iPad mini to Resemble Larger iPod touch Rather than Smaller iPad

| Rumor

iPad Mini RenderMockup via 9to5Mac

The rumored ‘iPad mini’ may look more like a larger iPod touch than a smaller iPad, according to a growing consensus powered by third party case leaks and schematics. In contrast with the iPad, which maintains a roughly uniformly wide bezel around the entire screen, the iPad mini may have a relatively thin bezel on the long dimensions, much the same as the iPod touch and iPhone.

One reason posited for the design is that a smaller iPad will be easier to hold and not require the extra bezel space for thumb and finger support. Another, perhaps more likely, argument is that, due to the iPad mini’s likely 4:3 aspect ratio, it would appear too big next to other 7-inch tablets that use a wider aspect ratio. Thin bezels on the side allow for the smaller iPad to be about the same overall height as other 7-inch tablets, but with more usable screen real estate due to the aspect ratio differences.

Further support for the thin side bezel comes from apparently conflicting information that’s leaked about the product. Many sources have indicted that the iPad will retain the 4:3 aspect ratio of its larger sibling, perhaps at a resolution of 1024x768. However, the few part leaks of rear cases that we’ve seen show the product to be too thin to support 4:3 if the bezel was the same width around the entire device. As mentioned above, if the bezels on the long dimension were significantly thinner than those on the shorter dimension, a 4:3 screen could fit.

iPad Mini SchematicsSchematics via ThinkiOS

Other explanations exist, of course. All the part leaks could be fake and the iPad mini could look exactly like a scaled-down iPad, complete with the same relative bezel-to-screen ratio. The information about the 4:3 screen could be wrong, and Apple is truly planning a much wider screen, even 16:9, for the new iPad.

Case Leak iPad MiniiPad mini Case Render via 9to5Mac

Finally, it could all be wrong and we’ll never see an iPad mini, or at least not for several years. We wouldn’t bet on that last possibility, however. A smaller iPad at $200 to $300 is too much of a money maker for Apple to pass on.

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Join the TMO Express Daily Newsletter to get the latest Mac headlines in your e-mail every weekday.

Comments

Garion

If the rumors of the iPad Mini pan out then Apple is going to have a very versatile and appealing product range for handheld computing indeed.

Just think about it, starting with the 4 inch iPod Touch over the 7,85 inch iPad Mini to the “full size” 9,7 inch iPad. With this smooth product line Apple will effectively have addressed every conceivable use case scenario where handheld touch computing could be relevant.

skipaq

As a tweener product, they should call it iPad Touch. wink

dmw

I like “Super Touch.”  Kinda rolls off the tongue.

furbies

I like ?Super Touch.?? Kinda rolls off the tongue.

That sounds like inappropriate intimate contact from a Super Hero(ess)

iJack

It strikes me that 4:3 would be a poor choice for iPad’s little brother.  The first time an owner plays a film from Netflix, Hulu or iTunes s/he’s going to feel cheated on the full-screen experience by the black bars top and bottom.  Apple could decide to crop (let them run off the screen) the right and left sides to overcome that, and fill the screen, but that would be an even worse choice, IMO.

mrmwebmax

+

It strikes me that 4:3 would be a poor choice for iPad?s little brother.? The first time an owner plays a film from Netflix, Hulu or iTunes s/he?s going to feel cheated on the full-screen experience by the black bars top and bottom.?

Despite the top/bottom black bars, I can’t see Apple changing the screen ratio from 4:3 to 16:9. That would seriously fragment the iOS platform.

iJack

That would seriously fragment the iOS platform.

How do you figure? 
The existing iPad is the only 4:3 device Apple make. Did it fragment the platform?
The iPhone and iPod Touch are both 16:9.

mrmwebmax

+

How do you figure??
The existing iPad is the only 4:3 device Apple make. Did it fragment the platform?
The iPhone and iPod Touch are both 16:9.

I don’t have an iPod Touch, but I do have the iPhone 4S. Apple states that its resolution is 960x640. If you divide 960x640, you get 1.5. If you divide 16x9, you get 1.78. If you divide 4x3, you get 1.33.

On the iPad, be it a Retina Display (2048x1536) or 1024x768, you get 1.33. So yes, the iPad is definitely a 4:3 screen, but the iPhone/iPod Touch are both between 4:3 and 16:9.

Plus, when I watch HD Serenity on my iPhone, there’s either clipping at the edges, or black bars at the top and bottom. So its definitely not 16:9, nor 4:3, but somewhere in between.

iJack

So its definitely not 16:9, nor 4:3, but somewhere in between.

Then what in hell are you kvetching about?  According to your math, the iOS platform is already ‘fragmented.’ 

Moreover, when you divide 960x640, you get 1.5, which is also a ratio of 16:8; a whole lot closer to 16:9, than to 4:3, so why are you continuing to argue?

Look at the Apple Store front page.  Does the iPhone screen look like the iPad next to it, or more like one of the Mac screens below?

mrmwebmax

+

Then what in hell are you kvetching about?? According to your math, the iOS platform is already ?fragmented.??

Moreover, when you divide 960x640, you get 1.5, which is also a ratio of 16:8; a whole lot closer to 16:9, than to 4:3, so why are you continuing to argue?

Dude, first off, chill.

Secondly, to be clear, I don’t think iOS is fragmented because of the different aspect ratios of iPads vs. iPhones, simply because there are so many dedicated iPad apps made for the 4:3 screen ratio. Perhaps best said, I think Apple will retain the 4:3 aspect ration for the rumored iPad mini so as to not fragment the iOS iPad-specific platform.

Thirdly, again, chill. Seriously. I’m neither kvetching nor arguing, just giving my opinion of the screen aspect ration of a device that only exists in rumors, based on how I feel Apple will play this one out in terms of the iOS App Store, iOS developers, existing iPad apps, etc.

iJack

Perhaps best said,I think Apple will retain the 4:3 aspect ration for the rumored iPad mini so as to not fragment the iOS iPad-specific platform.

But that’s not what you did say, was it?  What you actually said, and what this ‘discussion’ was all about was, “That would seriously fragment the iOS platform,” not “the iPad-specific platform.”

And don’t call me “Dude.”  It’s patronizing, and rather insulting.

mrmwebmax

+

But that?s not what you did say, was it?? What you actually said, and what this ?discussion? was all about was, ?That would seriously fragment the iOS platform,? not ?the iPad-specific platform.?

And don?t call me ?Dude.?? It?s patronizing, and rather insulting.

iJack, I promise to never call you “Dude” again, as per your request. Therefore:

iJack: Chill….

I honestly can’t get your deal here. I’m not attacking your argument. I agree that watching movies on anything but a 16:9 screen aspect ratio is somewhat compromised. I’m merely saying that I believe Apple will want the RUMORED—repeat RUMORED—iPad mini to be capable of running apps from the Apple App Store that were made For iPad without compromise. The iPad has always shown 16:9 movies WITH compromise—as you state—yet it holds 70% of the tablet market. The 16:9 tablets have yet to make a dent in that. So why would Apple want to take a “general-purpose” tablet—the iPad, regardless of screen size—and dedicate its form function SOLELY to one function; namely. HD movie play-back?

That’s it. That’s all I’ve been saying. Chill.

iJack

I?m merely saying that I believe Apple will want the… iPad mini to be capable of running apps from the Apple App Store that were made For iPad without compromise.

I’m quite sure Apple has no problem in letting developers scale and up-rez their iPhone/Pod apps to a 7.85” tablet.

...yet it holds 70% of the tablet market. The 16:9 tablets have yet to make a dent in that.

Meaning because they’re 16:9 they haven’t made a dent in the market?  Child.  Please.

Log-in to comment