Review: Apple's second-generation iPad mini with Retina display

135678

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 148
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,365member
    rogifan wrote: »
    How in the world are they coming up with revenue figures for android devices? I don't trust IDC because we don't know how they arrive at the numbers they do, and it's been proven that they restate numbers for prior quarters. To me that just shows they're pulling numbers out of their ass, making things up as they go along. They may have some sophisticated tool that spits out all these numbers but if they're putting garbage in they're just going to get garbage out. The fact is only Apple reports quarterly shipment and revenue data. Android is just one big, fat guess. And is it really fair to compare ONE company to dozens of others?
    Agree with pretty much everything you said except that they probably have a fair more data sources than simply pulling it out of their nether-region
  • Reply 42 of 148
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    flaneur wrote: »
    I would challenge that term "concept build." It looks to me like Google is more focused on sabotaging Apple's pricing by selling these orphaned tablets of theirs at no profit or at a loss. It gives the wankers a point of leverage when they allege that Apple stuff is overpriced, or that their memory bumps are overpriced.

    Google. Trying so hard not to be evil.

    Google makes its money off advertising. As long as it has your eyeballs that's all it cares about. The Verge ran a story the other day about supposedly only 500K Moto X phones being sold. Yet Wall Street doesn't seem to care one bit and are now pimping the cheaper Moto G as Motorola's savior and iPhone killer. There is zero point in comparing Apple and Google as their business models are completely different. Google makes money off advertising, Apple off hardware. A lot of analysts are saying Apple needs to go low end to capture market share. Personally I think that would be a disaster. I think Apple needs to stay high end but just make their experience that much better so they can show you get what you pay for. Let all these Android OEM's get in to a race to the bottom. Fandroids might like it now, but how will they like it when outside of China, Samsung is the only game in town? That's when they'll rue the day they cheered on this race to the bottom.
  • Reply 43 of 148
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    Agree with pretty much everything you said except that they probably have a fair more data sources than simply pulling it out of their nether-region
    I think curious to know what those data sources are. Are they getting data from carriers or resellers? Are the OEM's supplying them stuff? And even if their numbers are accurate what does it really tell us? It tells us nothing about actual usage statistics, paid app downloads, etc. I work for a very large health insurance company and our focus has always been on profitable market share whereas some or our competitors focus purely on lowest rates to get more members and it ends up biting them in the arse as the blocks of business they get are more unhealthy and not as profitable. Might not be the greatest analogy but to me this obsession by Wall Street and others on market share is nonsensical, especially when we don't know how accurate the data is and we don't have accurate usage statistics.
  • Reply 44 of 148
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,365member
    rogifan wrote: »
    I think curious to know what those data sources are.... I work for a very large health insurance company.

    Whoa, talk about sourcing data!! Insurance companies of all types dig in areas way more invasively and link more personally identifiable information than any internet advertising company does. Sorry for the distraction.

    Here's what IDC says they consider in their reports:
    http://www.idc.com/about/methodology.jsp
  • Reply 45 of 148
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    To be fair Android devices with less-accurate colors than similar Apple devices get severely dinged for it despite your observation that the vast majority of users don't see an issue. If's it's a honest problem for one then why wouldn't it be an honest problem when it happens to the other?

    It's an honest problem for any manufacturer that strives to be the best, it seems to me. I'm sure it pains a bunch of people at Apple that these LG displays aren't totally there, and I imagine they have Sharp, Samsung, LG and who knows else working on it full speed.

    The complaints I remember about screens from other manufacturers are a bit different. It was really obvious when OLED screens were bleeding from oversaturation, and obvious also when inferior TN or whatever panels had narrow viewing angles and truly washed-out colors. But both these problems were really obvious. The mini's borderline gamut performance is not really obvious—until you set it next to an Air, or until you train your eyes and brain to see like a colorist. Otherwise, it's not a deal breaker, as the Americans say. The other instances I mentioned were deal breakers.
  • Reply 46 of 148
    After writing code of a Kindle Fire HD for a week, all I can say is that Android is junk. The developer tools are amateur at best and the OS has no finesse.
  • Reply 47 of 148
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,365member
    flaneur wrote: »
    It's an honest problem for any manufacturer that strives to be the best, it seems to me. I'm sure it pains a bunch of people at Apple that these LG displays aren't totally there, and I imagine they have Sharp, Samsung, LG and who knows else working on it full speed

    Thanks for that. I think you may be saying that some of the display complaints on non-Apple devices voiced here may be overblown as users probably don't see their display as inferior particularly on newer mobile devices. Back in the day there were some bad ones I agree. Nowadays displays perceived as excellent are more the norm no matter who the manufacturer is.
  • Reply 48 of 148
    shompashompa Posts: 343member
    Why can't Apple just let me rent all their stuff?
    "You can have the latest iPad. Always. Just 49 dollar/month".


    Just switching iPhone/iPad each year sets me back 2000 dollars (EU taxes).
    And I have to switch. Steve will be angry at me if I don't buy the latest.
  • Reply 49 of 148
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,365member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Total BS.

    You can't jump lump all those tablets together.  That's like comparing 40 inch TV prices with 55 inch TV's.  Because both are sized to hang on a wall.  Bigger displays (all other things equal) cost more. PERIOD.  So comparing a Mini to a Kindle that is 30% smaller is STUPID.

    Small - Kindle HDX 7, Nexus 7, Galaxy 7 ($230-$250)
    Medium -  iPadMini($299-$399), Galaxy tab8 ($399), Kindle HDX8.9 ($394)
    Full Size - iPadAir ($499), Nexus10 ($499) Galaxy10 ($549)

    I own both a Kindle and iPad.  The size difference is massive

    Sog, you're still fudging to make comparative pricing look more less favorable for non-Apple tablets. The most likely reason to do so IMO is that is you find the Apple price out-of-line just as a couple of others claim. For instance the $499 price you've tagged the Nexus 10 with is the 32GB version while the "same price" you tried to sneak in for the Air is for the most basic 16GB version. I haven't the slightest idea what Galaxy Tab you're pricing at $549 either.

    If you're going to claim anger when others are making what you feel are unfair device comparisons you come off looking pretty disingenuous when you do the same thing.
  • Reply 50 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    Total BS.

     

    You can't jump lump all those tablets together.  That's like comparing 40 inch TV prices with 55 inch TV's.  Because both are sized to hang on a wall.  Bigger displays (all other things equal) cost more. PERIOD.  So comparing a Mini to a Kindle that is 30% smaller is STUPID.

     

    Small - Kindle HDX 7, Nexus 7, Galaxy 7 ($230-$250)

    Medium -  iPadMini($299-$399), Galaxy tab8 ($399), Kindle HDX8.9 ($394)

    Full Size - iPadAir ($499), Nexus10 ($499) Galaxy10 ($549)

     

    I own both a Kindle and iPad.  The size difference is massive


    You can put the Ipad mini in a "medium" category and that's probably where it best fits. But it doesn't belong with the 10 inch tablets since its raison d'être, at least according to Phil Schiller when he introduced the product, is one-handed use:

    Quote:

     


    "But what can you do with an iPad mini that you can't already do with the amazing 4th generation iPad? Well this, you can hold it in one hand [shows slide of someone palming an iPad mini]" 

     



    (Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=fYPn2vQIzxc&t=227. This video starts at the relevant quote.)

  • Reply 51 of 148

    thnk for review!

  • Reply 52 of 148
    gatorguy wrote: »
    No you're way less than clear. So is that an acknowledgement that some new Apple devices have inferior displays but it's of no importance because they're from Apple or is it that color-accuracy and/or brightness is given too much importance in the first place because no one notices no matter who makes the device?

    I've never seen any of these live side-by-side so whether common-guy notices any display quality differences I dunno. Have you?

    Technically inferior as in ranking slightly lower on certain specs? Sure, but you need to acknowledge every other aspect of the device since a single component spec does not a good user experience make.

    This is the same theme we've seen with Apple v Everyone Else for as long as Apple has existed. Apple creates a way to mass produce something at a scale no one thought possible then other follow only to try to one-up Apple and all other competitors. Let's go back to 2010 when Apple released the iPhone 4 with the Retina display. The anti-Apple crowd said it was pointless and yet Apple did it and it was great while still allowing great battery life. Nearly 2 years later we saw others. Some were very close to the PPI (310 v. 326 for the iPhone makes them technically inferior but still on par for the objective crowd). And some went into the 400+ PPI with horrible battery life which is not good design.

    Does going over 300 PPI on Nexus 10 make it a better experience simply because the PPI is technically higher? What about the battery life? What about the brightness which is affected for a given backlight with denser pixels? What about the GPU being able to push that make pixels? Apple created a specialized chip with a huge memory bus which I seem to recall AnandTech saying hasn't been matched which is odd considering that there are tablets now with a lot more pixels on them.

    The user experience is the key, not comparing raw specs without consider the user experience.

    In the case of the new iPads not having the display attached to the glass does affect it in a way that could very well be perceptible, especially in direct sunlight, compared to the Kindle Fire HDX, but with the Nexus 10 do you think you could pass a test from normal viewing distance where you were shown a screenshot from a video or text on a web page where only a 2x2 inch of the display was visible? I'm not sure most could.

    So keep your technically better in a couple one-to-one spec shootouts and I'll focus on what is the best overall user experience.
  • Reply 53 of 148
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,365member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Fudging my azz. 

    Yes the Nexus10 may have more GB but the iPad has a faster chip, better screen, ect.  I'm just using starting price.

    The Galaxy Note 10 starts at $549.  That's Samsungs premium large tablet.  You want to bring up the Galaxy Tab10?  Fine then I'll bring the iPad2 for $399.  Both have non-retina screens and 3 year old CPU's.  No serious tablet buyer will even consider the horrible Tab10 1280x800 screen.  No way in fuk can you compare it to the iPadAir 2048x1536 and A7 blazer.

    Yes fudging. The Nexus 10 starts at $399 which gets you 16GB, not a base price of $499 that you stubbornly try to cling to tho from researching it you already know better.

    Since you now clarified you really wanted to use the Galaxy Note 10.1 (more ram and higher res than the Air but probably worse overall) for price comparison purposes it's base price is quoted as $549 for the 16GB, $50 more for 32. Kinda like seeing Apple beat Sammy at their own game.

    But you're the one choosing base price as the comparable. There's a few other quality tablets whose base models handily beat Apple pricing. Just pay a visit to Amazon. You wanna now throw in the overall device experience to explain away the price differences then it's certainly legitimate to do so but that's not what you've been arguing up until now. If you were making up prices to fit your storyline it was a bad decision on your part, particularly when it makes you upset when you believe others are dishonestly stooping to it.
  • Reply 54 of 148
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by timmillea View Post



    I disagree that the 1st generation iPad Mini is difficult to recommend.



    1) It is still an iPad that can run all iPad apps;

    2) It is lighter and thinner (albeit marginally) than the 2nd generation iPad Mini;

    3) It costs significantly less than the 2nd generation iPad Mini after the recent price cut;

    4) If you have less than stellar near-sight vision there is little benefit of the increased resolution.



    I find the 1st gen iPad Mini very easy to recommend.



    And 5) It comes with several free productivity apps from Apple.

  • Reply 55 of 148
    Why is that when Apple does something extraordinary like add 4x the number of pixels it's considered overkill that is solely for marketing but when some other vendor ekes past Apple after a couple years it's somehow proof that Apple sucks?
  • Reply 56 of 148
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post



    I do wish Apple would price the memory jumps in $50 increments rather then $100.



    This is one of the biggest mistakes Apple made in positioning iPad.  iPads have much bigger screen than iPhones.  They are more suitable for productivity.  With productivity one generally needs more memory.  Apple is steering many productivity users away from iPads. 

  • Reply 57 of 148
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,365member
    sog35 wrote: »
    BS.  Apple owns 80% of the $700+ tablet market

    Of course they do. They probably have 80% of the models priced higher than $700 don't they?
  • Reply 58 of 148
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,365member
    sog35 wrote: »
    okay I was wrong about the Nexus10 starts at $399.   Sorry I don't follow closely crap tablets and their prices.

    My other points still stand.  Apple products are not that much more expensive if you compare simular sized devices.  And this is amazing since Apple has the highest resale BY FAR, best build quality, best CPU, best eco-system, and best customer service.

    My big gripe was comparing Nexus7/HDX7 to iPadMini.  That's stupid.  30% bigger screen is a HUGE difference.

    Fair enough.
  • Reply 59 of 148
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by OtakuFlyer View Post



    As much as I like the mini format I was sold by the reduced weight of the Air

    That's the surprise I found for myself as well. Fully expected to choose the new mini and yet the Air was just too superior a fit for my uses.

  • Reply 60 of 148
    tzeshantzeshan Posts: 2,351member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    BS.  Apple owns 80% of the $700+ tablet market




    The problem is the iPads are not growing because after four years they still serve the same purpose.

Sign In or Register to comment.