AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumor: Apple's next iPad mini to pack 324ppi Retina display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Apple's next iPad mini to pack 324ppi Retina display - Page 2

post #41 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:08pm
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post
"Gonna be exactly the same size…"

 

I mentioned that it likely isn't a problem anymore, so yeah, it would be.

Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
post #42 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

Yeah I get it - anyone who questions Apple's decisions, even RUMORED ones, gets shouted down or proof is demanded.  Those on the other side... well of course, you can assume that Apple will have no trouble producing these panels, despite recent evidence of production problems with high PPI panels.  Why would any member of the public KNOW about their production capabilities?  Why would you?  Why would I?  But I sure know that they have had a LOT of trouble with these displays in the past year on various products.

Real solid strategy you fanboys have there.  That way, you'll never know what hit you (er, Apple) until it's too late.  Great strategy!  Duhhhh

Fanboy tactics??? You were asked to back up an assertion that you made. That's not a fanboy tactic, it's common debate practice. It's courtesy.

It isn't your opponents' job to disprove your assertions; it is your job to back up your assertions...with relevant facts. And you have not. The best answer you could muster was "I dunno, but they seem to be having a lot of problems with these displays...on various products." This is so wide and vague a criticism, it can't be used as a predictor for production capacity of a future iPad mini.

"Can't innovate anymore my ass!" -- Phil Schiller

Reply

"Can't innovate anymore my ass!" -- Phil Schiller

Reply
post #43 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

.34" vs. .37".

Ooo~ so thick. And that was before the laminated screen whoozits, so I don't imagine it being a problem anymore.

I believe they lose 2mm when they get rid of the glass-to-glass touchscreen and go to glass-to-film, which is G/F2 when the Indium Tin Oxide film is two-sided, which is Dual ITO, or DITO.

Apparently that part of the screen production has been ironed out on the present mini, so cameronj's warnings may be obviated on that score. But there's still the IGZO side of the story, which has yet to be tested in high volume as far as I know.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post

 


Simple question, and I will ask nicely: Why would capacity for producing 326 ppi panels be half that of 163 ppi panels?

 

This is not about Apple, being a fanboy or strategy. It's a simple question based on something you wrote. Perhaps you can teach me something?

Because higher resolution screens are harder to make.  How much harder cannot be quantified by either of us, particularly because we're talking about the future.

 

Simple question: Why WON'T capacity be drastically lower?  Let's see how you can do.  I'm guessing you'll continue to equivocate, while demanding proof of others.

Reply
Reply
post #45 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



You can get upset and say that you are being pounded for questioning Apple but you aren't. In this and the previous thread you excused yourself from you were presenting statements as factual without anything to back them up. If you're being asked about how you came to your results it's because others are curious. Why should anyone accept blindly something you or anyone says that you aren't willing to verify or back up? That doesn't mean you need proof to state a hypothesis but it does mean you need to articulate yourself so others can understand where you are coming from.

In the previous thread you made a closed statement that didn't allow for any other possibility and in this one you are stating that production would be halved. You didn't say that the double density displays would be harder to produce and state various reasons why this makes sense; you stated they could only produce half as many.

That's ridiculous.  If you think that when someone talks about a) the future and b) a secretive company like Apple as an outsider, they can be precise, you're dumber than I would have guessed.  

 

Sorry, would you like me to say "maybe" every time I'm talking about what MIGHT happen in the future so you can figure it out?  You aren't really that thick are you?  You do understand that every one of us doesn't know exact (or even close) numbers about any of this stuff.  Funny that it's the guy who thinks maybe Apple is making a bad decision that gets asked for hard numbers.  Not the ones who believe, despite the debacle of the past year, that Apple can make anything it wants in any number it wants.

Reply
Reply
post #46 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by macslut View Post

It's #5 that gets me the most.  The extra resolution means much larger file sizes for images and other content.  If you're fine with a lower capacity iPad, that's cool, but for me 64GB isn't enough even without the Retina.

 

Wait? What? iPad apps are iPad apps, and we already have Retina iPads... with existing apps... that already use larger images and graphics. Thus a app for a "retina" iPad mini won't take up any more space that the same app downloaded to a non-retina mini.

 

You're not making any sense.

Reply
Reply
post #47 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

No way, man. That's crazy. What, that's like… a display with the quality of a… a retina or something. Crazy talk.

 

Not so crazy. I, myself, have two retinas.

Reply
Reply
post #48 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:28pm

Personally, I'm getting tired of this. So, yes, we're going to have a mini, and yes, it's going to be "retina", and yes, Apple is going to do the same copout move by simply doubling pixels.

 

Hey, I've got a crazy idea. How about teaching your developers how to do resolution independence?

Reply
Reply
post #49 of 83
2/4/13 at 3:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmgregory1 View Post

I'm really surprised all the focus is still on producing higher res screens and so little is being focused on reducing screen glare.  Apple did a pretty good job with the iMac, but the iPad (4 for me) is just too reflective under too many situations.  They've (Corning) figured out how to make the glass thin, strong, scratch resistant and (relatively speaking) light - why no focus on glare resistance or reduction?

Have you compared the mini to the bigger iPad side-by-side? The LCD panel is closer to the glass, and in fact there is one layer of glass missing on the mini. I'd be somewhat interested to hear from a reflection phobic person if they think the mini's DITO screen is better. Myself I'm not bothered by the reflections, because it's easy to tilt away from them.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Have you compared the mini to the bigger iPad side-by-side? The LCD panel is closer to the glass, and in fact there is one layer of glass missing on the mini. I'd be somewhat interested to hear from a reflection phobic person if they think the mini's DITO screen is better. Myself I'm not bothered by the reflections, because it's easy to tilt away from them.

There is less reflection on the mini but its nothing compare to the new imac improvements. They really did a great job on the imacs.

On the retina ipad mini, i dont think its doable unless they go with IGZO. If they dont the new mini will be heavier and more thick.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I'm not sure why AI is finally picking up on this so long after it's been worked out and why they are reporting an incorrect PPI.

Let's look at how Apple decided on the 7.85" iPad display size.

  1. They wanted to use the iPad's resolution and by its intrinsic property its aspect ratio
  2. They wanted to reuse known display tech they already have to reduce cost.

That's why we have a 7.85" iPad mini display that is 1024x768 at 132 PPI. When you double the iPad mini resolution you double the PPI to 326. 324 is the result of sloppy math by using sloppy and imprecise math by using a 7.9" size and without any consideration for how the display was chosen.

Shameful that this was reported at all, much less re-report by AI. Bottom line: It'll use the iPhone's display when the iPad mini goes Retina.


edit: clarified potential ambiguous text.

I hate to be a jerk, but by what "precise" math is 132 x 2 = 324 or 326?

iPhone 4s, iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 4s, iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
post #52 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

Because higher resolution screens are harder to make.  How much harder cannot be quantified by either of us, particularly because we're talking about the future.

 

Simple question: Why WON'T capacity be drastically lower?  Let's see how you can do.  I'm guessing you'll continue to equivocate, while demanding proof of others.


I will continue to equivocate? Let's see who is equivocating.

 

Exhibit #1: You made an assertion, and I asked you to explain. Instead of explaining yourself, you flip the question back to me. I am no expert but I am willing to bet that does not make me the equivacator here.

 

Exhibit #2: You are the one who wrote the their capacity will be halved, and now you say it cannot be quantified. Again, I am no expert. But this seems to corroborate exhibit #1.

 

 

The sound you hear is the shattering of what remains of your credibility. Don't blame it. You did yourself in.

Reply
Reply
post #53 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA View Post


I hate to be a jerk, but by what "precise" math is 132 x 2 = 324 or 326?


You're being a jerk because he clearly just made a typo. No victory too small?

Reply
Reply
post #54 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA View Post

I hate to be a jerk, but by what "precise" math is 132 x 2 = 324 or 326?

163 x 2 is 326. Fixed typo in original statement.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #55 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj View Post

Because higher resolution screens are harder to make.  How much harder cannot be quantified by either of us, particularly because we're talking about the future.

Simple question: Why WON'T capacity be drastically lower?  Let's see how you can do.  I'm guessing you'll continue to equivocate, while demanding proof of others.

You say it can't be quantified by "us" but that is exactly what you did which is why you back peddling now.

You made a statement and people were curious how you arrived that very precise and very certain conclusion.

Only now you are using the argument that I gave you by implying it would be lower based on reasonable assumptions.

I think yields will be lower per manufacturing line due to the increased difficultly and complexity in the manufacturing process. But by half, going on the 3rd year since the 326 PPI displays were introduced and Apple making more of those displays now than they ever made of the 163 PPI displays for production devices?

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #56 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:53pm

just like ipad 2 vs ipad 3... will the performance go down?  probably... I hope they keep the choice, and not force a retina only model that will have lower graphics performance, even if it looks nicer when it works.  It would probably be just as fast as the iPad 3 if we are lucky... 

Reply
Reply
post #57 of 83
2/4/13 at 4:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


Well, they have before. It was called iPad 3.

My iPad 3 gets the same battery life as my iPad 2 did.  And as far as being heavier, for me it's barely noticeable.  With the mini Apple's biggest selling point was how thin and light it is.  Sorry but I don't see them going retina until they can do it and keep the weight and thickness down.

Reply
Reply
post #58 of 83
2/4/13 at 5:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by macslut View Post

I totally agree.  People also forget the downsides to Retina:
1) Weight
2) Size
3) Battery life
4) Potentially slower (unless better graphics are used, which results in problem #3)
5) Consumption of storage capacity
6) Heat

It's #5 that gets me the most.  The extra resolution means much larger file sizes for images and other content.  If you're fine with a lower capacity iPad, that's cool, but for me 64GB isn't enough even without the Retina.
Ya- most of that will occur. Especially #6- My iPad 4 starts cooking if I've been using it a while (I always do full brightness). The mini being that tiny pushing out more pixels is bound for heat (unless a different type of display is used).
Either way- wife has a mini, and ill have one when retina comes out- be it this year or next.

(2) 2010 27" iMac i7, 2012 15" Retina MacBook Pro i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad 4, iPad Mini, (2) iPhone 5, iPod Touch 5, iPod Nano 7
Time Capsule 4, Airport Extreme 5, (3) Apple TV 3

Reply

(2) 2010 27" iMac i7, 2012 15" Retina MacBook Pro i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad 4, iPad Mini, (2) iPhone 5, iPod Touch 5, iPod Nano 7
Time Capsule 4, Airport Extreme 5, (3) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #59 of 83
2/4/13 at 5:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

.34" vs. .37".

Ooo~ so thick. And that was before the laminated screen whoozits, so I don't imagine it being a problem anymore.
That's over 9% thicker. Pretty decent size comparatively speaking.

(2) 2010 27" iMac i7, 2012 15" Retina MacBook Pro i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad 4, iPad Mini, (2) iPhone 5, iPod Touch 5, iPod Nano 7
Time Capsule 4, Airport Extreme 5, (3) Apple TV 3

Reply

(2) 2010 27" iMac i7, 2012 15" Retina MacBook Pro i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad 4, iPad Mini, (2) iPhone 5, iPod Touch 5, iPod Nano 7
Time Capsule 4, Airport Extreme 5, (3) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #60 of 83
2/4/13 at 5:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

My iPad 3 gets the same battery life as my iPad 2 did.  And as far as being heavier, for me it's barely noticeable.  With the mini Apple's biggest selling point was how thin and light it is.  Sorry but I don't see them going retina until they can do it and keep the weight and thickness down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Ya- most of that will occur. Especially #6- My iPad 4 starts cooking if I've been using it a while (I always do full brightness). The mini being that tiny pushing out more pixels is bound for heat (unless a different type of display is used).
Either way- wife has a mini, and ill have one when retina comes out- be it this year or next.

The Retina Mini is going to be a game changer. I'm planning on getting that and the iPhone 5S/6 this year!
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 83
2/4/13 at 6:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by doh123 View Post

just like ipad 2 vs ipad 3... will the performance go down?  probably... I hope they keep the choice, and not force a retina only model that will have lower graphics performance, even if it looks nicer when it works.  It would probably be just as fast as the iPad 3 if we are lucky... 

IIRC, performance didn't go down when they introduced the retina iPad because they added a stronger GPU. The same thing could be true here.

In any event, it would be a pretty good bet that when they release iPad Mini 2 that they'll keep the original version for sale at a lower price for some time.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #62 of 83
2/4/13 at 6:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


You're being a jerk because he clearly just made a typo. No victory too small?

 

I realized that later, but didn't edit/remove the post because of the irony.  It was a rant about precision mathematics.  Maybe the original PPI calculation was a typo, too.

iPhone 4s, iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply

iPhone 4s, iMac, Apple TV 2nd Gen, iPod Nano

Reply
post #63 of 83
2/4/13 at 6:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryA View Post

I realized that later, but didn't edit/remove the post because of the irony.  It was a rant about precision mathematics.  Maybe the original PPI calculation was a typo, too.

Except it wasn't a mathematical error but a typing error. Calling your kids by the wrong name on occasion is what I did. Losing one of your kids at Disney Land and not realizing it until you're half way home would be their error… assuming they ever realized it.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #64 of 83
2/4/13 at 7:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


When will iPhone get a retina display?

I understand the next gen is ready to go today. It will be an implant so you get retina quality no matter have close you hold the iPhone. Only small issues still persist: Users of the implant find they cannot input "Google, Amazon, or Microsoft" no matter how hard they try. Also, every attempt to enter "Steve Ballmer" is auto-corrected to "Uncle Fester,"

Reply
Reply
post #65 of 83
2/4/13 at 7:51pm

Hurry up Apple !! I'm sick of the Nexus 7 and I want to buy the iPad mini before I spend all of my savings -.-

Reply
Reply
post #66 of 83
2/4/13 at 9:39pm
Gruber links to Blogett, who has the interview that has spooked cameronj on Tim Cook.

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-kedrosky-on-what-has-gone-wrong-at-apple-2013-2

These guys who come up with simple-minded theories about "what's wrong at Apple," and present them as if they're giving you the deepest intelligence imaginable, are part of the media pathology.

They start with the wrong assumption. The problem is with the Market, not with Apple. And the problem with the Market is that it's being manipulated by the media. Like with this interview.

Apple's thinking seems to be, we can release a great little iPad if we can do a machined aluminum back, light in weight, cheap in price, but only if we can do a G/F2 touchscreen. Can the two suppliers in the world that can do those G/F2 films perform at the level we need for x millions of minis? They say so, but we won't know unless we try, will we? So let's try.

I'd rather see Apple try this and have a limited success at first, and good success eventually, than to not try it until some time in the future. In other words, to not do a mini for the holiday season, playing it safe just to please the stupid pundits and the stupider Market.

A ridiculous interview. Watch it and laugh, especially when Ms. Chang comes in with her chirpy little leading questions.

Edit: fixed link
Edited by Flaneur - 2/4/13 at 10:45pm
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 83
2/4/13 at 9:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Gruber links to Blogett, who has the interview that has spooked cameronj on Tim Cook.

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-kedrosky-on-what-has-gone-wrong-at-apple-2013-

These guys who come up with simple-minded theories about "what's wrong at Apple," and present them as if they're giving you the deepest intelligence imaginable, are part of the media pathology.

They start with the wrong assumption. The problem is with the Market, not with Apple. And the problem with the Market is that it's being manipulated by the media. Like with this interview.

Apple's thinking seems to be, we can release a great little iPad if we can do a machined aluminum back, light in weight, cheap in price, but only if we can do a G/F2 touchscreen. Can the two suppliers in the world that can do those G/F2 films perform at the level we need for x millions of minis? They say so, but we won't know unless we try, will we? So let's try.

I'd rather see Apple try this and have a limited success at first, and good success eventually, than to not try it until some time in the future. In other words, to not do a mini for the holiday season, playing it safe just to please the stupid pundits and the stupider Market.

A ridiculous interview. Watch it and laugh, especially when Ms. Chang comes in with her chirpy little leading questions.

Haha the link no longer works.  Which is fine by me as I hate giving a trollish site like Business Insider the clicks.

Reply
Reply
post #68 of 83
2/4/13 at 10:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Haha the link no longer works.  Which is fine by me as I hate giving a trollish site like Business Insider the clicks.

In case you change your mind: http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-kedrosky-on-what-has-gone-wrong-at-apple-2013-2

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #69 of 83
2/4/13 at 10:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Haha the link no longer works.  Which is fine by me as I hate giving a trollish site like Business Insider the clicks.

I know what you mean. Give these guys the business, same inteview:

http://www.telekom-presse.at/detail.asp?newsID=24230&boardSessionID=241000001F5316007110914927201302059999999999991731
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 83
2/4/13 at 11:11pm

Retina displays are my favorite thing Apple is doing at the moment, I can't wait to see a really big one.

Reply
Reply
post #71 of 83
2/5/13 at 12:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

My iPad 3 gets the same battery life as my iPad 2 did.  And as far as being heavier, for me it's barely noticeable.  With the mini Apple's biggest selling point was how thin and light it is.  Sorry but I don't see them going retina until they can do it and keep the weight and thickness down.


Don't mean to be picky but, as I am sure you know, there are actually (at least?) two versions of iPad 2. So which one are you using for comparison? Which tests did you run to objectively compare the battery performance?

Reply
Reply
post #72 of 83
2/5/13 at 12:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Retina displays are my favorite thing Apple is doing at the moment, I can't wait to see a really big one.


This is a bigger deal than most people (even here) give Apple credit for. Those who are dissing Apple for the lack of innovation are failing to see how Apple is (once again) dragging the industry forward. Other smartphone manufacturers have been forced to match the Retina Display. Websites are (gradually) upgrading to be compatible, not to mention apps, etc.

Reply
Reply
post #73 of 83
2/5/13 at 1:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

No way, man. That's crazy. What, that's like… a display with the quality of a… a retina or something. Crazy talk.


Where have YOU been?

Reply
Reply
post #74 of 83
2/5/13 at 4:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


This is a bigger deal than most people (even here) give Apple credit for. Those who are dissing Apple for the lack of innovation are failing to see how Apple is (once again) dragging the industry forward. Other smartphone manufacturers have been forced to match the Retina Display. Websites are (gradually) upgrading to be compatible, not to mention apps, etc.

Yes, they deserve a lot of credit for it. It's funny how quickly things just become the norm and people forget that it was actually somebody's effort that made it happen. They even invested their own money in partner manufacturing capabilities to enable them to make the higher res screens, so they made it happen in a very real physical sense, not case in an intellectual/design sense.

Reply
Reply
post #75 of 83
2/5/13 at 4:57am
I don't think any of us get offended by "fanboy", but it's often a bannable offense because it tells us you're not really here for a discussion. Most members with less than 10 posts are clearly here to troll if they call anyone fanboys. I don't understand cameronj's meltdown, but I'm locking his account in case someone else has control of it.
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 83
2/5/13 at 5:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


Don't mean to be picky but, as I am sure you know, there are actually (at least?) two versions of iPad 2. So which one are you using for comparison? Which tests did you run to objectively compare the battery performance?

I had the first iPad 2. And no I didn't run any tests to "objectively compare" performance.  I'm using my iPad 3 the same way I used iPad 2 and the only difference I notice is it takes a bit longer to charge.

Reply
Reply
post #77 of 83
2/5/13 at 6:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


This is a bigger deal than most people (even here) give Apple credit for. Those who are dissing Apple for the lack of innovation are failing to see how Apple is (once again) dragging the industry forward. Other smartphone manufacturers have been forced to match the Retina Display. Websites are (gradually) upgrading to be compatible, not to mention apps, etc.

Good point. They are going to drag everbody's video equipment forward also. High pixel density shows the flaws in the image, as well as the good when you get it.

The other big deal, if it happens, is that the iPad mini will have the first DITO IGZO HPD (High Pixel Density) screen. The DITO will bring the pixels closer to the glass, the IGZO will (maybe) make the moving images more responsive and vibrant, and the HPD will be made more obvious by the first two. We're going to need a new name or acronym for this new kind of screen.
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 83
2/5/13 at 8:50am
Originally Posted by cameronj

I'm deleting my account.

 

🎊🎉💥💫

Someone do me a favor and log into my account, change the password and email if you like.

 

Done and done. Left the e-mail, though, so we have it for reference. You'll be back. You can't resist. They never can.

 

Don't worry; you won't get subscription e-mails or anything.

Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
post #79 of 83
2/5/13 at 12:04pm
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
While Apple was criticized in some media outlets when the iPad mini debuted due to the lack a Retina-level display, the mini has seen strong sales in the months since its release. Supplies of the tablet have only recently begun to approach demand.

 

Yup.  There is zero pressure on Apple to release a Retina iPad mini.  Zero.

Having said that, I expect that Apple will release a Retina iPad mini sooner or later.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #80 of 83
2/5/13 at 4:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

🎊🎉💥💫

 

Done and done. Left the e-mail, though, so we have it for reference. You'll be back. You can't resist. They never can.

 

Don't worry; you won't get subscription e-mails or anything.

 

 

Am I the only one who sees 4 thick big squares there? Am I missing some plug in to display correctly pictures as it was the case sometimes on windows? I'm on a macbook pro 2011 10.6.8 safari 5.1.7...

Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumor: Apple's next iPad mini to pack 324ppi Retina display