apple and would publish nothing but hatchet jobs. But their reviews of iPad3 and particularly iPhone5 suggest this is not the case.

post #61 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Apple responds with the iPad Nano.
Game over.

Nope. Apple doesn't respond to the other boys by making products 'to compete'. They respond to their customers direct or indirect feedback

The 'response' that amazon etc gets is when they announce they sold 10 million Kindles across the lineup for the holidays. And Apple announces they sold 10 million wifi only iPad Minis in preorder alone. Indirect response but way more biting

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #62 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus009 View Post

 

This isn't really a valid argument anymore.

"When the iPad 3 came out," sure, back then.

I felt the same about the iPhone 4 at first, too.

Retina doesn't seem like a big deal at first blush, I'll give you that,

but, after using it regularly for a period of time, there's just no going back.

That's somewhat valid. This new screen is somewhere in between retina and iPad 2 resolution.... It will be interesting to see where. I also want to know what Apple plans to do for retina display minis going forward. Retina display is nice to have but I just looked at a 1900 pixel Surface with the most pixelated web browsing experience I've ever seen on a tablet. So....

post #63 of 99

I hate the writer who doesn't know what he's talking about. John Brownlee at Cult of Mac talking about resolution of iPad mini: "the minimum resolution that technically qualifies as HD is 1280 x 720 in an aspect ratio of 16:9. The iPad mini has 48 more pixels in height necessary to qualify as HD, but 256 pixels less in width." 

Really? Is that mean all old movies (in 4:3) encoded at 720p are not HD?

 

Of course their comment system is so f_ked up I couldn't post there. 

post #64 of 99
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

Really? Is that mean all old movies (in 4:3) encoded at 720p are not HD?

 

350x720 isn't HD, no.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #65 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

350x720 isn't HD, no.

Is there movie shot at that aspect ratio? Is there any video at all in that aspect ratio?

post #66 of 99
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post
Is there movie shot at that aspect ratio? Is there any video at all in that aspect ratio?


I doubt it. Hmm, I guess it would actually be 960x720 if we're talking "old film reconverted for Blu-ray release", and no, that's not HD. Yeah, that was a WAY wrong resolution that I picked earlier.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #67 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus009 View Post

 

This isn't really a valid argument anymore.

"When the iPad 3 came out," sure, back then.

I felt the same about the iPhone 4 at first, too.

Retina doesn't seem like a big deal at first blush, I'll give you that,

but, after using it regularly for a period of time, there's just no going back.

I felt the same about the iPhone 4 too.  And the 4S seemed similar (although had a tinge of yellow tint to it).  But I thought it was gorgeous- and looking at a 3GS I had laying around while I had my 4S side-by-side, there was no comparison.  It was better by a mile.  Interestingly enough- with the iPhone 5, when I compare the color reproduction next to the 4S.... IT makes the 4S look bad for crying out loud!

So I'm with you- once you go retina, it's hard to go back.  The main thing the mini has going for it is its brand new, so there is nothing to compare it to- so it not being retina isn't as big of a deal.  Me, I'll wait for retina- mainly because I think we'll see it around May/June.  Hey- look- I pulled numbers out of my butt because I have a gut feeling... I'm an analyst!

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #68 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I love what imore.com did here:
amazon_kindle_fire_vs_ipad_mini_v2-2.jpg


This comparison is so lame. A pitiful try to excuse the iPad mini. It explains itself.

post #69 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


I doubt it. Hmm, I guess it would actually be 960x720 if we're talking "old film reconverted for Blu-ray release", and no, that's not HD. Yeah, that was a WAY wrong resolution that I picked earlier.

It IS HD. Even iTunes said it's HD. Because when they used some number for HD they knew the movie, which we will see on the new TV have many aspect ratio so they only set it on vertical resolution. That means ALL films/videos with aspect ratio that have vertical resolution from 720 up are HD. 16:9 has nothing to do with it. We don't even have films shot in 16:9.

post #70 of 99
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


I doubt it. Hmm, I guess it would actually be 960x720 if we're talking "old film reconverted for Blu-ray release", and no, that's not HD. Yeah, that was a WAY wrong resolution that I picked earlier.

You mean 920x720 isn't HD- right?  Not an old film converted for Blu-Ray isn't HD?  Because Gone with the wind, wizard of oz, to kill a mockingbird, and some of the other jaw-dropping blu ray catalog releases would disagree.  :)

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #71 of 99
Originally Posted by ClemyNX View Post
This comparison is so lame. A pitiful try to excuse the iPad mini. It explains itself.

 

Er, what?


Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post
It IS HD. Even iTunes said it's HD.

 

Ooh, don't say that on an HD forum, though. lol.gif

 

Or on a television forum. Those exist, right? There have to be hardline TV fans… 

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #72 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

 

Ooh, don't say that on an HD forum, though. lol.gif

 

Or on a television forum. Those exist, right? There have to be hardline TV fans… 

There might have I guess. :) 

post #73 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

It IS HD. Even iTunes said it's HD. Because when they used some number for HD they knew the movie, which we will see on the new TV have many aspect ratio so they only set it on vertical resolution. That means ALL films/videos with aspect ratio that have vertical resolution from 720 up are HD. 16:9 has nothing to do with it. We don't even have films shot in 16:9.

Actually, several films are 1.78:1- which take advantage of the whole 16:9.  Films shot for use in iMax are even larger in several instances, but cropped down to 1.78:1.  But most are around 2.40:1.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #74 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Er, what?

 

Ooh, don't say that on an HD forum, though. lol.gif

 

Or on a television forum. Those exist, right? There have to be hardline TV fans… 

While 720 is "HD"- they have to define 1080p as "true HD".  Stupid sounding.  We also hear "1080p HD".  Why don't we have "SD" (480), "Almost HD" (720) and "HD" (1080) and then "like- really, really HD" (4k).  Where does it end?  lol

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #75 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Actually, several films are 1.78:1- which take advantage of the whole 16:9.  Films shot for use in iMax are even larger in several instances, but cropped down to 1.78:1.  But most are around 2.40:1.

I think you confused "films" with "digital videos", like Avatar for example. Mostly films are shot in 1.85:1 which is roughly 16:9 but not quite. You can still see a little black bar at the top and bottom. Try to notice it.

post #76 of 99
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post
While 720 is "HD"- they have to define 1080p as "true HD".  Stupid sounding.  We also hear "1080p HD".  Why don't we have "SD" (480), "Almost HD" (720) and "HD" (1080) and then "like- really, really HD" (4k).  Where does it end?  lol

 

It ends at Super Hi-Vision, period. They'll try to call it 8k, but calling it "SHV" to distinguish from "HD" (1080), "crap" (720), and "Grandpa's just going senile; he never actually watched video at that low a quality" (480) is a better idea, I think.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #77 of 99
Actually I think Amazon made a mistake putting the two side by side. First thing you notice is how huge the black bezel is on the Fire compared to the smaller bezel on the mini. Looking at the two side by side does not make me want a Fire.
post #78 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

I think you confused "films" with "digital videos", like Avatar for example. Mostly films are shot in 1.85:1 which is roughly 16:9 but not quite. You can still see a little black bar at the top and bottom. Try to notice it.

Ya- my bad.  I just saw that before you posted.  Films are  2.35:1, and 2K rigs are 1.85.  Maybe I'm thinking of the first several years of HD cameras where they used 1.78.  Forgot about the 2k rigs.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini Retina, iPhone 6, iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #79 of 99
Stereo speakers on anything the width of a tablet work great. You really get that stereo separation on the Kindle IF YOUR HEAD IS THE SIZE OF A CAT'S. Maybe. Stereo only works properly when there is a significant distance between the speakers.
post #80 of 99
These other tablets ads are so misleading it's sickening. Are they saying that supporting the fastest 4G LTE and latest WiFi protocols somehow makes the iPad mini a poor choice? It doesn't matter how many pixels you have to a point, the screen is 30-60% smaller and that makes a big difference, especially in landscape. The iPad's 4:3 aspect ratio wins on that account. Also, I don't think it much matters if you have stereo, mono or 5-point surround sound on your 7" tablet... it's not going to make a freaking difference. The sound is still going to suck. The iPad speaker sounds awesome for it's size and it's loud. Most other devices can't match that.

Speed of processor is probably better than the Amazon offering and the app choice is enormous in comparison, especially since there are still very few tablet specific apps for the Kindle which is really just a phone with decent media apps. Oh and did we mention that you need to pay to remove the ads? Yeah...

iPad mini: lighter, larger, faster, better selection. Everything you can do with an iPad 2 plus much more with improved cameras, networking, power management... Sorry Amazon.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Apple sells out of all iPad mini models as Amazon pans its price
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple sells out of all iPad mini models as Amazon pans its price