Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iPad mini

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 358 posts

Re: iPad mini

#241

Post by mark_l_watson »

tharris0101 wrote: post #167
jpxxx wrote: post #138

There is no obvious reason this product isn't going to sell in huge quantities. Less conceptually fragile, less expensive, more portable, same software stack, same media stack, same OS, same UX, same premium experience, same monstrous manufacturing and distribution reach, same monstrous advertising and product awareness engine. Every single one of the children you see in restaurants working an iPad so mommy and daddy…

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'd never use this product but I'm sure it will do great. I've been really critical of Apple lately, but I can't find any reason to get upset over this announcement. I find it funny how people are railing against this announcement just because its not useful to them. There are a million different needs and uses out there for different people.

You triggered something: I have been wondering why Apple does not have iPads support multiple user accounts that are easy to switch between? With iCloud, it would seem reasonable for a family to have a min, a standard iPad, and perhaps a future "iPad whopper" (with perhaps a 14 inch screen). They could be left laying around the house and anyone could just pick up the appropriate device as-needed.

I can answer my own question: Apple doesn't want people to share these devices: fewer sales.

Re: iPad mini

#242

Post by niels_olson »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #230
diminish wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree mostly with the parent and see in iPad mini few minuses for Apple; (1) 7.9" is slightly big to fit in pockets, (2) the non-retina display, and low resolution is a step backwards, (3) The lower net profit per person, will drag down Apple margins.(Now having the Apple logo seeable in a cafe will cost you lower) (4) The loss of credibility in previous marketing claims of perfect size for fingers similar to th…

I think the 1024x768 screen resolution is probably a smart move: same as my old iPad 2, but smaller. Not retina display quality, but not adding a retina display allowed the iPad mini to be less than half the weight. That said, my Samsung Galaxy S III has 1280x720 resolution which makes it really nice for watching Netflix, TED videos, etc. And the Galaxy phone is very light weight. I have decided to not buy anymore Ap…

> not adding a retina display allowed the iPad mini to be less than half the weight

do the pixels weigh more? Seriously, would faster graphics weigh more? Or are you saying juicing the graphics would eat more battery, and therefore, it would weight more?

Re: iPad mini

#243

Post by sixothree »

netcan wrote: post #193
erichocean wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought a Nexus 7 for dev purposes, and I also use it more now than my iPad (3rd gen), mostly due to the size. It's a lot easier to hold for long periods of time. But truthfully, all the Nexus 7 really did was make me want an iPad mini, because the device itself is very frustrating. Reading a PDF? Half the screen is a garbly mess since only one page gets rendered nicely. Drives me nuts. Even Chrome (which runs plent…

My reaction was "I want a giant phone." I love reading with it and it's the perfect size to hold but it's an ironically poor size for typing. Too small to use with more than two fingers (like an ipad) and too big to type like a phone. Maybe the ipad mini's extra inch makes it a little more typing friendly (for people with smaller fingers).

For a phone I want the exact opposite. Give me an iPod Nano sized phone and I would be extremely happy.

Re: iPad mini

#244

Post by Samuel_Michon »

spot wrote: post #195
grecy wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't. It's exactly the same resolution as the original iPad and iPad 2

same resolution, scaled down by 20%. so if you designed a button to be as small as a finger for the ipad, it's now too small.

The tap targets on a 10" iPad are quite big, there was some room to shrink the screen without it hurting usability. Besides, the 7.9" screen size wasn't randomly picked:

The tap targets on an iPad mini are exactly the same size as they are on an iPhone or iPod touch (which also confirms that Apple is using the same equipment to produce the iPad mini screen panels as they used for the iPhone 3GS — they're just cutting the panels in a different size).

“I think there’s a method to Apple’s madness in recommending 44-point-or-larger tap targets for all iOS apps, both on the iPhone and iPad, despite the fact that on the iPad-as-we-know-it, each point is physically larger than a point on the iPhone or iPod Touch. (1 point maps directly to 1 pixel on iPad 1/2 and older iPhones; 1 point maps to a 4-pixel square on the iPad 3 and iPhone 4/4S.) A 44-point tap target on the rumored iPad Mini would be exactly the same physical size as a 44-point tap target on the iPhone.”

http://daringfireball.net/2012/07/this_ipad_mini_thing

Re: iPad mini

#245

Post by Adirael »

jpxxx wrote: post #146
jiggy2011 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody else could sell a product called iPad without getting sued.

Yeah, but customers don't know that. "iPad" is the Kleenex of tablets. The only reason the Galaxy Note gets a pass is because it's still mentally categorized as a big telephone.

Is it? I've never head any other than some very old people which doesn't know what a tablet or a computer is calling a random tablet an 'iPad'.

Re: iPad mini

#246

Post by bane »

Joeri wrote: post #95
AlexMuir wrote: post #19

How underwhelming. At 7.9 inches, it’s perfectly sized to deliver an experience every bit as big as iPad What does that even mean? Either it's perfectly sized, and the iPad is the wrong size. Or it's not. There can surely only be one perfect size to deliver an iPad experience??? Either it's 10" or it's 7.9". I think Apple's marketing has always been the same - it's just that for a while they were ahead of the curve a…

Underwhelming is the operative word. Apple's product iterations get more boring with each upgrade. Classic innovator's dilemma. The iDevice line-up sells too well to change the formula, but there's no wow factor anymore. I always figured at some point they would slap a proper navigation UI on the ipad (the icon grid offers a really poor ux), but i suspect they'll stick with evolutionary steps for years to come. I'm p…

It doesn't help that they are clearly playing follow the leader now too.

Bigger phone, smaller tablet...yawn.

Re: iPad mini

#247

Post by munchor »

hkmurakami wrote: post #233
jpxxx wrote: post #138

There is no obvious reason this product isn't going to sell in huge quantities. Less conceptually fragile, less expensive, more portable, same software stack, same media stack, same OS, same UX, same premium experience, same monstrous manufacturing and distribution reach, same monstrous advertising and product awareness engine. Every single one of the children you see in restaurants working an iPad so mommy and daddy…

With respect to digital textbooks, as someone who had to haul many American sized (read: Oversized) textbooks from class to class, from school to home, every day for 6 years during Junior High and High School, carrying around 1 iPad would have relieved my spine of great gravitational burden. For this reason alone, I truly hope that digital textbooks become viable.

But do you think school should be relying on iOS/Android/Kindle?

Should they use something new? I don't want governments to pay (even more?) bazillions to Apple or Samsung, but making their own will also come expensive.

Ideas?

Re: iPad mini

#248

Post by krrrh »

niels_olson wrote: post #242
mark_l_watson wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the 1024x768 screen resolution is probably a smart move: same as my old iPad 2, but smaller. Not retina display quality, but not adding a retina display allowed the iPad mini to be less than half the weight. That said, my Samsung Galaxy S III has 1280x720 resolution which makes it really nice for watching Netflix, TED videos, etc. And the Galaxy phone is very light weight. I have decided to not buy anymore Ap…

> not adding a retina display allowed the iPad mini to be less than half the weight do the pixels weigh more? Seriously, would faster graphics weigh more? Or are you saying juicing the graphics would eat more battery, and therefore, it would weight more?

Yes. The iPad 3 was significantly thicker and heavier than the iPad 2. It takes a larger battery to drive 4 times the pixels and maintain a 10 hour battery life.

Re: iPad mini

#249

Post by joahua »

hahainternet wrote: post #113
podperson wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same size an a Kindle Fire / Nexus 7, but lighter, with better battery life, a bigger display, better battery life, and a faster processor. Oh, and it's an iOS device so you can actually use it for something other than bragging about how cheap it was and propping up wobbly tables.

This is the type of low quality comment we should avoid on HN. Ignorant, prejudicial and irrelevant.

Oh, come on. As someone who's developed for both platforms, and worked with plenty of other devs (who ought to neither be ignorant nor prejudicial about the situation at hand as their job depends upon it) make quips of this sort all the time. Android is near-exclusively the target of their mirth.

This leaves irrelevance, perhaps, but given the context of this thread I'd argue it's not that either.

Re: iPad mini

#250

Post by sixothree »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #241
tharris0101 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'd never use this product but I'm sure it will do great. I've been really critical of Apple lately, but I can't find any reason to get upset over this announcement. I find it funny how people are railing against this announcement just because its not useful to them. There are a million different needs and uses out there for different people.

You triggered something: I have been wondering why Apple does not have iPads support multiple user accounts that are easy to switch between? With iCloud, it would seem reasonable for a family to have a min, a standard iPad, and perhaps a future "iPad whopper" (with perhaps a 14 inch screen). They could be left laying around the house and anyone could just pick up the appropriate device as-needed. I can answer my own…

I find not having user accounts drastically reduces how much the iPad gets used in my house. In my case, I'm sure this affects sales in the app store.
Post reply on HN