iPad mini iPad mini reviews: screen leaves something to be desired

[53x12]

The screen might be the most important aspect for me as that is some tangible that you interact with and use every time you pick up the iPad. Poor screen quality can result in a less than ideal experience. It is all about the experience anyways, right?

If we are honest with ourselves, the iPad mini should have come with the retina display from the beginning. But as we know, this opens it up for Apple to throw in the retina display next year.

A few reviews are even mentioning the screen of the iPad mini being it's biggest negative spec.

Jay Yarow:

For the last two years it's been telling the world how important it is to have a super sharp display. And now, it apparently isn't that important.

The reason Apple skipped the Retina display for the iPad mini is because it would have been too expensive and it would have drained the battery.

However, Apple has also conditioned us to believe it can do the impossible. So, excuses about price and battery feel like just that — excuses.

Therefore, the lack of a Retina display is a let down. (It also leads us to believe people should hold off on the iPad mini for a year under the assumption Apple will add Retina in the next model.)

The early reviews of the iPad minis are largely positive, but there's one common complaint. The screen is wanting.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ipad-minis-screen-2012-10#ixzz2At0mtjXo

MG Siegler:

While we’re on the subject of the screen, let’s not beat around the bush — if there is a weakness of this device, it’s the screen. But that statement comes with a very big asterisk. As someone who is used to a “retina” display on my phone, tablet, and even now computer, the downgrade to a non-retina display is quite noticeable. This goes away over time as you use the iPad mini non-stop, but if you switch back a retina screen, it’s jarring.

That’s not to say the iPad mini screen is bad — it’s not by any stretch of the word. It’s just not retina-level. At 163 pixels per inch, it’s actually quite a bit better than the iPad 2 screen (the last non-retina iPad), but you really can’t compare it to a retina display.


Read more: http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/30/ipad-mini-review/

Walt Mossberg:

...unlike its closest competitors, the Mini can’t play video in high definition. Apple insists the device does better than standard definition, if you are obtaining the video from its iTunes service, since iTunes scales the video for the device, so it will render somewhere between standard definition and HD. It says some other services will do the same. But the lack of true HD gives the Nexus and Fire HD an advantage for video fans.

Read more: http://allthingsd.com/20121030/sizing-up-the-new-ipad-mini/

Joshua Topolsky:

There's no question that to the naked eye this screen does look lower in resolution than its nearest competition. Pixels are noticeable, especially in webpages, books, and when viewing email — and that can be distracting sometimes. Since Apple is the company that's gotten our eyes used to the hey-look-no-pixels trick of the Retina display, it's hard to take a step back and not notice. I don't think the lower resolution is a deal-breaker in this product, but it is a compromise you have to be aware of. It simply doesn't look as clear as other products on the market.

Read more: http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/30/3576178/apple-ipad-mini-review

David Pogue:

Sadly, the Mini doesn’t gain Apple’s supercrisp Retina display. Nobody’s going to complain about the sharpness — it packs in 163 pixels per inch (ppi) — but it’s not the same jaw-dropping resolution as the big iPad (264 ppi). Gotta hold something back for next year’s model, right?

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/t...dows-phone-8-review.html?ref=technology&_r=1&

CNET:

But oh, that screen. It's not bad, not at all, but it's not Retina Display. It's not even as high-res as other 7-inch tablets. If you're an obsessive over crisp text, you'll notice the fuzziness. If you're comparing the Mini to a laptop, you won't. I wanted that display to be as good as the one on the iPhone 5, iPod Touch, and Retina iPad. It isn't, not now. It mars the product for me, because otherwise, the screen size and its aspect ratio is perfect for handling comics, magazines, and reading apps.

Read more: http://reviews.cnet.com/ipad-mini/

Is the screen a deal breaker? Guess each of us will have to make that decision our selves after some use. But a small device that you will hold 6-8in from your face, those little pixels could very well be a deal breaker. YMMV.

 

[monaarts]

The screen might be the most important aspect for me as that is some tangible that you interact with and use every time you pick up the iPad. Poor screen quality can result in a less than ideal experience. It is all about the experience anyways, right?

If we are honest with ourselves, the iPad mini should have come with the retina display from the beginning. But as we know, this opens it up for Apple to throw in the retina display next year.

A few reviews are even mentioning the screen of the iPad mini being it's biggest negative spec.

Is the screen a deal breaker? Guess each of us will have to make that decision our selves after some use. But a small device that you will hold 6-8in from your face, those little pixels could very well be a deal breaker. YMMV.

Considering all of these reviews gave it great scores overall and just made a comment on the scren, I would say no. Most reviews I am reading actually mention that the iPad mini is the best iPad yet, overall.

 

[dmelgar]

Considering all of these reviews gave it great scores overall and just made a comment on the scren, I would say no. Most reviews I am reading actually mention that the iPad mini is the best iPad yet, overall.

True.
Which is why I'm amazed at the BGR headline that proclaims all the reviews say the screen is awful whie overlooking that the reviews say its an amazing device. So much for being a paid shill as fandroids will say.

 

[Peanut207]

Which is why I'm also holding onto my iPad 3. If the difference is that noticeable or bothers me in the slightest I will just return it and wait for the mini with Retina that will most likely be included in the next version. No biggie.

 

[jedolley]

The screen was never a deal breaker for the iPad 1 or 2, so I don't see why it would be here.

 

[53x12]

Considering all of these reviews gave it great scores overall and just made a comment on the scren, I would say no. Most reviews I am reading actually mention that the iPad mini is the best iPad yet, overall.

For many going to the iPad mini, they are coming from an iPhone4/4S/5 and/or iPad3 and/or MBP RD. Those that spend a lot of time reading emails, books, magazine, journal articles...etc. on the iPad mini might have an issue with the blurry/fuzzy/less that optimal/less than perfect screen.

Apple is all about designing and selling the best product bar none. Not sure sure they hit the mark on the screen. After all, the screen is what you are interact with the whole time. YMMV.

The screen was never a deal breaker for the iPad 1 or 2, so I don't see why it would be here.

The issue is that Apple has now set the standard with the iPhone4/4S/5 and/or iPad3 and/or MBP RD. That is what people are use to. When iPad 1 came out there was no RD. With iPad 2, there was no RD except for the iPhone 4. The iPad2 represented the best screen in a tablet at the time.

 

[monaarts]

True.
Which is why I'm amazed at the BGR headline that proclaims all the reviews say the screen is awful whie overlooking that the reviews say its an amazing device. So much for being a paid shill as fandroids will say.

BGR: "...but the screen is “terrible” compared to Apple’s Retina displays, but not that bad for those coming from an iPad 2 or the original model."

I read this think "...but the mercedes S500 is "terrible" compared to Lambourghini's Gollardo, but not bad for thise coming from a Honda or Toyota"

 

[darngooddesign]

...Is the screen a deal breaker? Guess each of us will have to make that decision our selves after some use. But a small device that you will hold 6-8in from your face, those little pixels could very well be a deal breaker. YMMV.

It really is subjective, but I have never held my iPad 2 6-8 inches from my face. Using a piece of paper (8 1/2" x 11"), the minimum distance I hold my iPhone is 9" and the minimunm I hold my ipad is 14". Now that's the minimum, usually I hold my iPhone and iPad 12" and 18" respectively.

 

[advan031]

When I moved from the iPad 2 to iPad 3 while I noticed the difference in ppi, I would have been fine with the iPad 2 screen. Who cares about HD video on such a small device? It's not a 50" HD tv we're talking about here.

 

[jedolley]

For many going to the iPad mini, they are coming from an iPhone4/4S/5 and/or iPad3 and/or MBP RD. Those that spend a lot of time reading emails, books, magazine, journal articles...etc. on the iPad mini might have an issue with the blurry/fuzzy/less that optimal/less than perfect screen.

Apple is all about designing and selling the best product bar none. Not sure sure they hit the mark on the screen. After all, the screen is what you are interact with the whole time. YMMV.




The issue is that Apple has now set the standard with the iPhone4/4S/5 and/or iPad3 and/or MBP RD. That is what people are use to. When iPad 1 came out there was no RD. With iPad 2, there was no RD except for the iPhone 4. The iPad2 represented the best screen in a tablet at the time.

I get that. However, a lot of the reviewers have also commented that it's still a beautiful display, even better than the iPad 2. I get that most a lot of us are spoiled by Retina displays, but being non-retina doesn't automatically make it ugly, unbearable, or even unusable. When the iPad 3 was released the iPad 2 stayed around because it was (still is) a great device. The mini probably should be cheaper, but being non-retina will not make it a bad device.

 

[drew0020]

When I moved from the iPad 2 to iPad 3 while I noticed the difference in ppi, I would have been fine with the iPad 2 screen. Who cares about HD video on such a small device? It's not a 50" HD tv we're talking about here.

I thought the iPad 2 screen was terrible. The pixels were clearly obvious to me during almost all my usage. After reading the mini reviews I expect the same results unfortunately. Luckily for some people on here they can't tell a difference but for me it sounds like I'm waiting till next year for a mini.

 

[Yr Blues]

not plunking $329+ on something that apple should have pushed out with retina

i'll wait

 

[darngooddesign]

...Luckily for some people on here they can't tell a difference but for me it sounds like I'm waiting till next year for a mini.

Or they can tell but it doesn't bother them.

 

[rockyroad55]

I get that. However, a lot of the reviewers have also commented that it's still a beautiful display, even better than the iPad 2. I get that most a lot of us are spoiled by Retina displays, but being non-retina doesn't automatically make it ugly, unbearable, or even unusable. When the iPad 3 was released the iPad 2 stayed around because it was (still is) a great device. The mini probably should be cheaper, but being non-retina will not make it a bad device.

Exactly, it's so portable yet it has the power of an iPad. That's the selling point and that's making me think about getting rid of my iPad 3 for it.

 

[53x12]

When I moved from the iPad 2 to iPad 3 while I noticed the difference in ppi, I would have been fine with the iPad 2 screen. Who cares about HD video on such a small device? It's not a 50" HD tv we're talking about here.

So we care about HD video/RD on an iPhone 4/4S/5 and even an iPad 3, but yet we don't care about it on an iPad mini? So which is it, we do care about RD or we don't?

I get that. However, a lot of the reviewers have also commented that it's still a beautiful display, even better than the iPad 2. I get that most a lot of us are spoiled by Retina displays, but being non-retina doesn't automatically make it ugly, unbearable, or even unusable. When the iPad 3 was released the iPad 2 stayed around because it was (still is) a great device. The mini probably should be cheaper, but being non-retina will not make it a bad device.

There are many that care about the quality of the screen. Those that might use the iPad to show pictures, video clips, watch movies, read books...etc. Apple has been telling us RD is important, right?

 

[MicroByte]

I wondered about how the smaller screen size would compare to an iPad 2 given that it's the same resolution, but smaller. It would seem to me that when you shrink a screen down, the pixels would be packed a little tighter so the image would be a little cleaner. I know it's not Retina, but I would think the screen would be better than an iPad 2.

 

[ZBoater]

Oh please. Did the iPad 2 have "poor screen quality" when it was released? It was magical for crying out loud!!!

The Mini will be an increase in screen quality while reducing size and maintaining resolution, cutting weight in HALF, with better cameras. If the iPad 2 was magical, the Mini is freaking revolutionary....

 

[iproductsuser]

Yes it is a 100% deal breaker for me. This is the sole reason I am not selling my iPad 3 for the mini model. Sorry apple, you lost on this one for not including retina as you've pushed on everything else (for the most part).

 

[Shaddow825]

Cherry picking quotes. Noone seemed to mention that most of the reviews that said the screen was a problem either said or strongly implied that this was a better ipad then the retina for all the other attributes and that they were or were going to be using it more than the other ipads.

 

[jedolley]

So we care about HD video/RD on an iPhone 4/4S/5 and even an iPad 3, but yet we don't care about it on an iPad mini? So which is it, we do care about RD or we don't?





There are many that care about the quality of the screen. Those that might use the iPad to show pictures, video clips, watch movies, read books...etc. Apple has been telling us RD is important, right?

I didn't say it wasn't important. It's obviously better, but the lack of it does not make the iPad mini a "bad" device. If it's really that important to you or anyone else, you have the choice to get the iPad 4. I just don't think it will be a "deal killer" for most.

 

[clyde2801]

Bet you the mini next year will somehow manage to have a better screen and more ram.

I don't want to sound like a hater or a member of the tinfoil hat brigade, but I think you can make a good argument that Apple parcels out features and hardware to gently encourage people into the yearly bi-yearly upgrade path.

 

[N0ddie]

Surely those of us that only have an iPad 2 aint gonna notice any difference in the screen quality?

Think it'll only be an issue if you've been Retina'd?

 

[AttilaTheHun]

The screen was never a deal breaker for the iPad 1 or 2, so I don't see why it would be here.

I will see it for myself, I ordered the ipad 4 and the mini,
never bought an ipad b4,
my wife has the ipad 2 and she is useing it alot,she hardly opens her laptop,
so I will get one for myself too the mini is good for being portable you can tack it any where you go (you know)
I saw the ipad 3 and fined out that some time it too slow, thats the reson Apple updated the processor and the graphic,
so let see if it a reson for me to have this toys or keep useing the MBP 17"

 

[53x12]

Cherry picking quotes. Noone seemed to mention that most of the reviews that said the screen was a problem either said or strongly implied that this was a better ipad then the retina for all the other attributes and that they were or were going to be using it more than the other ipads.

Of course it is cherry picking. The whole point of this thread was to look at what reviewers are saying about the screen. Don't like what they say? Fine. But the issue still stands that the screen might leave something to be desired. This thread is not about the rest of the iPad mini. There are other threads for that. This is strictly looking at the screen quality.

I wondered about how the smaller screen size would compare to an iPad 2 given that it's the same resolution, but smaller. It would seem to me that when you shrink a screen down, the pixels would be packed a little tighter so the image would be a little cleaner. I know it's not Retina, but I would think the screen would be better than an iPad 2.

iPad mini 163ppi vs. iPad 2 132ppi so yes a slight improvement (a little over 20% improvement in ppi).

 

[zhenya]

I wondered about how the smaller screen size would compare to an iPad 2 given that it's the same resolution, but smaller. It would seem to me that when you shrink a screen down, the pixels would be packed a little tighter so the image would be a little cleaner. I know it's not Retina, but I would think the screen would be better than an iPad 2.

From The Verge: