I do not mean to be a dick, but I would rather have HD than a non HD screen. That is the major reason why I would never buy the mini. I am not saying I am buying the Fire either. Apple wants everybody to buy the new toy and then upgrade to the HD version in a year or less.
Yeah, retina or bust.
I just can't go back.
Still, I'm looking forward to inspecting this display out in store.
...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.
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.
"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..
"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..
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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".
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.
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
Comments
Heh heh!
Enjoy your ads, Kindle users. Until Amazon yanks your content, anyway...
Hey, we sold a zillion Kindles!
But we did not make any money though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
I love what imore.com did here:
They forgot to mention that "dual stereo speakers" is incoherent nonsense also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatthewGavin
I do not mean to be a dick, but I would rather have HD than a non HD screen. That is the major reason why I would never buy the mini. I am not saying I am buying the Fire either. Apple wants everybody to buy the new toy and then upgrade to the HD version in a year or less.
Yeah, retina or bust.
I just can't go back.
Still, I'm looking forward to inspecting this display out in store.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odditie
...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.
Crickey, the bezel on that Kindle Fire is HUGE!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges
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..
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges
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..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU
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...
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.
Originally Posted by AnalogJack
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".
That's easy to do with you sell 100 of them and then sell 300 of them the following week.
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.
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