back to article 7.85in 'iPad Mini' said to sport retina screen

The 7.85in iPad will sport a "retina" display after all, it has been claimed, but will still come in at $200-250 retail. We've heard rumours before that the so-called 'iPad Mini' will be cheaper than the current, 9.7in model, but thus far all such suggestions have come with the caveat that a low price will mean a low resolution …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge
WTF?

Not Plausible

The incremental cost of Flash is tiny compared to the gap in cost between a standard and a retina display with 4x the pixels.

I call BS.

3
0
JDX
Gold badge

Re: Not Plausible

More problematic in my view is fitting all that battery in the smaller casing.

2
0

Re: Not Plausible

The entire article is BS.

"Apple now has a retina iPod Touch, iPhone and iPad"

As far as I was aware the screen in the iPhone 4S and ipod touch has not changed since 2010 and is not retina.

0
3
JDX
Gold badge

Re: Not Plausible

So where exactly do you think the "retina display" brand used in iPad 3 came from if it isn't the iPhone or iPod? It was the iPhone which introduced the damn thing in the first place.

2
0
Silver badge

@tmTM

Dunno about the iPod touch but the iPhone 4 and 4S have had retina screens since summer 2010.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

"Pocket friendly"?! 8in is most definitely never going to be pocket friendly.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Is that an 8inch iPad in your pocket or........

3
0

If they make it a proper shape, i.e. 16:9 it will fit in most jacket and suit pockets.

1
4
Silver badge

I can just about slip a 7" Playbook into a large coat pocket but it sticks out the top. Not very practical but I've done it a few times.

I think that you would struggle to do that with an iPad because the 4:3 aspect ratio means it's going to be wider than the typical 16:9 or 16:10 format that other devices use. I'm assuming any mini iPad would still be 4:3 but I don't see Apple changing the aspect ratio given that it would screw up every iPad app in existence.

3
0
JDX
Gold badge

>>If they make it a proper shape, i.e. 16:9 it will fit in most jacket and suit pockets.

It also wouldn't be the same shape as a normal iPad so wouldn't have the same aspect ratio and would need a different resolution.

1
0
Thumb Down

Apple Rumours...

...once again... Zzzzzz....

0
0
Gold badge

Re: Apple Rumours...

Indeed. Very few turn out to be real. It's almost like Apple leaks out lots of fake information to confuse their rivals.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Apple Rumours...

Yes... but why would they leak specs that are better than the actual device (which is what the rumours are generally like)? That leads to disappointment with the actual product.

More likely it's their rivals leaking inflated specs so the device ends up disappointing, and hopefully a few punters look elsewhere.

1
1

Would be superb if they could sell it around 250, but i cant see that happening. Unless there is some other reduction in specs or functionality a massive number of buyers would go for the cheaper option over a full sized one, just to save 40-50% of the cost.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Complete bullshit

The entry level iPod Touch is almost $200... there is no way it's going to be this price on the off chance (snowball in hell) that this thing is even real.

1
0
Silver badge

I think they'll attempt to sell it at as close to iPad price as they can get away with. Apple devices are always cynically priced and designed such that people to "buy up" to the next level. That's why there are no memory expansion ports for example.

2
0

Re: Complete bullshit

I was dealing in GBP, not USD. 250 GBP = roughly 400 USD.

An 8GB iPod touch here is around 160.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Complete bullshit

Andrew,

You're forgetting VAT and other common yet unexplained markups. Most gadgets sell for roughly the same £ as they do $:

iPod Touch for £189

iPod Touch "Now starting at $199"

You can occasionally find one on clearance cheaper... sure - no disagreement there.

0
0

Re: Complete bullshit

No, actually, the iPod touch 8GB is widely available at around £160, supermarkets, Argos, etc. I dont think carphone warehouse should be the go-to place for anyone looking for anything, even a reasonably priced phone.

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Search/searchTerms/IPOD+TOUCH.htm

£155. Including VAT.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Complete bullshit

Ok... can we compare Apple to Apple list price to rule out any clearance deals or loss leaders?

£169 in UK

$199 in US

That gives an Apple list price ratio of 1.18 $/£. If my logic holds an my math is right... that would mean a list of £250 would translate to $295 which would put it more in the middle ground between a Touch ($199) and the entry level iPad 2 ($399).

That said, can we agree that the $200-$250 in the article is complete bullshit?

0
0
JDX
Gold badge

£250 is quite realistic if it is the iPad2 spec, given that iPad 2 is now under £300.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Why bother with random website rumours?

One thing is for certain though, it's display won't be pentile.

0
0
Trollface

Yawn

Lets just rename this joke of a website "www.applerumouroftheday.com"

Wheres the El Reg tombstone icon when you need it.

1
0

Possible, but doubtful

Well, the costs of high resolution displays scale more with size than with resolution, so this isn't totally impossible... Still, I doubt it. 1024x768 on 7.85" should be fine, the backlight uses much less battery (which makes the device not only cheaper again, but also thinner and lighter), you get better performance and the price (and margins!) surely would be much better compared to a retina display.

Honestly, I would instantly buy a cheap, light and thin 7.85" iPad with 1024x768. Should be great for ebooks and couch surfing.

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Possible, but doubtful

I expect a lot of people would want to buy one of these. They might even put off buying the rumoured Nexus tablet in case this rumour is true!

1
0
JDX
Gold badge

Re: Possible, but doubtful

Could be another vast surge of sales, I agree.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

I’d be very surprised. With big profit margins on the new iPad (which they can’t make fast enough), and the older iPad 2 fulfilling the cheaper segment, there’s no reason to release a smaller iPad.

It would also cannibalise sales from the iPhone 5. A slightly larger screen, which is likely, would also bridge the gap.

I’ve no doubt they’ve made a smaller iPad in their labs, but I don’t see it making the light of day to be honest.

0
0
Silver badge

>It would also cannibalise sales from the iPhone 5

Possibly, but on that logic there would be no iPod touch... I'm sure that Apple would find a way to to differentiate a small iPad from a large iPhone; no cellular radios in the budget iPad, for example.

Not sure what the point of a slightly smaller iPad would be, though... it still won't fit in a jacket pocket.

0
0
JDX
Gold badge

I could see lots of people buying a iPad mini who simply think a 10" is too big.

0
0

Are we really suggesting that a 5" screen on a phone would hamper the sales of an 8" tablet from the same manufacturer?

What on earth were Samsung thinking when they released the Galaxy Note?! They already have a 7" tablet ... why would anyone buy such a phone when its almost the same size as the tablet...

Oh, wait, thats right, one is a phone, the other isn't. That must be the difference. No?

0
0

Horsehit!

2048 x 1536 in a smaller screen for cheaper? Horeshit I say.

1
0
Silver badge
WTF?

So...

When most people with 16GB Ipad (3)'s are complaining that with the app upsizing due to the retina display, we're to believe that a smaller one with just 8GB makes sense (especially given it will no doubt be non-expandable)?

As noted above, flash memory is cheap (as chips) these days - see the current price of thumb drives in your local supermarket etc. So it would be a device that would struggle to store what most people would want it to, even with the reduced form factor.

Somehow I think Apple's marketting droids are more on the ball than that...

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: So...

Yes, 64GB micro sd is £45 at play.com

1
0

This will need to an inch thick to have a reasonable sized battery to power the screen .... and then there is the heat.

0
0

Please El Reg - Start giving dimensions in metric instead of old money - We've had metric for decades now!

2
2
Thumb Up

Pffft. Metric Shmetric.

El Reg units FTW.

1
1
Silver badge

Don't start...

... or else the Reg will switch to a strange unit of length, like milli-velociraptors.

But seriously, even here in the UK, diagonal screen measurements are almost always given in inches. It gives you the distance in one or two significant figures, and can be roughly estimated to your hand (fore-finger tip to thumb tip roughly equal to 6")

It's that it is applied to screens of differing aspect ratios that can confuse- often to a 16:9 laptop maker's advantage.

Beer: Imperial

Milk: Imperial (doorstep) or Metric (supermarket)

Cheese: Metric

Diamonds: Carats

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Don't start...

Even in mainland European countries, screen sizes are often in inches. Who knows why.

1
0

Re: Don't start...

Inertia. More than with many other things people don't care that much for the actual exact size of a screen, they just want to know how large or small it is compared to other screens they're familiar with.

Additionally screens happen to come in sizes that are nicely expressed in inches in somewhat comfortable and memorable (low) figures.

It's somehow strange but I'm comfortable with that.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

milli-velociraptors

I like it!

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Don't start...

Surely, they wouldn't change from the officialLDB length standard at this point.

Now then, the screen would be 1.42 linguine if it exists at all. That said, perhaps a new unit is called for to define resolution and it should be based on how many pixels occupy a given angle at a particular viewing distance along the lines of sub-pixels per steradian, SPPS for now. This should take into account whether a device is monochrome, color, hand held, wall mounted, etc. and be accompanied by suitable standards, such as SPPS3L which would be sub-pixels per steradian at 3 linguine or SPPS.5DDB which is measured at 1/2 a double-decker bus. Mind, I'm just spit balling, I'll leave the real details to the unit pros at El Reg.

1
0

@Dave 126 - Re: Don't start...

You forgot:

Carrots: Metric

0
0
Facepalm

No no no no no no....

It'll be ipad2 based... so the new shrunk processor, cooler and less power hungry, with old res screen, so no big power requirements, = smaller battery.

Essentially ipad (2) mini.

This will then of course also leave apple free to launch the new, improved model in classic apple fashion 6 months later so everyone can buy it again.

4
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: No no no no no no....

> classic apple fashion 6 months later

That wouldn't be classic Apple at all, since they operate a yearly refresh cycle for most of their products.

Are you living in some odd time frame or confusing with Apple with Samsung?

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Its a Big iPod Touch...

... and not a small iPad.

I mean, what what else can they do with the Touch?

0
0
Stop

It would seem far more sensible...

...for Apple to keep the non-retina resolution for this iPad Mini / iPod Touch-XL or whatever it is, if indeed it "is" at all. The pixel density will rise as the screen shrinks for the same number of pixels, so the display will of course look crisper and more retina-y anyway, and it should keep the cost under control, which I doubt would be possible on a 2048x1536, 7-8" screen.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums