I don't care about ppi I care about what my eyes see on the screen. If Apple can build a device that has lower ppi but is visually equal or better than what's already out there than great. We already have that with iPhone 5 don't we? The S3, One X and Lumia 920 all have more ppi but iPhone 5 display is equal to or superior to all of them.
1) So now you're saying that Apple can use a lower PPI and offer a better user experience? Let me refresh what you have said previously, "You keep bringing up user experience. Well let me tell you as a user of an iPad the quality of the display is something I care about and I would consider that part of a superior user experience. In my opinion for a smaller iPad to be competitive (especially since there's a 99% chance it will be more expensive than Fire or Nexus 7) it has to have an equal or better display." Sure seems like you care about the raw specs over the user experience to me.
2) S3 as in the Samsung Galaxy SIII with the PenTile display with the RGBG subpixel layout? That's what you classify as superior?
And you're forgetting the "expectation of quality" market.
All the ones you've listed are either nonexistent or can be filled by the iPad as it is.
You're right, I was forgetting about that expectation-of-quality market, which is us, who have had that category calibrated to newest iPhones and retina iPads and now retina Macbooks.. But this is not for them—us—it's for the people whom Eddy Cue saw would like this size.
So this device category is about "form factor." Apple is selling a size as their first feature, again. They've done it before with iPods. This time they are following someone else's first cheap exploitation of the size-market (out of tablet and ecosystem competition with Apple, notice). These first exploiters whom Apple is following became the bar-setters when it comes to price--Amazon and now Google—but that's not a bad thing for the intended mark—er, market—parents and "educators." The predicted market, that is.
No one knows how they'll sell this one, just like no one saw what the first iPad, the first cheap and usable, slick touch tablet, was before they defined it in their design and marketing. So marketing has become visible as part of the design process, and that means screens will now be calibrated to levels like Baby's First Screen for marketing (through device design) reasons. This is probably the Dick and Jane, first-reader screen.
But then there's the world-dominating Chinese market, which values small and artfully desgined devices, combined with the unspec-conscious but jewel-conscious aesthetic/utilitarian market. People will carry this as a note pad, fact-checker and reader, along with their phone, where they wouldn't carry an iPad: to dinner, to the Academy Awards, to the stupid game, the conference, where they would be embarrassed or afraid to carry an iPad for fear of leaving it at the table or the bar or the condiments counter at Starbucks.
They will make it jewel-like by comparison with the competition, watch. Game over. The size category is co-opted by precision case-making and its equivalent in software. It's all in the case and the software and the competence in connectivity at this point. The screen brilliance that comes as such a cost before the tooling for the size is paid for will have to wait. I wish not, but I expect it's true, It's about size and price and competence and tactile quality this time around, like with the first iPod in 2001. Or so it seems to me.
2) S3 as in the Samsung Galaxy SIII with the PenTile display with the RGBG subpixel layout? That's what you classify as superior?
Um, did I not say that I thought the iPhone 5 display was equal or superior? For me display quality is part of the user experience. When I first got my new iPad the Nook app wasn't updated for retina. Reading books on it was a real pain. But once they upgraded their app it was a far superior experience.
Um, did I not say that I thought the iPhone 5 display was equal or superior? For me display quality is part of the user experience. When I first got my new iPad the Nook app wasn't updated for retina. Reading books on it was a real pain. But once they upgraded their app it was a far superior experience.
That's what you think is EQUAL TO the iPhone 5 display?!
That's what you think is EQUAL TO the iPhone 5 display?!
I think there's a lot of arguing over a few very good displays that I don't see actual users complaining about. The recent HTC OneX, Samsung S3, Galaxy Nexus, iPhone 5, and Moto Razr HD all get high marks for display quality if you look at user reviews. Even techie sites like Anandtech don't badmouth any of those. I don't think most users of those include the display in their list of device complaints.
Personally I see a bit too much spec-tossing being used to prove one is better than another for everyday users. Just my 2 cents.
I think there's a lot of arguing over a few very good displays that I don't see actual users complaining about. The recent HTC OneX, Samsung S3, Galaxy Nexus, iPhone 5, and Moto Razr HD all get high marks for display quality if you look at user reviews. Even techie sites like Anandtech don't badmouth any of those. I don't think most users of those include the display in their list of device complaints.
Personally I see a bit too much spec-tossing being used to prove one is better than another for everyday users. Just my 2 cents.
The comment wasn't that thy are good enough, it was specify about being equal to or superior. And in this case about 163 PPI display not being good enough for a budget iPad.
Note, I've made more than a few positive comments about PenTile being a clever low cost and low power option.
As for bad mouthing other products we see a lot of non-Apple products getting a pass on clearly inferior features and user experience for what can only be described as a pity review while any slight on an Ape product becomes a major issue. Lens flare? Seriously? We're now suppose to believe that never existed before the iPhone 5?
The comment wasn't that thy are good enough, it was specify about being equal to or superior. And in this case about 163 PPI display not being good enough for a budget iPad.
I've no doubt that Apple has taken price point, component costs, acceptable profit margin, target market and user experience into account, and the new iPad mini will reflect that.
*I've got a marketing piece to work on in the morning, so I'm just getting in the mindset.
There is noting about the iPad mini rumours that are geared toward it being "more" than the iPad (3) in any way. I know we all want Apple to release something groundbreaking every day but they simply can't. Sometimes it's about releasing something smaller, cheaper, and simpler to capture the lower end of the market once the tech and saturation make it viable. As previously noted, we've seen them do this with the iPod line up.
Yes, yes & yes!
I have no idea why Rogifan and others are so passionate about the iPad Mini having to be a ground-breaking superior device...to a point where it just doesn't make good business sense.
Let's be clear, the iPad Mini WILL BE better than the Nexus 7 & Kindle Fire. It will be priced just more than Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire to upsell that market and to prevent substantial traction of competitors. It won't be as good as the iPad 3 (base specs, anyway).
But in the view of Apple, Apple marketing, and the general consumer, the iPad Mini will be "superior" than the competition (at the same size/price points).
Um, did I not say that I thought the iPhone 5 display was equal or superior? For me display quality is part of the user experience. When I first got my new iPad the Nook app wasn't updated for retina. Reading books on it was a real pain. But once they upgraded their app it was a far superior experience.
the judgment is really based on the user's preference
Comments
1) So now you're saying that Apple can use a lower PPI and offer a better user experience? Let me refresh what you have said previously, "You keep bringing up user experience. Well let me tell you as a user of an iPad the quality of the display is something I care about and I would consider that part of a superior user experience. In my opinion for a smaller iPad to be competitive (especially since there's a 99% chance it will be more expensive than Fire or Nexus 7) it has to have an equal or better display." Sure seems like you care about the raw specs over the user experience to me.
2) S3 as in the Samsung Galaxy SIII with the PenTile display with the RGBG subpixel layout? That's what you classify as superior?
You're right, I was forgetting about that expectation-of-quality market, which is us, who have had that category calibrated to newest iPhones and retina iPads and now retina Macbooks.. But this is not for them—us—it's for the people whom Eddy Cue saw would like this size.
So this device category is about "form factor." Apple is selling a size as their first feature, again. They've done it before with iPods. This time they are following someone else's first cheap exploitation of the size-market (out of tablet and ecosystem competition with Apple, notice). These first exploiters whom Apple is following became the bar-setters when it comes to price--Amazon and now Google—but that's not a bad thing for the intended mark—er, market—parents and "educators." The predicted market, that is.
No one knows how they'll sell this one, just like no one saw what the first iPad, the first cheap and usable, slick touch tablet, was before they defined it in their design and marketing. So marketing has become visible as part of the design process, and that means screens will now be calibrated to levels like Baby's First Screen for marketing (through device design) reasons. This is probably the Dick and Jane, first-reader screen.
But then there's the world-dominating Chinese market, which values small and artfully desgined devices, combined with the unspec-conscious but jewel-conscious aesthetic/utilitarian market. People will carry this as a note pad, fact-checker and reader, along with their phone, where they wouldn't carry an iPad: to dinner, to the Academy Awards, to the stupid game, the conference, where they would be embarrassed or afraid to carry an iPad for fear of leaving it at the table or the bar or the condiments counter at Starbucks.
They will make it jewel-like by comparison with the competition, watch. Game over. The size category is co-opted by precision case-making and its equivalent in software. It's all in the case and the software and the competence in connectivity at this point. The screen brilliance that comes as such a cost before the tooling for the size is paid for will have to wait. I wish not, but I expect it's true, It's about size and price and competence and tactile quality this time around, like with the first iPod in 2001. Or so it seems to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaNorse
Anything with a smaller screen then a iPad would be a pain to read on.
You need magnifier glass for sure
Um, did I not say that I thought the iPhone 5 display was equal or superior? For me display quality is part of the user experience. When I first got my new iPad the Nook app wasn't updated for retina. Reading books on it was a real pain. But once they upgraded their app it was a far superior experience.
That's what you think is EQUAL TO the iPhone 5 display?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That's what you think is EQUAL TO the iPhone 5 display?!
I think there's a lot of arguing over a few very good displays that I don't see actual users complaining about. The recent HTC OneX, Samsung S3, Galaxy Nexus, iPhone 5, and Moto Razr HD all get high marks for display quality if you look at user reviews. Even techie sites like Anandtech don't badmouth any of those. I don't think most users of those include the display in their list of device complaints.
Personally I see a bit too much spec-tossing being used to prove one is better than another for everyday users. Just my 2 cents.
The comment wasn't that thy are good enough, it was specify about being equal to or superior. And in this case about 163 PPI display not being good enough for a budget iPad.
Note, I've made more than a few positive comments about PenTile being a clever low cost and low power option.
As for bad mouthing other products we see a lot of non-Apple products getting a pass on clearly inferior features and user experience for what can only be described as a pity review while any slight on an Ape product becomes a major issue. Lens flare? Seriously? We're now suppose to believe that never existed before the iPhone 5?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
The comment wasn't that thy are good enough, it was specify about being equal to or superior. And in this case about 163 PPI display not being good enough for a budget iPad.
I've no doubt that Apple has taken price point, component costs, acceptable profit margin, target market and user experience into account, and the new iPad mini will reflect that.
*I've got a marketing piece to work on in the morning, so I'm just getting in the mindset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
There is noting about the iPad mini rumours that are geared toward it being "more" than the iPad (3) in any way. I know we all want Apple to release something groundbreaking every day but they simply can't. Sometimes it's about releasing something smaller, cheaper, and simpler to capture the lower end of the market once the tech and saturation make it viable. As previously noted, we've seen them do this with the iPod line up.
Yes, yes & yes!
I have no idea why Rogifan and others are so passionate about the iPad Mini having to be a ground-breaking superior device...to a point where it just doesn't make good business sense.
Let's be clear, the iPad Mini WILL BE better than the Nexus 7 & Kindle Fire. It will be priced just more than Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire to upsell that market and to prevent substantial traction of competitors. It won't be as good as the iPad 3 (base specs, anyway).
But in the view of Apple, Apple marketing, and the general consumer, the iPad Mini will be "superior" than the competition (at the same size/price points).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
Trust Spam to think of this. You're a genius, on par with the likes of... me :P
What handheld device I'd love from Apple more than anything is an e-ink reader.
Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing what Apple could do with some kind of e-ink product.
the judgment is really based on the user's preference