If you needed a mini tablet you would cause there's practically zero competition
I bought the new 8 inch Alexa tablet the other day, and the price was decent but it's a piece of shit. I only wanted it for putting on a video in bed while I fall asleep but it can't even do that because when you drop the brightness to minimum, the display randomly turns off (not actually locking the screen, it's still running the app and active, you can touch stuff you can't see, but the pixels are turned off)
I've seen some TVs do that, turn off the screen when it gets dark (not talking OLED). Often takes too long and is a nuisance. There's a similar awful gimmick with speakers turning off when quiet, but it results in sound cutting out because it's too slow. I've seen some monitors that even try to do this when using headphones through them.
The base iPhone 17 has a 120 Hz display, I suspect they are going to drip feed it through their products as a cheap spec bump (vs adding extra RAM or storage).
Has any non pro consumer ever noticed a display greater than 60 hz. I can barely get the regular people in my life to nice anything above 30 hz or turning off motion smoothing. I really don't see how any of this stuff matters for most people
You don't have to know what Hz is to see that scrolling on some devices is smooth and on other (coug..Apple) devices is choppy. 60Hz feels like a decade old phone.
Phones today have plenty of power to generate 120 screens per seconds. Capping them with a screen is a terrible idea. Smooth form a decade ago isn't the same as smooth of today.
20 years ago I was gaming at 30fps and called it smooth. Now 120Hz feels like bare minimum.
I got a Pixel 7 Pro for work, and it's so laggy. Idk what a 120hz display is for when stock apps like Google Maps are running at like 30fps. I thought maybe some corp security stuff was slowing it down, but I showed it to people at work who have only ever used Android, and they thought it was normal.
Outdated comparison now that Liquid Glass is lagging my phone.
I mean the entire UI lags, not just the map. Not a steady 30fps, but it looks like something close to that on average. It seems like they started with weaker hardware and then threw Java onto it.
I just tried it on my iPhone right now, and yeah, something seems wrong. Switching from 120Hz to 60Hz on my Mac, I can barely tell. On the iPhone, 60Hz feels more like 30Hz.
My pixel lets me pick between 60 or 120Hz refresh rate, the bump in perceived smoothness is substantial, to the point that 60Hz does appear choppy in comparison.
I'm sure there is a point of diminishing returns for display refresh rates, but I can tell you from experience that it is definitely higher than 60hz. 90hz feels meaningfully smoother (on a Steam deck), and 120/144hz (on a desktop monitor in my case) feels smoother than that. Even mouse input latency is perceptibly lower. I've never used a display faster than 144hz but I honestly would not be surprised to discover that one can still tell the difference well past 144hz.
60fps is basically fine as long as you are unaware that it can be any better, but once you find out you are forever spoiled by the knowledge.
Yup. For me up until 90/100ish it's a pretty significant improvement all the way up and after that I don't know if I could notice outside of a fast game or wiggling the cursor over a contrasting color
I'm sure a lot of people now would feel odd if you gave them a 60Hz phone after high refresh has become so common, even if they don't pay conscious attention to that kind of stuff
I'm sure mouse latency is a big issue for iPad Mini users.
I know there's a sizable contingent of people who just think a bigger number is better, but realistically this is a device for passively consuming text and video content that is typically around 30 fps anyway. Why waste the battery power on faster refresh?
The ProMotion screens have variable refresh rate depending on the content displayed. 10Hz to 120Hz for iPhones and 24Hz to 120Hz for iPads. So in theory the power consumption should be even better than a regular screen for static content like reading text.
Not sure about iPads, but going from a pixel 3 to a pixel 5 made me feel like my pixel 3 was broken. Xr to 16 pro was similar, but that is because Xr was legit broken.
It’s definitely not true even now. Even a moderately fast finger drag will lag noticeably - usually by at least a frame in even very carefully tuned situations. It’s just physics. If you aren’t noticing it, you’re just used to it.
Try rapidly dragging up and down to scroll a web page.
For some people, it’s motion sickness inducing of it gets too laggy
> Does the page look and feel glued to your finger as you scroll?
Yes, for me issues with apps have mainly been in poorly optimized code causing lag, slow loading and the like. The 60hz/120hz thing has never really been a practical issue.
That argument goes the other way though? The only reason TV manufacturers would leave frame interpolation on by default is that a decent chunk of people notice, those people care, and most of the people who notice are "normal people" who aren't repulsed by it.
If only "pro consumers" noticed or cared... well, those "pro consumers" are the ones who think it looks like shit and would rather have a TV without it.
Nobody ever wanted a >60Hz display, but once you've used one it's hard to go back. It's like having a higher-performance car. You're now stuck with paying more just for baseline happiness.
It's probably not actually as hard to go back as we think it is, but holding on to stuff is in our genes.
I keep hearing this all the time, and I think this is an absolutely massive overstatement that you cannot go back to 60 hz after experiencing high refresh rates.
My personal experience is that I do notice the difference - for like a minute - and then I adjust and never care anymore.
Strangely enough, I can't use a sub-120hz phone anymore, but I have no problems using my 60hz laptop or 75hz desktop monitor. Maybe the different form factors let people compartmentalize their experiences.
I think Apple has held off 120 Hz for so long precisely because the average person gets a bit of a jolt of "this device is fast, it runs so smooth compared to..." they can't quite immediately place until someone explains it's the refresh rate.
Without this, it'd be very hard for an average user to "feel" a performance difference between an A18 Pro in the Neo and say as far as the M5 Max in a MacBook Pro unless they had a "special" use case which really needed the extra CPU/GPU cores.
Of course, they can't stay forever on that. E.g. with the iPhone 17 they finally flipped the non-Pro over. Probably because it was starting to make the iPhone seem sluggish/stuttery compared to other phones more than it was making the iPhone 18 seem fast. Tablets have never seemed to be as fierce a market in terms of your average Joe comparing them, but I'd expect the same switch to being a liability instead of a tool will happen there as well (if they aren't already late to the game).
I think they made iOS run slower for 60Hz devices. Like 2-3 version ago they changed all the animations and it makes it unbearable to use my iPHone 17 on 60Hz when I used to prefer running my old Samsungs on 60Hz several years ago.
Someone was complaining to me that Apple took a long time to add 120 Hz displays to phones. I didn't even know what my iPhone had, turns out it's 60 Hz cause it's a 12 mini. I've used 120 Hz displays before. Cannot tell the difference.
Some people are born with nervous systems which aren’t capable of noticing the difference, just like there are people who can’t see better than 20/20 no matter how good their optical acuity is.
Thanks for the link, checked it and well even side by side on my mbp, the difference is not that super obvious. 30 to 60 fps is very obvious and night and day. 60 fps and 120 fps, I only notice the difference side by side if I pay attention...
But maybe it's because I'm 40+ with relatively bad eye vision and 20 years earlier I'd be noticing the difference much more.. But I'd say going from 1080p to 4k was a lot more obvious than that...
I doubt there's much difference because of the adaptive refresh rate, it runs at a lower rate most of the time and only uses 120 when it decides that would be useful.
But if you really don't want it, Settings > Accessibility > Motion > Limit Frame Rate will cap it at 60.
There's also an option to prefer page rendering updates near 60 hz buried in Safari's feature flags settings. This one defaults to on, presumably to protect the battery life from asshole web developers and advertisers.
Yeah, that would be fair. Personally I just want it globally disabled, idc. But maybe there's 1 in 100 times I do care and can turn it on, that'd be nice.
Frustratingly, built in Mac displays kinda force enable it. You can at least reduce the max nits to be the same as max screen brightness, rather than the insane "XDR" default where HDR can go nearly 3x the max brightness. You can also make a custom color profile that disables HDR, but this disables the screen brightness controls, which isn't worth.
Forgot to say... This test proves that my eyes/brain are capable of seeing the difference. But this is a test deliberately meant to show the difference, and even then I have to focus on it. I'm not going to notice in regular usage.
If something is not noticeable when it gets "better", but it leads people to notice other stuff is "worse" over time, then I'd argue it's not actually a good thing to get.
Imagine if someone said "this food won't really taste better to you when you first eat it, but after 6 months you'll find other food tastes worse". To me, this would not be a selling point.
I've often had new phones that are 'faster' but I barely notice the fastness until I go back to my old phone and realise that my finger-memory needs adapting because things take just a bit longer to load.
That's not been my experience with the refresh rates, and it's not what GP and GGP said either. I have a 13 mini and have bought both 16 and Air. I kept them for 2 weeks and then returned.
When I got the phones, I did not notice any benefit related to screen refresh. I also did not notice any detriment when I went back to my 13 mini after two weeks on a 120 Hz screen.
But if it was as GP said, and it's only something you notice when you go back to a "lesser" screen, then that would not be a selling point in my book.
I always wondered why Windows users didn't notice the jagged text in 2001 and see a Mac as obviously better. You don't know what you aren't missing until it's gone.
I didn't know how bad TV looked in the 90s. We watched a low res 19 inch TV from across the room. Did moving to HD make any real difference in our lives? Do we really enjoy TV that much more? Once the excitement wears off about 20 minutes into watching it, its still the same thing. If the story is good, you get into it either way and forget what you're watching it on.
Depends on the content. When people are talking in a nondescript (thing the "12 Angry Men" movie), SD is quite fine. Now compare it to Blade Runner or Scarface. Those movies absolutely benefit from more detail and colors.
Sounds very similar to old glass panes being thinner at the top and thicker at the bottom. Did the glass flow over the years, or did we lose what was common knowledge at the time, for installers to orient each pane a certain way?
Yes, I definitely remember noticing how much better TV was when we moved from 20" sets from last century to HD LCDs (and then much larger/higher-res LCDs) over the last 25 years.
And I would disagree that only the story matters. If that were the case, people wouldn't go to the theater (a trend that has started happening in the last 15 years as people have been able to rig their living rooms to give an experience that is nearly theater quality, especially when considering cost and convenience. When we had 20" TVs, they were no substitute for going to the movies.
People had giant TV’s in the past as well. They are cheaper now.
Either way, a larger screen is not the same improvement as higher resolution. And more importantly, the reason people may not go to the movies when they have a home theater system is partly due to justifying the cost of the theater system.
I watched TV and used computers in the 90s and the whole time I was desperate for display technology to improve. Mainly CRT refresh rates, which often gave me a headache, but yeah I noticed the crappy pixel density all the time too. The nice Apple display I have now is one of my fave things I’ve ever bought and could only be improved by being >60Hz (which I do notice, but it’s not a big deal).
That’s what I’m talking about. 80Hz was just enough to keep the headaches away for me and that was either impossible or came with other compromises for some monitors / video cards.
Big of you to assume I only watch "if the story is good".
The kids make me watch Transformers - completely devoid of suspense or consistency. That 4k 120Hz OLED is the only thing getting me through that gauntlet.
HD matters a lot for sports. Big screens and nice sound help with movies, which DVD quality is usually good enough for, but certain movies deserve to be a theater or IMAX. It doesn't matter for most other things. I still watch stuff in 360p or 240p.
It's the same dynamic as with how we optimize for web pages speed. People don't immediately think that website responding 200ms faster is better. But they enjoy the experience more anyway (even if at some subconscious level) and they end up liking it more and spending more time with it.
With food also you could be incrementally getting better and better food and when you then try v1 it would taste bad.
It seems that we might also be noticing slight degradation more than slight improvement in general? No idea if that's true.
I think this varies a lot from person to person. I find the effect to be incredibly subtle - one of my monitors reset it self to 60hz a while back, and I didn't catch the problem for days.
Sure, and maybe I'm odd, but I don't read text while scrolling. I stop scrolling and then read. So yes, if I just scroll up and down quickly I can see the refresh is different, but otherwise I don't notice it in my regular usage.
Plus we all grew up reading the 24fps text scroll in the Star Wars intro just fine. Until we convince a new generation of cinematographers to shoot in 120fps, it all seems a bit moot - even most digitally-authored content doesn't exceed 60fps (and tech people are the first to complain about things like the soap opera effect...)
There is a big difference between watxhing a movie and operating a device where your input makes things move on the screen, you notice the depay way more.
I find that watching something like a fast-pan in 24fps footage on a modern LCD is horrific. CRTs used to inherently smooth this sort of thing out, but now we get these harsh frame transitions. As much as the soap-opera-effect is maligned, a high refresh rate LCD needs some form of motion prediction for low frame rate content.
Yeah, which is why those TVs doing frame interpolation or whatever are beneficial for most people as long as they do it well. Even though AV pros might get annoyed at the fakeness.
The way frame rate work on conventional film vs. an LCD are completely different. It’s like trying to ask the bitrate of a Vinyl record.
Conventional film projectors don’t show each frame continuously, they transition the shutter blade smoothly between frames, and projectors often flash each one a couple of times (48 or 72hz). A cinema projector is going to demolish a LCD in smoothness and motion quality even if it technically has a higher refresh rate on paper.
So when remastering from film, do they put each frame into the digital video and keep it 24 fps, or do they play the film and digitally record it at 60 fps to capture the projector effect?
Can you not literally see the frames skip as you move the mouse cursor across the screen? To me it’s OBVIOUS and excruciating and I’m only a light/casual gamer and use all my computers for work.
If I move my cursor slowly I can see the difference, I guess? But I don't habitually do that - I run with mouse/trackpad dialled to maximum acceleration, even at 120Hz there's a skip when you flick the cursor halfway across the screen. And I'm rarely scrolling a line at a time, I'm going page at a time.
I don't really get the obsession with smooth movement for desktop use (as opposed to gaming). Possibly this is a generational thing? Why is anyone intentionally using a computer primarily via slow analogue inputs?
What you definitely notice between 60Hz vs 120Hz on a phone is the battery drain.
Depends a lot on the usage I guess. In a tablet where you may draw etc you can notice the difference definitely. Or if you play games on the phone. But otherwise I don't think the difference is that important as it is sometimes claimed.
I used to switch between a MacBook Pro with a 120Hz display and a MacBook Air with a 60Hz display and never noticed any difference. I think I could probably have noticed if I'd put them side by side and compared the feel of the scrolling, but why would I do that?
There's a minority of people who really do notice stuff like this, which is fine. The problem is that for some reason, they sometimes have difficulty accepting that they're a minority.
Not for me. I tried out the high refresh rate thing, switched back to 60.. can't tell any difference at all. Same for high DPI vs "regular" DPI screens.
Screen flicker on CRTs with low refresh rates was terrible for me, but with modern flat panels.. nope, can't really tell the difference.
The difference is extremely noticable on a PC when you're dragging windows around with a mouse (or gaming of course). Especially if you have a dual-monitor setup and only one of them does the high refresh rate.
Not sure I'd notice it much on a phone.
And for decades we've had people claiming that 30fps is just fine for gaming...
> I can barely get the regular people in my life to nice anything above 30 hz or turning off motion smoothing. I really don't see how any of this stuff matters for most people
"I don't have an issue with it, so most people also don't have an issue with it"
It happens when someone overestimates how much other people agree with them, assuming that their own personal beliefs, values, or experiences are the default for everyone else.
Reading comprehension is important. There was no inverse take here. Just pointing out anecdotal evidence isn't enough to draw a conclusion over a larger sample size.
You want them to cite sources for something they can't possibly cite. I'm telling you that you are doing the same thing they are: confidently asserting that you're correct even though you cannot possibly prove that.
The comment wasn't saying "I don't have an issue with it." It said "regular people in my life." In fact, maybe the commenter is one of the few people who have an issue with it.
For doomscrolling or watching videos it makes little difference. For an iPad that advertises drawing with the pencil, the latency of the brushstroke is a massive difference between the two. The more immediate feedback unlocks more confidence and reduces a lot of friction.
From what I can tell, it's the thing they notice more than almost anything else. I was recently shopping for a new phone and my brother, who has no interest in tech, kept telling me I need to get the one with it (I forgot the exact term he used, it wasn't 120hz admittedly).
My Samsung Galaxy has a switch for either 120hz or better battery life. Never bothered to even try the 120hz. The phone feels fine. Hell, the only reason I even upgraded to this one was to get security fixes.
Yes? 30-60 is night and day so i have a hard time believing this.
There is an argument to be made on battery life 60-120 but my god i can instantly tell between 60-120. The key part is the input responsiveness more than anything else. If you tell someone to look at “frame rate” few will notice the dif but have them grab a window and wiggle it around, obv dif with responsiveness
High refresh rate displays are an interesting feature because most users do not notice the difference.
I can spot a 60Hz display from jiggling the mouse pointer for a second.
I’ve also done side-by-side comparisons of full screen scrolling on 60Hz and 120Hz screens for less technical people who could barely perceive a difference when I was pointing it out, but it took some time to get them to see it.
MKBHD (YouTube tech video and reviewer) talks about this a lot: It’s highly valuable to people like you and me who are attuned to the performance of our devices, but most people don’t notice. Or care!
I would appreciate high Hz displays everywhere, but I admit that Apple has probably made the right consumer choice tradeoff to compromise on refresh rate for these lower end devices where minimum cost and maximum battery life are the two most important features for those who buy them.
I think another thing to keep in mind is that there’s probably an element of sensory adaptation at play here. Like when you wear a watch: you notice it at first, and then you don’t notice it on your wrist anymore.
So if you’re actively moving between a high-refresh-rate device (like a lot of people here with their 144hz monitors) and then one with a lower refresh rate, you’re probably more sensitive (and potentially annoyed) by the discrepancy.
You will notice this as soon as you use a low dpi device again for any length of time. First 10 minutes you see the pixels. After that you stop seeing the pixels.
Viewing distance plays a factor too. I realized 4k tvs are useless to me because I can't perceive 1080p pixels unless I'm comparison shopping in a TV show room from 2 feet away (probably why they don't let you experience appropriate TV viewing distances in these spaces in the first place).
I'm one of those who can't spot a difference. I've tried to with the mouse trick or scrolling and I just can't see it. I can see the difference between 30fps and 60fps but anything north of 60fps is imperceptible to me. Maybe it's from a lifetime of gaming on toaster specs where I'd scarcely break 25fps.
While I agree 100%, I'm more interested in the variable refresh down to 1hz that comes with 'Promotion' to save on battery when viewing lots of static text.
If you give me a choice between buttery smooth >60Hz refresh rate animations, and better battery life, I'll choose the battery life 100% of the time. But that's just me. But then again, with the insides of a typical tablet being 90% battery these days (along with a little motherboard along one edge) maybe that's all a nonissue. Phones, on the other hand... my unambitious, cheap (from when you could still get half decent cheap phones) one goes two days on a charge easily, whereas a friend with an "advanced" phone struggles to get through one day with it, often running out during all-day outdoor adventures. Tradeoffs!
What's magical about 60 there? I'd naively think you'd just want VRR and some power saving render rate behavior rather than a fixed target framerate equal to the max framerate for all types of content all the time. The latter gives you neither good power saving nor good experience in most combinations.
Look at Apple’s own smartphone lineup. The Pro models with 120Hz screens get better battery life than the low end iPhone models.
You could make up for the difference in battery life with an almost undetectable amount of extra battery capacity from both a cost and size standpoint.
I think you missed the point of their comment. The point is they are reducing features (marginal cost difference for them) to provide a worse experience for a cheaper model. I'm pretty sure it's less complicated to have a shared manufacturing process with fewer SKUs than to have two separate displays (if they're even different and not just software locked).
Do you think they couldn't add a refresh rate control to the device if you wanted to have lower battery? They already have variable refresh rate implemented, a much harder problem.
I remember the age of when Intel used to lock down hardware multipliers for overclocking behind the K versions, and GPUs did too. This is a well known practice, and Apple is not above it.
the irony is that 120hz screens are actually 1-120hz vs constant 60hz which makes it more battery efficient most of the time except for when you're scrolling
LG were the first to ship products with Tandem OLED, in the automotive market. Apple were not even the first in the mobile or PC markets, being beaten by Huawei and Dell, respectively.
Most 5K monitors on the PC side are not going to be driven over Thunderbolt, but rather DisplayPort or HDMI.
And the most popular resolution on PC is not 4k, but rather 1080p and 1440p.
> Which is why most of the PC world is on cheap 4k monitors still.
According to the Steam Hardware Survey for last month, 47.91% of Steam users are on 1920x1080; adding the 2.56% on 1920x1200 means that a majority of users are still on 2K. The next biggest chunk of users are on 2560x{1440, 1600}, at about 32%. Only 5% of users are on 4K resolutions or greater.
And these are gamers, who are more likely than the average user to care about graphical fidelity. Most of the PC world just does not care about 4K, period.
To the average consumer, deep blacks will look great in the next Avengers movie.
To the average consumer, obsessing over scroll feeling not completely perfect is a distraction from watching the next Avengers movie, if not downright neurotic behavior.
To a prosumer, the value may be obvious but the price may not be worth it. Which can lead to a distaste for the company, for not being a more accommodating company.
To a professional, if you need it, you need it, and you begrudgingly pay for it. Because you need it.
I don’t even know what my phone screen has. Wasn’t why I bought the pro at the time. Wanted the additional ram. So I wouldn’t feel as pressed to upgrade now. (Prosumer, aka neurotic.)
I could not care less about any refresh rate over 30.
You can care about it, but that just means it sounds like a differentiator to me, not something everyone should pay for just because you care about it.
You will have to somehow prove it if you would say that the panel and driver chip are all already ready to do 100+ hz for free by default, and are actually artificially limited, and that that artificial limitation doesn't come with some other advantage like battery life (allowing a smaller battery or less cost in some other way).
For movies, 30fps is good enough, but for a screen which you interact with, the change to 120hz is dramatic. And there is no reason why they should not be adding it.
Not sure if to give credibility and we will soon know but I bet the panels they are using are 120hz rate panels, locked to 60hz. Reading it from multiple sources. No clear data we will have to wait for ifixit
Or, jokes aside, I honestly think that you might just have beefier time-integrating sensory-processing circuits in your brain than I do. Really. I do profoundly notice the difference, and it's a gritty and distracting thing. A slight but persistently intrusive and distracting perceptual thing. I honestly wish I didn't notice, but I do. I basically ask this: believe us when we ask for higher framerates and lower end-to-end latency.
And I'm fairly certain that the hardware and software to do higher frame rates across the board is a baseline commodity in the Apple source hardware ecosystem the build and integrate from. And it's certainly a better fit to consider it a line drawn between "pro" and "not pro" for marketing and pricing purposes than any fundamental and meaningful price-of-equipment threshold.
Usually it's low FPS (if FPS at all) that causes motion sickness. This comes up in VR discussion a lot. IIRC like 90Hz is considered a minimum.
I get horribly motion sick playing some games like Half-Life 2, Metroid Prime, or the original DOOM. I run my phone at 120Hz and like it. For games, cranking up the FoV tends to help, also disabling effects like viewbobbing, blur, shaking, etc.
I understand this is not fun to experiment with, though. Once I'm motion sick, I tend to be the entire day, only sleeping fixes it, so I'm not usually excited to keep trying to tweak the thing that makes me sick. I tend to dive into settings before playing any game now. I hate when it auto starts the game to appear cinematic.
If they INSIST that it MUST be 60 Hz, I'd accept the consolation/compromise of 60 Hz but 0ms-ish latency. (Maybe they already do it that way.)
As in waiiiiit until the 16.67ms between frames is almost up while sampling inputs, then bam!, render quicky, bam!, transfer it over a link that could carry more than 60 frames per second, bam!, fast OLED display. Each frame fresh and close to input.
To the why?-sayers: Because the difference is noticeable. We can get all philosophical and discuss whether it's a competitive advantage for someone to not notice the difference, or vice versa. Why the why?, why not just… take us difference-noticers on our word? Like… we're not taking your 60Hz 16.67ms crunchiness away from you?
"Maybe they already do it that way" refers to Apple's implementation of the iPad Mini OLED.
It's extremely interesting, and I'll be frank here, that people who just can't tell the difference are usually judgy and kind of status- and comparison-oriented towards people. In my experience. Others may not notice that difference.
I wanted to upgrade my air(gen4) but with these prices it's just not happening. Oh and no support for the perfectly fine apple pencil I already got with it is just....
Value/$ in iPad basically has not changed since 2022. Inflation (general and AI/antitrust-driven component shortages) has cancelled out technical gains.
I would not assume it is software-locked. Display controller on 120Hz ProMotion displays is more expensive. Also, the panel itself is likely cheaper LTPS vs. LTPO.
The question you I think should ask is who finds this value reasonable?. To which, I can only answer my myself who can’t see any reason to upgrade from my iPhone 15.
I'm on iPhone 13 and only reason I'd like to upgrade is my battery is poor now and because I have a small crack on the back glass, Apple requires me changing both the back glass and battery which is $500 CAD.
For humans that don’t follow every tiny little bit of news and recall it for one word non-secular answers to things…
I assume this guy is saying that I should upgrade my iPhone 15 because of an Israeli tech company, Cellebrite. Implying that I need to stay current on my phone hardware in order to be not targeted by a nation state actor.
“nation state actor” makes it sound unlikely. They sell boxes to many different governments, including the FBI. If you ever cross an international border you should have a modern device running the latest patches.
Keep looking at your feet, you might find the point there someday.
The point isn’t the money. It’s the value.
Is that easier for you to understand? Perhaps I should refute my own argument since you are having trouble getting to a point in which you can agree or disagree?
Yeah, you phrased it better. I am really frustrated these days. The (more accurate) statement I should made is: "The only people who can afford devices like this are smart enough to question the value."
It's hard to even know what price to use to calculate the delta, since there are different processors with different memory capacities, different CPUs based on memory, and higher price for the nano-texture display.
But yeah, a top-of-the-line iPad mini costs well more than an MBA, which seems kind of nuts. Add on a keyboard case and Apple Pencil Pro and you're looking at $1,500.
Is it? I’m curious what use-cases you think are the most relevant here.
Putting the ipad right next to the sink when doing dishes is the best I can come up with. Or maybe if it’s used in a business context, such as for salespeople doing a promotion on a sidewalk
It makes no sense to make the devices so thin and then having a fat camera. This requires a cover to equalize the size with the camera for haptic reasons. Better use this space for other stuff like larger batteries and make the device the same thickness everywhere.
Density is insanely highly correlated with the perception of premium quality. No one’s increasing the volume of premium devices beyond what’s needed to hold components.
Not sure about the iPad Mini, but I've really only seen the bigger iPads with a case. There's just so much screen to damage, and you do really want some kind of way to prop up the bigger iPads. I very rarely remove my iPad Pro from its keyboard case.
> In reality the back was curved, and they took pictures from an angle that only showed off the edge of the screen and not how far back it curved
You only see the thickness at the back from an angle where you can't actually use the computer (and for many people, that whole angle is going to be against the wall). This is the good kind of design - making something appear beautiful without compromising the core function.
I'm distinctly less convinced about ever-thinner mobile devices that I immediately have to slap a case on...
The older iMacs that were the same thickness all the way across, they still looked good. Except they were some of the best machines to service. Literally two screws in the bottom, the whole thing split in half, and your hard drive, memory and other components were right there. I worked on tons of them and they were fantastic. It saved people money in the long run when they needed an upgrade because it took less time. Even replacing the screen or logic board in them was a piece of cake.
I presume it is a flattering angle instead of a falsified image. The camera bump is near the one large button, which was furthest from the camera when they rotate it, so the iPad could have been angled slightly to hide the bump. Maybe someone can try to reproduce it after it comes out to see if it is a false image.
this is directly side-on. they've def removed the camera bump. In the initial animation at the top where the hand grabs it too. the bump is very clear in shots later!
wait... could they have hidden it under the hand? and why does that person's thumb seem extra long?! the more I look at this the less I understand it.
Perspective is still at play. At arms length, on my phone, if I make it so the flat surface is completely aligned with my center of vision, the bottom side covers at least 1mm of whatever is on the underside. The closer one gets to the phone, the more pronounced the effect.
The video keeps triggering my sense of seeing CGI, but the hiding effect on display can absolutely be accomplished in camera.
I would assume, however, that they didn't "fake" it - that they instead chose a filming position and lens such that camera was obscured behind the edge of the device (the edge facing the viewer is the far side from the camera). Bit of trickery for sure though.
> I would assume, however, that they didn't "fake" it - that they instead chose a filming position and lens such that camera was obscured behind the edge of the device
I’d suspect the same. From that angle, the camera bump is on the opposite edge; when I hold my iPad Air in the same position, the camera bump is also just about hidden.
That being said, I’d also suspect that Apple chose that angle deliberately.
Historically, Apple used real photos and video for marketing material, only lit and polished to perfection to create a sort of hyper-real effect. Nowadays, who knows.
I’ve seen enough parents at graduations and tourists to know people use it. Assuming they need the big screen because their vision is bad which undermines the need for a high res photo in the first place.
But don't you just need a big camera on your giant tablet? How will you ever manage if you don't have a nice camera on both sides of all your handheld devices? /s
If they put the tiny "front-facing" camera pointed out the back it would be enough for the vast majority of people I imagine.
That's the thing - I genuinely don't understand the user or usage Venn diagram : when and who will 1. Have an expensive ipad with them and require a good big camera, but 2. Not have an equivalently competent phone with them?
Don't get me wrong, I understand it happens - back when I did wedding photography, one of my massive pet peeves were the uncles and grandparents who stepped into the aisle with their massive tablets just as bride is starting her walk... But I do not understand it at all :-/.
I'd absolutely happily completely kill the rear facing tablet camera. I've had at least a dozen android and ipad tablets and I genuinely don't think I took a single photo with them - it'd feel weird and awkward and so ostentious.
(As always as a consumer, clearly I'm in minority here :-})
When I use the rear camera, it's part of a feature of some other app that clearly makes sense to use as a tablet. You're bogged down as it being used as a primary camera as a photographer. There are other needs for cameras other than portraits. Using the rear camera in an AR mode is quite handy in apps.
The most common use-case for the rear iPad camera in our household is stop-motion animation. There are some great apps for this, and the big screen (when effectively stabilized on a tablet stand or tripod + clamp) is lovely for composing and comparing frames.
Note that the uncles and grandparents are all old. When you get to a certain age, your eyes don't like to focus on small things like cameras. The elderly prefer tablets, and they want to be able to take pictures of their nieces and nephews and grandchildren.
False. That is a false statement. You said that "no one" wants these to be heavier, when in fact, many people would gladly accept a few nanograms of extra weight for a better battery. Look at everyone with a Clutch or Anker attached to their phone.
Since basically everybody uses a case anyways, the important factors are weight and width with the case on. This design makes both of those significantly smaller than your suggestion.
The argument is most people use a case regardless, so if it were the same thickness across the device, the iPad would be considerably thicker once in a case. That and weight. I don’t use cases so it bothers me too, but it does make some sense.
It's still very strange how much work goes into the materials for the case and the ergonomics and weight of holding the devices without a case just to assume everyone will put it in a case. I'm with you on iPads, they get too heavy/thick for their primary uses once in a case. The phones I sort of get but I still think it ruins a lot of the aesthetic choices they make about the case design.
I find it annoying too, I assume it's because thin and light devices sell more (both in promo photos and when used in Apple stores).
My mum's Samsung S23 Ultra has a ridiculous camera bump and rocks back and forth when you use it, even with some thinner cases. You need a super thick case for it to stay stable.
I've always thought this too. An iPad with an integrated case would be able to fill the entire flat back area with a battery, and just have rubber on the edges where impact protection is needed. The existing design is really optimized around having an impressive experience in the store when holding an uncased product, before you inevitably cover it.
Why would you want an integrated case? The soft impact absorbing materials degrade much faster than the aluminum. Look at the average ipad users case and it's falling to pieces, you don't want that permanently fixed to the device.
There's also many users who don't need a case. A lot of ipads are POS systems that are fixed to the bench so they don't need a case either.
> Why would you want an integrated case? The soft impact absorbing materials degrade much faster than the aluminum.
Given that the impact-absorbing parts could be [0]
...rubber on the edges where impact protection is needed.
and could obviously be designed to be replaceable, either by a handy user or an Apple Technician, why wouldn't you want Apple to design the feel and balance of a device with a case that has built-in impact protection?
Apple's decision to make most of its handhelds out of various grades of "fragililum" has boggled my mind since they sold the first iPhone with an easily-shattered glass back. That choice makes sense for a conspicuous status symbol that people are going to take very good care of... but most folks either end up with one with damage that makes plain how theirs is not the kind of life that makes that possible, or they have installed some aftermarket shell that ruins the effect by covering up the conspicuously fragile part of the hardware.
WAT. Just because you do not does not mean you get to dictate how others can use it. I know lots of people that use the rear camera on iPads. I'm one of them.
then everything would be just tiptoeing and nothing would be interesting.... it's not like someone saying that will actually cause Apple to get rid of it
Yes they are just whining into the void about something they can’t change. Great use of everyone’s time all around.
More likely though they’re trying to signal their membership to the in-group that’s always circle jerking on every iPhone/iPad post about SD cards, removable battery, thick small phone, flush camera, etc.
To be fair, the iPad mini is a way better form-factor for camera use than any of the big iPads. I think the only time I've ever used the rear camera on the 12" iPad was to scan a document...
Some people don't have iPhones though. Rare, I know. I have an iPad and my wife has an iPhone but I have never owned one at all and instead have always used Android right from the HTC G1.
Yeah it's infuriating. I love how even Apple are embarrassed by it, since in the first two animations of people holding and rotating the device they've left off the camera bump, making it look smooth flat.
If they levelled it out you could surely fit a far larger battery in it too. I'd far rather have a device 1.5mm thicker with a battery lifespan twice as long and no silly bump on it.
I have a hard time believing the camera bump isn't the result of intensive consumer psychology experiments. Setting a bare apple device down on a flat surface feels like chair with a leg sawed off. They need you to buy the accessories. This is part of making the ecosystem viable.
Half the time their mid-year fresh is just a new color, with a huge marketing push. If everyone has a case, colors become a moot point.
I also don’t think I’ve ever seen an Apple exec use a case, as it would imply the phones are durable and a case is needed, which they don’t want to convey. (Bumpers for antenna-gate aside)
The correct answer. The camera bump is intentional and so is building phones that aren't resilient to drops out of the box. What do you mean I can't have a phone with rubber bumpers on the corners?
I would be content if they'd stop making phones slippier than a wet bar of soap. My Pixel 8a is ridiculous, I don't know how they do it. If you have dry hands, it's nearly impossible to hold on to.
Yeah, I added a boring case on day 1 and would have trouble describing the feel of the bare device right now.
Found one on Amazon so I dodge Google's exorbitant plastic markup, and it is a relatively minimalist wrap that smooths out the camera bump and makes it more grippy in hand, in pockets, and on flat surfaces.
The behavior of those slippery phones in pockets is almost the bigger gripe to me. Like they are a new class of motion amplifier, trying to rotate and squirt their way out at the slightest twitch.
The curvature on the back of those is such that it's harder to rotate into a position so the thumb can hit the right button than a flat surface would be.
It also means that resting it on the arm of a recliner produces about the same result as just dropping it into the void to begin with: It's going to wind up there either way.
Tangentially related: this is the funniest rant about this "devices with a fat camera bump that don't lay flat" rant that exists: "Why?" - Lazy Posy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP7lYuyGTmg
More material, bigger battery = heavier device. For something this size I figure people want something they can comfortably hold in one hand for a session.
Perhaps if they put a very small lip around the camera lens and a physical bump on the other side so the device doesn't rock, at least it would be symmetrical and the glass would be slightly less prone to surface contact.
I would happily give up on the entire AI industry in exchange for more affordable hardware. No hesitation. The worldwide inflation resulting from the AI rollout is shameful to say it politely
I've thought a lot about that actually. I have a number of hardware purchases I'd like to make but I'm delaying due to the insane prices. That said, would I give up LLMs for the prior prices? No. Prices will come down eventually once more factories come online (it's just slow to bring up a new factory/fab, especially for RAM) and LLMs are such an awesome tool that I'll take the short-term pain of higher hardware.
That’s if you’re considering your personal situation. The increase in hardware is impacting every single institution that needs computers. Smaller hardware companies with low margins cannot operate in the current situation. That means less consumer choices, new projects delayed or cancelled. The impact on less developed countries is of course exacerbated. Hospitals, schools, government agencies are getting less for the same level of spending. And of course that results in worst services, worst infrastructure, more expensive services and goods
Maybe institutions and companies are gonna have to get smarter at making use of stuff that they have instead of just churning thru hardware. It's hard to see it being sustainable anyway to be constantly turning over hardware every few years if not yearly. In a way, this chilling of consumerism is kinda neat.
Luckily absolute performance still exists, it's just that we've normalized shipping less efficient software slopped out because there'll probably be new silicon in a few years so it doesn't matter.
Commodity hardware is plenty powerful and can be taken advantage of should prices signal efficiency is important again.
But it is impacting everything. Even the new Sony RX camera has a slower sensor readout from the years old model simply because they can't get hold of the DRAM.
It's especially bad if you're non-American with multiple TVs.
e.g. I've got three screens in my house (office TV, living room TV, basement projector) in Canada — upgrading to the latest Apple TV on each of them would cost me $1,287.
I have two televisions - living room TV with an AppleTV and bedroom TV with some Roku device. I'm going to buy the new AppleTV and put it in the living room, then move that AppleTV to the bedroom, then recycle the Roku (finally, I hate that thing).
It should be less expensive but I rely on it (cancelled cable TV and just have streaming now) and so I'm just happy they are still working on it.
Depending on what you subscribe to, streaming services are now as expensive (if not more) than cable was if you got premium channels. I hear also Disney will add ads to all tiers as well.
What isn't smooth is the separation between the iPad and iPhone teams. I'm pretty sure new things being visited on the Duo such as the split keyboard interface have already been tried on the iPad side.
The iPhone Air is larger than an iPhone 17 in height and width. Every non-plus/max iPhone since the 13 Mini came out is smaller than the Air in height and width. Wouldn't they be a more logical upgrade than the Air?
The main body of the iPhone Air is thinner, of course, but including the camera bulge, I think it's thicker than all non-pro iPhones up to the 16.
Is there something about making the main body thinner that makes the iPhone Air more comfortable to hold than other smaller phones? Is it the weight? The 17e is only 4 g heavier than the Air, and the 16e is only 2 g heavier.
I have never been interested in the Air because of the size, so I can't even remember if I have picked one up in an Apple Store.
Forget the dimensions and size on paper. I tried the iPhone 17 for two weeks, came running back to the Mini. Later on, I upgraded to the Air and I'm very pleased. Yes, it's slightly larger in hand but it's still delightful to use like the Mini. Even though its 25g heavier than the Mini, it feels lighter because it's less dense.
Interesting! Thanks for the opinion. I'm very skeptical that I'll feel the same way, but I'll check it out next time I'm near one.
I just replaced the battery in my Mini, and got the bonus free screen (I understand it is hard even for Apple to replace the battery without breaking the screen), so I'm probably set for a while, but it would be nice to have an upgrade path in the future!
Hopefully as Apple's own N-series Wifi chips mature and get rolled into more products, they will include GPS/GNSS capabilities into the chips, as right now if you want that functionality you have to purchase the "Wi-Fi + Cellular" variant:
Edit: to perhaps make it more clear, I meant still sell a +Cellular variant with the C-series chips (or whatever), but move the GNSS functionality into the N-series chips. So you'd have a non-cellular and a cellular, but both would have GNSS.
It's part of it. Another part of the reason is patent related royalties that they have to pay to the likes of Qualcomm, Nokia, etc. for any device that has a working 5G stack inside of it. Apple actually has had their own 5G modem implementation for a few years now; they clearly have the technology to deliver this with a clean full in house chip design.
But any device that has that embedded would have some royalty overhead added to the BOM. Which is why they've always had ipads with and without 5G and have so far never really bothered with adding this on laptops (which actually would make a lot of sense from a technical point of view). Operators would probably love that because it's a nice up-sell opportunity on monthly subscriptions. And with soft sims there would not be a need for a hardware sim card.
For the same reason, you don't see this feature on many other laptops either. There are a few obviously but it's a less common feature than you'd expect given how important good connectivity is to most laptop users.
So the reason they have not released a +cellular MBP is down to them not wanting to make royalty payments? What do they care? They just roll that payment into the +cellular price bump. It's not like they are dipping into their own billion dollar cash on hand balance.
Do you have a better reason? I think the price difference is probably too high to justify the feature. I don't see any technical reason why they wouldn't do this. But patent royalties and additional overhead related to device certification would definitely add some complexity and cost.
No, but there's a lot of examples of "I don't have a better reason" regarding Apple decisions. I know that there's a lot of bad blood between Apple and Nvidia hence AMD GPUs every where before the M-series chips. Clearly, they are tired of of their cellular vendors, otherwise they would not have developed their own chips. But they already have the cellular relation for the iPhone/iPads, so what would extending that to allow MBP inclusion mean that makes it a non-starter for Apple?
I can only speculate. But my guess is that they don't anticipate additional mac sales if they were to ship this feature. So, the only reason to do this for them would be if it would bring in more revenue. And given the cost overhead related to patents that I outlined, it might just not be that interesting. My guess is that a lot of the agreements they have for this might cover iphones and ipads but not laptops.
It's not just Apple. 5G stacks in laptop are just very uncommon. Most vendors seem to independently come to the conclusion that they are better off not bundling that. Of course the difference is that Apple now has their own modems and chips for this. Which might change things but so far hasn't.
The reasons Apple want to vertically integrate everything and own it are easier to grasp: chips, firmware and software made by them are easier to control and upgrade by them. With qualcomm, they are basically getting them, their development teams, their supply chains for chips on the critical path to shipping products. And they are outsourcing what is a pretty major part of the whole phone experience to a third party.
Apple has been working on their own 5G modem for many years before they shipped it. I don't know for sure but I would not be surprised if efforts for that started when Steve Jobs was still alive even. This was always the logical move for them to make as soon as they got the idea of doing their own chipsets for their phones.
I would say this is the main reason, given tethering has caps, but maybe also how cell tower capacity probably would not do great with a whole new product market segment that's also high-bandwidth during the LTE days. With 5G's promise of increased capacity and 6G on the way, maybe it'll be possible soon enough.
> The buyer is also signing up for a monthly payment. So clearly they have the cash to make an “extra monthly payment” or two up front.
I know of pilots who buy the +Cellular simply for GNSS and do not get a separate plan.
Charging more for the C-series hardware is understandable, but if there's enough of a 'transistor budget' it would be nice for the GNSS functionality to be more universal (since the N-series seems to be going into everything).
The cheapest configuration of the original model was $329 in 2012 [0]. Even when corrected for inflation, that would still be less than $500 in today's money -- so quite a bit less than $700!
Is the comparison unfair because today's model is much more powerful than the one from 14 years ago? Perhaps. But perhaps it shouldn't be compared to the past, but to its relative competitors?
Not really unfair, as the basic use case is still the same for either model.
A toilet from a hundred years ago in the same product tier serves the same function as one today. Old models were also more expensive when adjusted for inflation, but today's toilets can tackle more turds with less water.
The alternative approach leads to those "costs have dropped by 7 orders of magnitude in the last 50 years" style of deceptive graphs popular among people with an agenda to insist AI memory price inflation isn't a real problem.
The CPI component for IT does also get adjusted based on quality, but it's not linear. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1WYYo Hm, would you say computers are similar in cost:utility as late 2022? I think that's fair if you aren't looking specifically at GPUs.
On the plus side, devices are designed to last longer, be more repairable and be updated for longer than they were in 2012.
The upfront cost of a device is less important than the total cost of ownership, which highly depends on the lifespan of the device. An ipad that lasts 2.5 years needs to be half the price of one that lasts 5 years.
Sorry, but as someone who's owned a v1, the first 12" Pro, a Mini, and now an M4 Pro: hahahaha, no.
Durable, yes. Given how many hours each of my iPads has spend in my kids' hands I can't really complain on that front.
But repairable? Not in any meaningful way. When the battery gets too weak you can use it as a tethered control panel for media or smart home apps; when the screen cracks you can slap a protector on it. Aside from that, any hardware fault outside of warranty means it's DOA.
Sure, but that tells you that the upgraded specs and pricing is a conscious decision made by Apple, not something forced by AI. Making an entry-level small screen equivalent of the 11-inch iPad is always an option. They’re choosing not to take it.
Memory and storage is expensive as hell, so they're gonna ration it for their more expensive devices.
Same reason this year, for the first time ever, Apple announced their new Pro phones (and the ultra-expensive Duo) but no base-model iPhone 18. They're paying more for memory so they're gonna use it on the devices where they make more on a sale.
Right. The prices are up for Nvidia’s benefit (and Micron, Sandisk by extension).
I know it’s now a trope to say “an incoming Democratic Congress should…” but there are really serious questions to ask about the means by which Nvidia is securing such a radically high value buy-and-hold strategy, and whether it amounts to deceptive channel stuffing.
The whole tech industry is using apparent demand for Blackwell GPUs as a proxy for AI demand, when this is a wholly broken metric because Nvidia seems to be gaming it, and everyone (consumer and business alike) is paying more as a result.
More like they were not able to find a pretext to sell it for more.
I can open my local store and will see shitty 8/128 Android tablets for less than 150 euro. If memorypocalypse was the main reason for pricing new ipad mini as it is, the budget tablet segment would be completely dead because manufacturers just wouldn't be able to afford memory at all.
The whole supply demand spherical cow model of capitalism really breaks down when suppliers decide they'd collectively use their cartel to not engage in demand and instead gouge prices.
It doesn't, capitalism is the free association without coercsion. When the government can mandate that you cannot sell certain GPUs to customers in specific areas or that your model is too scary and you must shut it down and can give or take government contracts that are work hundreds of millions or billions of dollars, and the federal reserve will bail out the banks If they make mistakes, you have a crony capitalist environment that has very little to do with the free market.
Apple: Just fix the software. I have an iPad Mini (6?) and it's clearly just such an orphaned product. They're not even TRYING to make it usable. The on-screen keyboard takes up the majority of the screen when in landscape mode. In portrait mode, the "drawer" on the left side of the screen takes up so much space in apps like Maps/Flighty that it covers the location you're currently at.
They've clearly given almost no thought into how the (already marginal) iPadOS renders on a smaller screen.
Agentic coding has slowly but surely allowed me to enhance many aspects of my life, big and small, with self-made software and automation. These systems are just for myself and my loved ones.
I left the mess of Android years ago in favor of iOS. The restrictive distribution system always irked me but never affected me personally. Now though, having to jump hoops and resort to PWAs for many different things I want to do with my devices, iOS truly feels maliciously crippled. I’m in the market for exactly this kind of tablet, if only they’d let me run my own code in peace maybe I’d buy it.
isn't android about to push an update that nerfs most of its advantages in this regard? the duolopoly sucks. (yes, other options exist but with pretty drastic tradeoffs.)
I’ve had a side quest of finding a true Linux tablet with cell service with similar battery life to my iPad. They don’t seem to exist, or there’s one or two that cost double my iPad. It’s unfortunate
"We just changed a couple things, no biggie, don't buy it" is the reality, but that doesn't sell. Marketers optimize for sales saying what they can get away with.
That's just the nature of (slow) exponential gains. If the processor gains 1% in flops each generation, the absolute flop increase is always the largest ever. Now consider that a device has tens of marketable metrics and that is always a defensible claim.
You're not wrong.
The video video on Youtube gives a very good (and quick) overview of the marketing behind phone screen glass marketing claims; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YrdI7h2XoY
The same will apply to everything any company is marketing, at the very least it will always be their 'best' 'new' product.
Last iPad Mini I bought in 2015 was 32gb for $379CAD, one today 11 years later is $949CAD for 128gb, 2.5x over 10 years, I know there is different tech, inflation and times are different but I always though the mini as the budget option, now with this recent releases Apple is just going for: it's expensive because that's the only way we can keep growing....
Luxury inflation is more than normal inflation, but this isn't a luxury even though it's not necessary, and the price isn't going up due to the steady cause of inflation (money creation).
Their budget iPad I think got 70% increased in price a couple of months ago. I was planning to upgrade my iPad mini to the normal 11inch iPad and when I checked the price it was nowhere near the price I remembered I last saw it.
The mini is not the budget option, at least not anymore. The base 11" iPad starts at $450 in the US (and can often be found on sale for less). It is the cost-down with lower-spec components, and is probably a more compelling product for the consumer looking for the cheapest iPad option than a cost-down mini would be.
I wish this was somehow listed as a separate line item with the price, assuming prices will normalize at some point. I don’t want these prices to be considered the new normal, even after memory prices come down. I think transparency in the pricing would help with that.
I have a 2022 mini that I use constantly. I was looking forward to this update. I like the oled and the lower weight, but it's just too expensive for what you get. The processor upgrades etc. mean nothing to me, my 2022 mini isn't slow. I don't want the camera on the side either.
It's too bad because Apple only updates these things every couple years and the price never goes down, so this is the best moment to update. Oh well. Maybe I'll buy a new cover for my old mini.
You mean that the corner was damaged, not that a cat also chewed on the corner of your MBP, right? I'm still in shock that a cat would chew on glass and metal enough to damage it - two cats doing it is too much in one day!
Yup. Had an MacBook Air. Slight water damage near charging port. Laptop functioned correctly on AC power. Extensive battery diagnostics: Healthy. Just the charging circuit saying "go ahead, charge device"...
At the Genius Bar expected something reasonable, realistic... $300? Parts and labor.
"So we have a quote for you, $950. Perhaps we go out and look at the new Macs together?"
90% of the cost of the laptop to replace the charging port.
Only Apple can properly replace these screens and pair the parts (FaceId etc),
so setting the standard repair cost high enough helps push people toward Apple Care eligible new devices, handicapping the second hand market.
That has been the case basically since Apple Care existed IMHO.
You're right, the self-service repair program exists. It doesn't clear neither the pairing issue nor parent's hurdles though, as Apple parts are still required , you can't get any similar enough screen you'd want, and they'll be priced the same as in Apple Stores.
As far as I remember, the self-repair kits only make sense in very niche cases (I think repair shop get a different contract ?) and won't work around any limitations Apple puts on parts or repairs.
I did not call Apple, this was a local "fix my iPad" shop.
It was funny, the guy was narrating as he is searching saying "Whoa, this is the most I've ever seen... Wow, oh man... Hold on..."
I knew it was not going to be good.
I asked if there were any DIY options for me.
He said I could possibly find a used iPad online and swap that screen. But, given the insane prices of the replacement screen, I assume the secondary market for a salvageable iPad that works is really tough.
At this point it makes sense to just buy another used iPad.
your ex’s cat chewed on the corner of an iPad? Does the cat have some more interesting stories of destruction since it apparently likes chewing on metal/glass, a higher level of destruction setting than the standard cat.
Because you gave the context clues of M4 chip and OLED screen and $1200 repair cost, this means you somehow snagged an iPad Pro 13” with the cellular modem for $500, which is way below market value.
The current version of this model of iPad purchased brand new is $1700.
In other words, this is the highest end iPad available. Any other lower spec model reduces the repair cost lower than what you were quoted.
I bought it off Facebook marketplace. The guy selling it apparently was granted the device from his work and then didn't need it. I didn't get the sense it was sketchy at all but now I'm wondering a bit. I had no idea it was that expensive new, I'm sad that this thing appears to be a brick now!
Given the criticism the Duo has had for not being a very good iPhone[1], I was hoping for a foldable iPad mini, which would seem to dodge those problems. Maybe in a year or two (does anyone remember the iPod Touch, which was an iPhone without the phone bit? I loved that thing.)
I expected the Duo to closer to the size of a normal iPad. I didn't realize it was a foldable iPad Mini that's also a phone. imo It's too small for the bulkiness that it adds. Also sacrificing the camera was not worth the fold.
The point of foldables is that they fit a big screen in your pocket. What's the point of a foldable display? Fit a 10 inch in your tiny purse? Very hard sale for double the price.
We will eventually see "foldable MacBook" because I genuinely want a 20" screen in my backpack or even just a smaller 16" MacBook. I guess not coming before 2035
It makes me think of a Bento-box laptop with a foldable keyboard and a tri-fold display, where both the display and the keyboard unfold when you open the computer. Extremely thick, but a very small footprint when closed.
I'm not sure whether that's amazing or something that'll bankrupt any company that tries to sell it with longer than a 3-day warranty.
Just curious, is that based on your own experience or negative reviews you’ve read online? I’m using the Duo now and quite like it. It’s a first-gen device, so it has its quirks, which is expected. Calling it the worst phone is a bit of an exaggeration though. It’s a foldable, not a conventional phone, so you can’t really expect to use it the same way.
Oh absolutely based on those reviews! I was surprised that John Gruber of all people was so harsh on it. As an Apple Vision Pro owner, I'm fairly tolerant of first-gen devices :)
That's a problem already solved by having a lower refresh rate, though. You can't get extra battery drain from 120hz when your device can only achieve 60hz.
The only genuine performance increase I could see is if you're using it for drawing/notes because the Apple Pencil samples at 240/s so you would see a difference in drawing smoothness between 60/120/240hz screens. This would mirror the use case in fast-paced and high action games - more info for your eyes sooner allowing better reaction times.
Also, isn't ProMotion just branded VRR? Allowing for lower battery use in static/low change applications?
There is an entire field of study dedicated to this sort of thing called Psychophysics. It’s hardly trivial. Perception isn’t an absolute measure of sensory input as it’s influenced by context, comparison, as well as prior experience. Improvements in one experience can change the standards by which we judge subsequent ones. These principles have had profound implications across entire industries. A good primer is the book Priceless: the hidden psychology of value by Poundstone.
And what is it being used for though? To better scroll instagram and various message app inboxes? We needed 120hz for this? I mean a lot of people including here on HN are just buying this to scroll x. It is an iphone after all, walled garden means that's about all the sort of things you can do with this thing.
It's not a trivial feature. The Class A surface on an iPad is the screen.
If you plan to look at moving things, like scrolling, which is a central part of using the device, 120fps makes the scrolling less blurry and therefore more pleasant to look at.
This is like asking why people have a hardon for cars with nicer materials for seats and interiors if a normal cheap plastic interior could pass all the same crash tests.
It is a real thing. If you experienced the shift from CRT to the first generation of LCD screens and the CRT bros are not moving to the new technology because it gives them headaches and the majority of people are OK with the refresh rates. The 60fps to 120fps perception is hard to explain.
Im usually big on refresh rates but this one doesn’t bother me. I move between 60hz iPads and iPhone to 120hz iPad Pros and my mind doesn’t register a difference between them.
I can see the 120hz nice scroll when I’m paying attention but I’m normal use on these devices I forget about it. Basically it wouldn’t be a dealbreaker for me but I agree it should probably be the standard
you don't need promotion if you're going to use it for movies, but OLED is a huge improvement in this regard.
the price is a bit high, but that's all apple products.
i do think this means a lot of android tablets on this form factor are going to start coming out with OLED screens as well though, which is good, as they will be much cheaper.
I think the Mini's primary use case that benefits a 120hz screen is art apps, but the artists I know would prefer OLED over 120hz. For entertainment, video is video, and games on tablets often lock to 30 by default to preserve battery life.
For the iPad Air (especially the 13" model!) I agree 100%.
Apple likes to slow roll features out. It's kind of a necessity when Wall Street expects you to put out a desirable hardware version every few years. Gotta protect that runway!
I'm shocked Apple haven't acquired Procreate yet. It's nearly always in iPad marketing material. Personally I know so many artists who've bought iPads, and the only app they have installed is Procreate.
It’s possible they simply don’t want to sell. ProCreate parent company is extremely successful on its own, it’s possible being part of Apple wouldn’t bring anything to the table for them. Looking at some apps Apple acquired it’s not clear that being part of a mega corporation benefits creative tools.
The largest acquisition in Apple’s entire history is only 3 billion dollars (Beats). Apple doesn’t waste money like Microsoft, Google or Meta on large fit them in later acquisitions.
I thought the same thing about iPhones, then I got an iPhone Air and can’t imagine going back to those fat bloated bricks people lug around daily. Worse, they put a thick case on it making it even more portly, because the aluminum bodies dent so easily. iPhone Air is what Steve Jobs would have wanted: a super thin strong Titanium phone that doesn’t need any case to feel complete.
Just because it's good doesn't mean it can't be better
The novelty of how thin my M5 iPad Pro is still hasn't worn off. Sometimes it's just nice to hold some tech in your hand that feels like it's from the future.
Since when have we established "thinner and lighter" equals "better"?
In the case of iPhone Air and Galaxy Edge phones, there were notable compromises to achieve a thinner body, for which many people don't consider an improvement.
Granted, I have not seen or used the new iPad mini, and I don't know if any such compromise has been made. But probably should leave it open until we conclude this is a plus.
I’ve been raw dogging my mini for the past couple of days because I removed the Smart Folio to wash off all the accumulated gunk. The sudden thinness and lightness was amazing.
Supports extended display - with Apple ignoring the capabilities of Pro iPhones (give us the Dex already!), this is now the smallest device you can take on trips to have it become a (nerfed by software) workstation when plugged to USB-C monitor.
I don’t see homeview being worth it unless they allow app installs. $300 for a display that shows photos and smart home controls is kinda pointless. You can’t even put up your home assistant dashboard on it.
I think there will be be app integration, but hopefully no App Store. We know that apps can work on HomeView using CarPlay. Not sure that is sufficient long term, perhaps just to jump start things. They may need to enhance that library to allow more kinds of apps to work with HomeView.
Right now, I think they are bringing out an MVP and waiting to see how people react to it and what kinds of things turn out to be useful. When they launched the Watch, no one was sure what kinds of things we would want to do on it. It took a while to see what was useful. I think a model where apps on your phone provide HomeView widgets like the Watch might be better than writing apps specifically for such a device.
Sure, but it’s weird to consider a device to be good value when the reason for that value is features you hope will launch in future updates maybe years down the line.
The homeview is DOA, I'm sorry. Who is the target for this?
There is no app store. I mean maybe they will add one later, but still until that happens I really dont see any use case besides setting some kitchen timers.
Yes, smart home is a thing, but tons of people need apps like Hue or Shelly to control their setup.
> This will make sure my kids can FaceTime their grandparents whenever they want
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that charged iPads are not the primary constraint here. If you can't trust them to keep their iPads charged, there's a good chance that you'll come back in a year and the HomeView hasn't left the setup screen, or is sitting in a box somewhere.
I don't like when they force a storage upgrade just to get a matte screen. I have no need for more storage, but would like a matte screen. As a $100 upgrade for nanotexture, it already seems steep, but forcing it to a $200 upgrade due to a needless storage bump is too much to ignore.
I also question what is required for nanotexture. I read the iPhone Duo has this in a replaceable screen protector, effectively. A replacement, under AppleCare is $15. Are we being charged $100 for a factory installed screen protector? If so, why does that need to be tied to certain levels of storage to reduce SKUs?
OLED is really good for media consumption, and IMO, this form factor is one of the best for carrying around in trips and watching movies on the car/plane/train/etc.
But the price is a bit high, that's the history of Apple though. On the other hand, I think this particular screen is probably going to be sourced by cheaper small android tablets at a much more competitive price, and if you're using it for media consumption, there's no difference between an Apple and an Android tablet.
Is Stage Manager with an external monitor possible with this new iPad Mini or still artificially limited to M chips? I mean it’s more powerful than the M1 iPad Air which supports it.
I'd like to have that confirmed too. Size wise, I'd love to get a Mini, but only being able to mirror to an external display, especially at this price, is a no from me.
I don't see anything suggesting it can perform this, so likely the artificial limit is still in place.
As a life long and continuous Apple user (and iOS SWE), I recently got a $150 Samsung Android tablet that I can use as a claude interface. It can take in voice commands, and create new builds of itself on a network Mac. So I can essentially have whatever screen or interface I want for any given moment. Right now I'm tuning my motorcycle with an OBD bluetooth device and recording engine behavior on rides.
There’s a tiny segment of folks (like me) who have been waiting a very long time for an 8ish inch OLED tablet. For some reason, until mid 2025, they were extremely rare, even in the Android multiverse. I’m excited because I read a ton with white text on black, and an OLED display (especially with this nanotexture stuff) will make a huge difference.
I wish Apple did an iPhone Uno or iPad nano — basically a wide phone with camera cutout, status and dock on the right or left side. Yes, two design versions for both left and right handed people. It will be so amazing for multi-tasking on mobile by quickly changing between apps with a permanent dock.
How would an OLED screen be an improvement over an ipad 8th generation? I'm debating on what to upgrade to but I mainly use my ipad for reading comics nowadays. Movies/TV are for the big screen.
I own no iPads but all my screens are OLED and I would never buy anything else. The true black is an absolute killer feature. It makes the device just a glowing wonder at night, magical feeling, no way to overstate it.
OLED + dark mode after sundown are awesome. On Android we also get the extra dim mode which makes it perfect for lights-out.
I use GrapheneOS on my Pixel and it gets very dim. Also, I have the night mode (orange tint) cranked way up - something that the stock OS should allow you to do.
And furthermore Apple’s OLED screens tend to have more color reproduction issues. I don’t have an iPad any more but gather a group of people using OLED iPhones. Use light mode and open the Settings app at the same time. You will see that different OLED screens render the same white menu items differently. Some will have a yellowish tint, others an unpleasant green tint. This happens regardless of whether one turns on or off TrueTone. This has been going on since the very first OLED iPhones. The old LCD iPhones never had this problem. It is highly subjective but it bothers me way more than a 60Hz refresh rate.
In general display technologies are highly subjective. Besides LCD versus OLED, there are people who love nano texture and there are people who hate them. There are people who absolutely need 120Hz and there are people who can’t tell the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz. It’s a shame that we can’t customize the display technology exactly as we want.
Nano texture was the entire reason I upgraded to an iPad Pro M4. The camera on the long edge is a major regression as far as I am concerned, however. The only drawback is fingerprints are harder to remove,you really need that special microfiber cloth or one of the cheap Chinese clones.
It's not. OLED screens use PWM, i.e. they are switching to almost black 256 times a second. That's tiresome for the eyes. Especially when you read from it with artificial lighting which is dim, that makes those black periods long and noticeable. Yes, recent iPhones sometimes don't go full black, but that's only for near-100% brightness.
Can definitely attest to this. When I was doing my PPL I had an iPad that had a built-in cellular modem loaded with ForeFlight for GPS positioning mounted to the inside of the cessna's window.
I've been hoping for a water and dust resistant tablet for use in the pottery studio for a while (for photographing work in progress, cataloguing glaze ingredients, taking notes, etc), as it's a wet and dirty environment, but the price kills all interest.
And with a 1-nit minimum brightness, iPad mini is even more suitable for dim environments, from users reading in bed at night to pilots checking their electronic flight bag in the cockpit.
As per other comments, my guess is somewhere between 1% and 5% of ipad mini sales are to pilots. It's gotta be significant or they wouldn't drop a line that in their main copy!
I like using my 6th gen as an erader. With the right color settings the screen doesn’t fatigue me, and it’s nice to be able to read from any source (kindle, Apple Books, Libby, a pdf, etc).
Nurses and elderly homes are a large market for minis in Japan. You get up to date patient data without the bulkiness of a regular iPad or the minimal screen of an iPhone. It also surprisingly fits in the pockets of nurse uniforms.
Perhaps they are planning to launch application features that require or benefit from the A20. Anyway it looks like the base model of the new iPad is using binned CPUs that were not quite good enough for the iPhone 18: 5 cores instead of 6, 1 neural engine instead of 2.
That's not the same thing at all as "selling it as a Pro product". They just happened to put a chip in it which has "Pro" in the name, and which this press release accurately names. They're still selling it as an "iPad Mini" at the same segments and value props that they've always sold iPad Minis at.
And the "Pro" in the chip name doesn't mean anything anyway, "Pro" is actually the lowest-power suffix for A/M-series chips (behind "Max" and "Ultra").
One of my beloved devices was the Nexus 7, it was an excellent affordable template that didn't feel cheap, nor fancy or pro. Just a good media consumption / general purpose small tablet.
I wish Apple would make a similar device. I'm fine with recycled chips and getting a bit gimped on RAM size.
Like the MacBook Neo of iPads; I just really want a media consumption device. A20 Pro means nothing to me.
They have enough bezel room to make it into 8.7" or even 8.9" version without changing the dimensions of the mini.
I believe this is the lightest iPad at only 255g. I just wonder how much more weight can they shave off.
And if they are going to kill the iPad? The current iPad line up is split into Pro, Air, (iPad) and Mini. Surely the mini could replace the normal iPad?
My iPad Pro is six years old now, the last generation before they started putting M chips in them. Still not interested in buying another until I can run a Linux VM on it.
Mine is a notebook, a sketch book and a reading device. I read books and queued Instapaper articles, take meeting notes, and make digital art. I love that device to bits.
The iPad is great for sketching, and for making music. It's like having a precision tool, such as a quality chef's knife. If you like to cook, you may not need a nice knife every day, but when you do need it, it's outstanding.
I would love Apple to actually make something that is worthy of the name Apple. When Steve was alive, Apple was A-P-P-L-E and now it is just a shell of its self.
The true innovation is hidden deep in the announcement:
"iPad mini supports both Apple Pencil (USB-C) and Apple Pencil Pro,.."
Like literally FINALLY. Having the wrong pencil for the wrong device sucked so much. (Deal with many iPads/iPhones at work, demo units, just such a hassle).
Back in the mid 2000s, Palm sold Treo smartphones with the camera removed, for high-security places that forbade cameras. Why do I tell this story? It means there is (was) a market for it. I would LOVE and iPad mini with the camera (and its bump) removed. A nice thin slab.
I don’t know about everyone else but I’m just so sick of Apple releasing marginally improved products, calling it their biggest update ever, and then jacking up prices. $700 for an iPad mini is absurd RAM price increases or not.
Do there exist any good small Android tablets at a reasonable price?
There were none available in Canada with cellular when I looked a few years ago so I ended up buying an African-region Galaxy Tab A9 for $170. It's functional, but by God is it slow, and that's after adb-removing about 50 pieces of Samsung bloat.
Samsung Galaxy Tab A11 X130 with 8GB of RAM costs around 220 EUR, I haven't tested that one though.
Another alternative is the Lenovo Legion Tab TB321FU, 12GB RAM, 256GB, but this one costs 500 EUR.
But you are right, there are not a lot of alternatives with 8GB RAM out there. Most Android Tablets with a screen size of 8-9" have 4GB, which would make them slow.
> Samsung Galaxy Tab A11 X130 with 8GB of RAM costs around 220 EUR, I haven't tested that one though.
This unfortunately looks to be basically the same as the A9 - the A11 is just lightly refreshed with a newer stock OS and higher refresh screen — the SoC and memory are the same.
It's the SoC that's really killing these tablets, the Helio G99 is about on par with the A10 Fusion from 2016.
The Google Pixel Tablet can be degoogled with GrapheneOS, but it was discontinued last month. It also does not have cellular connectivity. But it’s an excellent device, and the one I am using as part of my effort to wean myself off dependency on fast-enshittifying Apple.
They are working on it (CXMT for RAM and YMTC for NAND flash) but not having access to ASML’s EUV lithography equipment hobbles them.
The US government is also trying to kneecap them, threatening Apple with tariffs if they went ahead with YMTC storage, even if only for the Chinese market.
They are thus primarily focusing on the Chinese market, but if they weren’t there, DRAM and flash is a global commodity market and prices would have gone up even more insanely than today.
This is a disappointment. Apple has so much potential with iPad minis, but they consistently hold back simply because they don’t want to cannibalize their pro models.
Ok, how is this a disappointment - what does it not have that the pro does that you're seeking? To me, this just looks like a large phone without cellular. Not sure I'd want this, as I already have a large phone - good enough.
That's the whole iPad line. No multi-user because they don't want families to buy only one iPad, no support for running apps outside of the app store, etc.
With OLED, this is going to be the best e-book reader in dark mode, and given that it's water resistant you could even use it in bath/hot tub w/o destroying the device - if you're willing to put down $700 for an e-reader that is.
They should stop handicapping the non-Pro displays at 60hz refresh rate. The world moved on 5 years ago. It’s getting tiring now.
Right? Pro devices should be 240hz now
Why? Reference monitors in the production industry aren't.
The non-Pro iPhone 17 has ProMotion. I have to assume it's a matter of time before it'll make its way to the non-Pro iPads.
Sure, but the parent comment is saying the “matter of time” should be in the past. I wouldn’t buy a 60hz device today.
If you needed a mini tablet you would cause there's practically zero competition
I bought the new 8 inch Alexa tablet the other day, and the price was decent but it's a piece of shit. I only wanted it for putting on a video in bed while I fall asleep but it can't even do that because when you drop the brightness to minimum, the display randomly turns off (not actually locking the screen, it's still running the app and active, you can touch stuff you can't see, but the pixels are turned off)
> I bought the new 8 inch Alexa tablet [...] for putting on a video in bed while I fall asleep
That's...horrifying.
Have you tried closing your eyes?
I've seen some TVs do that, turn off the screen when it gets dark (not talking OLED). Often takes too long and is a nuisance. There's a similar awful gimmick with speakers turning off when quiet, but it results in sound cutting out because it's too slow. I've seen some monitors that even try to do this when using headphones through them.
The base iPhone 17 has a 120 Hz display, I suspect they are going to drip feed it through their products as a cheap spec bump (vs adding extra RAM or storage).
Or this will be an anomaly and they'll drop the base iPhone and keep the E model for the new base, the Air, the Pro and now the Duo.
> I suspect they are going to drip feed it through their products as a cheap spec bump (vs adding extra RAM or storage).
The iPhone sells way more units than the iPad, so it makes sense that it's not a feature for the iPad mini yet.
Has any non pro consumer ever noticed a display greater than 60 hz. I can barely get the regular people in my life to nice anything above 30 hz or turning off motion smoothing. I really don't see how any of this stuff matters for most people
You don't have to know what Hz is to see that scrolling on some devices is smooth and on other (coug..Apple) devices is choppy. 60Hz feels like a decade old phone.
Yeah I wanted to love the form factor of the Mini and thought the 60 he wouldn't be an issue but was reminded any time I used the device.
Actually surprised to learn Apple did the OLED swap and didn't use the opportunity to bump it up at least to 90 hz like the OLED Steam Deck.
If your phone is choppy when scrolling a list on a 60 Hz display, it's not going to scroll smoothly on a 120Hz display.
Phones today have plenty of power to generate 120 screens per seconds. Capping them with a screen is a terrible idea. Smooth form a decade ago isn't the same as smooth of today.
20 years ago I was gaming at 30fps and called it smooth. Now 120Hz feels like bare minimum.
I still game at 30 fps and don't really notice it, but scrolling at 30 fps gives me a headache.
Real pro gamers do 29.97 fps
iOS at 60Hz is so much worse than Android at 60Hz, I don't know why. maybe Apple did it intentionally to sell more iphones
Really, my case it's opposite. I was quite happy with the 60hz on my ip13mini, even if my main phone is Android 120hz phone.
I got a Pixel 7 Pro for work, and it's so laggy. Idk what a 120hz display is for when stock apps like Google Maps are running at like 30fps. I thought maybe some corp security stuff was slowing it down, but I showed it to people at work who have only ever used Android, and they thought it was normal.
Outdated comparison now that Liquid Glass is lagging my phone.
For whatever map rendering in Google Maps is capped at 30fps, yes. Google doesn't seem to care.
I mean the entire UI lags, not just the map. Not a steady 30fps, but it looks like something close to that on average. It seems like they started with weaker hardware and then threw Java onto it.
Yeah the Android is capable of 120 but often lower than 60 in practice
I just tried it on my iPhone right now, and yeah, something seems wrong. Switching from 120Hz to 60Hz on my Mac, I can barely tell. On the iPhone, 60Hz feels more like 30Hz.
> it's not going to scroll smoothly on a 120Hz display
It will be buttery smooth between the chops.
It's hilarious because the 120hz display is probably contributing to the lag
My pixel lets me pick between 60 or 120Hz refresh rate, the bump in perceived smoothness is substantial, to the point that 60Hz does appear choppy in comparison.
As someone who occasionally browses Hacker News on a Kindle e-Reader, having a low refresh rate really doesn't matter.
I'd love to have eInk at 90-120Hz. But I agree that 60Hz or 5Hz is pretty much similar expeirience when it comes to scrolling.
E ink is at 60hz now. Look up Bigme B7 (it's wild!)
I'm sure there is a point of diminishing returns for display refresh rates, but I can tell you from experience that it is definitely higher than 60hz. 90hz feels meaningfully smoother (on a Steam deck), and 120/144hz (on a desktop monitor in my case) feels smoother than that. Even mouse input latency is perceptibly lower. I've never used a display faster than 144hz but I honestly would not be surprised to discover that one can still tell the difference well past 144hz.
60fps is basically fine as long as you are unaware that it can be any better, but once you find out you are forever spoiled by the knowledge.
Yup. For me up until 90/100ish it's a pretty significant improvement all the way up and after that I don't know if I could notice outside of a fast game or wiggling the cursor over a contrasting color
I'm sure a lot of people now would feel odd if you gave them a 60Hz phone after high refresh has become so common, even if they don't pay conscious attention to that kind of stuff
I'm sure mouse latency is a big issue for iPad Mini users.
I know there's a sizable contingent of people who just think a bigger number is better, but realistically this is a device for passively consuming text and video content that is typically around 30 fps anyway. Why waste the battery power on faster refresh?
The ProMotion screens have variable refresh rate depending on the content displayed. 10Hz to 120Hz for iPhones and 24Hz to 120Hz for iPads. So in theory the power consumption should be even better than a regular screen for static content like reading text.
Not sure about iPads, but going from a pixel 3 to a pixel 5 made me feel like my pixel 3 was broken. Xr to 16 pro was similar, but that is because Xr was legit broken.
I know you’re being sarcastic with that first line, but touch latency is even more noticeable than mouse latency.
Does the page look and feel glued to your finger as you scroll?
Yes? That was true even of the first iPad.
It’s definitely not true even now. Even a moderately fast finger drag will lag noticeably - usually by at least a frame in even very carefully tuned situations. It’s just physics. If you aren’t noticing it, you’re just used to it.
Try rapidly dragging up and down to scroll a web page.
For some people, it’s motion sickness inducing of it gets too laggy
> Does the page look and feel glued to your finger as you scroll?
Yes, for me issues with apps have mainly been in poorly optimized code causing lag, slow loading and the like. The 60hz/120hz thing has never really been a practical issue.
Having seen faster screens, I find 120 is where the diminishing returns ramp up for me. I wouldn’t bother with more.
I would be surprised if >10% of people didn't notice a difference between 60Hz and 120Hz.
Whether the hardware can keep up with Liquid Glass and push 120 frames a second is a different story, of course.
notice, maybe, but care, definitely not. there's a reason TV manufacturers get away with leaving on that awful AI smoothing by default.
That argument goes the other way though? The only reason TV manufacturers would leave frame interpolation on by default is that a decent chunk of people notice, those people care, and most of the people who notice are "normal people" who aren't repulsed by it.
If only "pro consumers" noticed or cared... well, those "pro consumers" are the ones who think it looks like shit and would rather have a TV without it.
Nobody ever wanted a >60Hz display, but once you've used one it's hard to go back. It's like having a higher-performance car. You're now stuck with paying more just for baseline happiness.
It's probably not actually as hard to go back as we think it is, but holding on to stuff is in our genes.
I keep hearing this all the time, and I think this is an absolutely massive overstatement that you cannot go back to 60 hz after experiencing high refresh rates.
My personal experience is that I do notice the difference - for like a minute - and then I adjust and never care anymore.
Yeah, we're talking more like reducing the amount of sugar in your tea hard, not quitting heroin hard.
As an experiment I put my phone into 60Hz after posting this comment. 5 hours later I've remembered. I didn't notice.
Strangely enough, I can't use a sub-120hz phone anymore, but I have no problems using my 60hz laptop or 75hz desktop monitor. Maybe the different form factors let people compartmentalize their experiences.
I think Apple has held off 120 Hz for so long precisely because the average person gets a bit of a jolt of "this device is fast, it runs so smooth compared to..." they can't quite immediately place until someone explains it's the refresh rate.
Without this, it'd be very hard for an average user to "feel" a performance difference between an A18 Pro in the Neo and say as far as the M5 Max in a MacBook Pro unless they had a "special" use case which really needed the extra CPU/GPU cores.
Of course, they can't stay forever on that. E.g. with the iPhone 17 they finally flipped the non-Pro over. Probably because it was starting to make the iPhone seem sluggish/stuttery compared to other phones more than it was making the iPhone 18 seem fast. Tablets have never seemed to be as fierce a market in terms of your average Joe comparing them, but I'd expect the same switch to being a liability instead of a tool will happen there as well (if they aren't already late to the game).
I think they made iOS run slower for 60Hz devices. Like 2-3 version ago they changed all the animations and it makes it unbearable to use my iPHone 17 on 60Hz when I used to prefer running my old Samsungs on 60Hz several years ago.
I think it only really matters for gamers, but seriously, who's gaming on an iPad?! Use a PC or console!
It's worth pointing out that mobile gaming surpasses PC and console combined, in terms of marketshare and revenue. https://playercounter.com/gaming-industry-revenue-statistics...
I don't know how "mobile" gamers are using iPads (or tablets), but considering the size of the market, I doubt it's particularly niche.
Yeah, but they aren't "gamers," they're just people who sometimes play games. Which is fine. I'd much rather be in the latter camp.
Source?
Someone was complaining to me that Apple took a long time to add 120 Hz displays to phones. I didn't even know what my iPhone had, turns out it's 60 Hz cause it's a 12 mini. I've used 120 Hz displays before. Cannot tell the difference.
Some people are born with nervous systems which aren’t capable of noticing the difference, just like there are people who can’t see better than 20/20 no matter how good their optical acuity is.
Maybe I'd be able to tell in a blind test if I'm looking for it. Just meant it's not something I'd passively notice.
If you have any devices with a faster screen, you can see them side-by-side on https://testufo.com/
Not a blind test, but the smoothness when tracking a moving object is very obvious
Thanks for the link, checked it and well even side by side on my mbp, the difference is not that super obvious. 30 to 60 fps is very obvious and night and day. 60 fps and 120 fps, I only notice the difference side by side if I pay attention...
But maybe it's because I'm 40+ with relatively bad eye vision and 20 years earlier I'd be noticing the difference much more.. But I'd say going from 1080p to 4k was a lot more obvious than that...
I've never understood the 120hz hype. Sure it looks a tiny bit better, but I'd trade that in a heartbeat for more battery.
I doubt there's much difference because of the adaptive refresh rate, it runs at a lower rate most of the time and only uses 120 when it decides that would be useful.
But if you really don't want it, Settings > Accessibility > Motion > Limit Frame Rate will cap it at 60.
There's also an option to prefer page rendering updates near 60 hz buried in Safari's feature flags settings. This one defaults to on, presumably to protect the battery life from asshole web developers and advertisers.
If only they had an option to disable HDR to protect your eyes from advertisers
Agreed, I'd go for a setting where each page could have exactly one HDRed item
Yeah, that would be fair. Personally I just want it globally disabled, idc. But maybe there's 1 in 100 times I do care and can turn it on, that'd be nice.
Frustratingly, built in Mac displays kinda force enable it. You can at least reduce the max nits to be the same as max screen brightness, rather than the insane "XDR" default where HDR can go nearly 3x the max brightness. You can also make a custom color profile that disables HDR, but this disables the screen brightness controls, which isn't worth.
Yeah, I can tell if looking at the UFO but not the stars. It doesn't really look choppy at 60, just blurry.
Forgot to say... This test proves that my eyes/brain are capable of seeing the difference. But this is a test deliberately meant to show the difference, and even then I have to focus on it. I'm not going to notice in regular usage.
Some people can't even be convinced that 60fps is significantly better than 30fps for gaming.
Convincing them they need more than 60hz is going to be a hard sell.
If you use a 120 Hz iPhone for 6 months and then switch back to your 12 mini, you'll notice immediately.
If something is not noticeable when it gets "better", but it leads people to notice other stuff is "worse" over time, then I'd argue it's not actually a good thing to get.
Imagine if someone said "this food won't really taste better to you when you first eat it, but after 6 months you'll find other food tastes worse". To me, this would not be a selling point.
I don't think that's a good comparison.
I've often had new phones that are 'faster' but I barely notice the fastness until I go back to my old phone and realise that my finger-memory needs adapting because things take just a bit longer to load.
I'd assume it's similar for screen refresh rates.
That's not been my experience with the refresh rates, and it's not what GP and GGP said either. I have a 13 mini and have bought both 16 and Air. I kept them for 2 weeks and then returned.
When I got the phones, I did not notice any benefit related to screen refresh. I also did not notice any detriment when I went back to my 13 mini after two weeks on a 120 Hz screen.
But if it was as GP said, and it's only something you notice when you go back to a "lesser" screen, then that would not be a selling point in my book.
I always wondered why Windows users didn't notice the jagged text in 2001 and see a Mac as obviously better. You don't know what you aren't missing until it's gone.
I didn't know how bad TV looked in the 90s. We watched a low res 19 inch TV from across the room. Did moving to HD make any real difference in our lives? Do we really enjoy TV that much more? Once the excitement wears off about 20 minutes into watching it, its still the same thing. If the story is good, you get into it either way and forget what you're watching it on.
Depends on the content. When people are talking in a nondescript (thing the "12 Angry Men" movie), SD is quite fine. Now compare it to Blade Runner or Scarface. Those movies absolutely benefit from more detail and colors.
Watching older TV shows I notice a lot more close ups of actors faces. I’m convinced it’s because the shows were produced with small screens in mind.
Sounds very similar to old glass panes being thinner at the top and thicker at the bottom. Did the glass flow over the years, or did we lose what was common knowledge at the time, for installers to orient each pane a certain way?
Yes, I definitely remember noticing how much better TV was when we moved from 20" sets from last century to HD LCDs (and then much larger/higher-res LCDs) over the last 25 years.
And I would disagree that only the story matters. If that were the case, people wouldn't go to the theater (a trend that has started happening in the last 15 years as people have been able to rig their living rooms to give an experience that is nearly theater quality, especially when considering cost and convenience. When we had 20" TVs, they were no substitute for going to the movies.
People had giant TV’s in the past as well. They are cheaper now.
Either way, a larger screen is not the same improvement as higher resolution. And more importantly, the reason people may not go to the movies when they have a home theater system is partly due to justifying the cost of the theater system.
I watched TV and used computers in the 90s and the whole time I was desperate for display technology to improve. Mainly CRT refresh rates, which often gave me a headache, but yeah I noticed the crappy pixel density all the time too. The nice Apple display I have now is one of my fave things I’ve ever bought and could only be improved by being >60Hz (which I do notice, but it’s not a big deal).
CRT refresh rates is super high, usually starting at 120hz... and now we are trying to do the same? you want to feel headache again?
> CRT refresh rates is super high, usually starting at 120hz...
That’s not my memory of it at all. They were often set to 60Hz by default, and increasing the setting to 75Hz would make it noticeably less flickery.
> and now we are trying to do the same? you want to feel headache again?
The headaches were from when it was too low.
That’s what I’m talking about. 80Hz was just enough to keep the headaches away for me and that was either impossible or came with other compromises for some monitors / video cards.
Big of you to assume I only watch "if the story is good".
The kids make me watch Transformers - completely devoid of suspense or consistency. That 4k 120Hz OLED is the only thing getting me through that gauntlet.
HD matters a lot for sports. Big screens and nice sound help with movies, which DVD quality is usually good enough for, but certain movies deserve to be a theater or IMAX. It doesn't matter for most other things. I still watch stuff in 360p or 240p.
It's the same dynamic as with how we optimize for web pages speed. People don't immediately think that website responding 200ms faster is better. But they enjoy the experience more anyway (even if at some subconscious level) and they end up liking it more and spending more time with it.
With food also you could be incrementally getting better and better food and when you then try v1 it would taste bad.
It seems that we might also be noticing slight degradation more than slight improvement in general? No idea if that's true.
This was exactly my experience when I stopped eating fast food regularly.
I think this varies a lot from person to person. I find the effect to be incredibly subtle - one of my monitors reset it self to 60hz a while back, and I didn't catch the problem for days.
Scrolling text, I notice IMMEDIATELY
Sure, and maybe I'm odd, but I don't read text while scrolling. I stop scrolling and then read. So yes, if I just scroll up and down quickly I can see the refresh is different, but otherwise I don't notice it in my regular usage.
Plus we all grew up reading the 24fps text scroll in the Star Wars intro just fine. Until we convince a new generation of cinematographers to shoot in 120fps, it all seems a bit moot - even most digitally-authored content doesn't exceed 60fps (and tech people are the first to complain about things like the soap opera effect...)
There is a big difference between watxhing a movie and operating a device where your input makes things move on the screen, you notice the depay way more.
I find that watching something like a fast-pan in 24fps footage on a modern LCD is horrific. CRTs used to inherently smooth this sort of thing out, but now we get these harsh frame transitions. As much as the soap-opera-effect is maligned, a high refresh rate LCD needs some form of motion prediction for low frame rate content.
Yeah, which is why those TVs doing frame interpolation or whatever are beneficial for most people as long as they do it well. Even though AV pros might get annoyed at the fakeness.
The way frame rate work on conventional film vs. an LCD are completely different. It’s like trying to ask the bitrate of a Vinyl record.
Conventional film projectors don’t show each frame continuously, they transition the shutter blade smoothly between frames, and projectors often flash each one a couple of times (48 or 72hz). A cinema projector is going to demolish a LCD in smoothness and motion quality even if it technically has a higher refresh rate on paper.
Right, but we're mostly all watching 24 fps movies on LCDs. I don't have a cinema projector in my living room.
So when remastering from film, do they put each frame into the digital video and keep it 24 fps, or do they play the film and digitally record it at 60 fps to capture the projector effect?
Either way, DVDs were digital 29.97 fps at most.
Can you not literally see the frames skip as you move the mouse cursor across the screen? To me it’s OBVIOUS and excruciating and I’m only a light/casual gamer and use all my computers for work.
If I move my cursor slowly I can see the difference, I guess? But I don't habitually do that - I run with mouse/trackpad dialled to maximum acceleration, even at 120Hz there's a skip when you flick the cursor halfway across the screen. And I'm rarely scrolling a line at a time, I'm going page at a time.
I don't really get the obsession with smooth movement for desktop use (as opposed to gaming). Possibly this is a generational thing? Why is anyone intentionally using a computer primarily via slow analogue inputs?
What you definitely notice between 60Hz vs 120Hz on a phone is the battery drain.
Depends a lot on the usage I guess. In a tablet where you may draw etc you can notice the difference definitely. Or if you play games on the phone. But otherwise I don't think the difference is that important as it is sometimes claimed.
Yeah, first thing I'd do is check if it can be disabled
I used to switch between a MacBook Pro with a 120Hz display and a MacBook Air with a 60Hz display and never noticed any difference. I think I could probably have noticed if I'd put them side by side and compared the feel of the scrolling, but why would I do that?
There's a minority of people who really do notice stuff like this, which is fine. The problem is that for some reason, they sometimes have difficulty accepting that they're a minority.
Not for me. I tried out the high refresh rate thing, switched back to 60.. can't tell any difference at all. Same for high DPI vs "regular" DPI screens.
Screen flicker on CRTs with low refresh rates was terrible for me, but with modern flat panels.. nope, can't really tell the difference.
The difference is extremely noticable on a PC when you're dragging windows around with a mouse (or gaming of course). Especially if you have a dual-monitor setup and only one of them does the high refresh rate.
Not sure I'd notice it much on a phone.
And for decades we've had people claiming that 30fps is just fine for gaming...
There was an immense step up from 30 to 60.. I guess it stands to reason there would be more improvement past 60
> I can barely get the regular people in my life to nice anything above 30 hz or turning off motion smoothing. I really don't see how any of this stuff matters for most people
"I don't have an issue with it, so most people also don't have an issue with it"
False Consensus Effect (or false consensus fallacy):
It happens when someone overestimates how much other people agree with them, assuming that their own personal beliefs, values, or experiences are the default for everyone else.
But in this case, most people really truly don't have an issue with it.
It's a very small minority who cares.
> It's a very small minority who cares.
Cite your sources, please or you're just echoing "trust me, bro".
Most people don’t even know what a refresh rate is. They don’t know why it’s measured in hz. They certainly don’t know what 60 vs 120 means.
You can’t prove your inverse take tho.
Reading comprehension is important. There was no inverse take here. Just pointing out anecdotal evidence isn't enough to draw a conclusion over a larger sample size.
Mmm nope, that trick doesn't work here today.
You want them to cite sources for something they can't possibly cite. I'm telling you that you are doing the same thing they are: confidently asserting that you're correct even though you cannot possibly prove that.
It is not a difficult concept.
> confidently asserting that you're correct
Where did you see this? The acoustics in your head must be wild:))
> The acoustics in your head must be wild
Source?
The comment wasn't saying "I don't have an issue with it." It said "regular people in my life." In fact, maybe the commenter is one of the few people who have an issue with it.
For doomscrolling or watching videos it makes little difference. For an iPad that advertises drawing with the pencil, the latency of the brushstroke is a massive difference between the two. The more immediate feedback unlocks more confidence and reduces a lot of friction.
From what I can tell, it's the thing they notice more than almost anything else. I was recently shopping for a new phone and my brother, who has no interest in tech, kept telling me I need to get the one with it (I forgot the exact term he used, it wasn't 120hz admittedly).
Scroll text in 60 and 120Hz. Can’t read while scrolling at 60Hz. It’s not movies what makes you notice
My monitors accidentally switched to 30hz and it was extremely noticeable.
I am a nerd, but scrolling and my mouse cursor is obviously smoother at 120hz over 60. I can't tell the difference at 144 vs 120 however.
My Samsung Galaxy has a switch for either 120hz or better battery life. Never bothered to even try the 120hz. The phone feels fine. Hell, the only reason I even upgraded to this one was to get security fixes.
Yes? 30-60 is night and day so i have a hard time believing this.
There is an argument to be made on battery life 60-120 but my god i can instantly tell between 60-120. The key part is the input responsiveness more than anything else. If you tell someone to look at “frame rate” few will notice the dif but have them grab a window and wiggle it around, obv dif with responsiveness
High refresh rate displays are an interesting feature because most users do not notice the difference.
I can spot a 60Hz display from jiggling the mouse pointer for a second.
I’ve also done side-by-side comparisons of full screen scrolling on 60Hz and 120Hz screens for less technical people who could barely perceive a difference when I was pointing it out, but it took some time to get them to see it.
MKBHD (YouTube tech video and reviewer) talks about this a lot: It’s highly valuable to people like you and me who are attuned to the performance of our devices, but most people don’t notice. Or care!
I would appreciate high Hz displays everywhere, but I admit that Apple has probably made the right consumer choice tradeoff to compromise on refresh rate for these lower end devices where minimum cost and maximum battery life are the two most important features for those who buy them.
I think another thing to keep in mind is that there’s probably an element of sensory adaptation at play here. Like when you wear a watch: you notice it at first, and then you don’t notice it on your wrist anymore.
So if you’re actively moving between a high-refresh-rate device (like a lot of people here with their 144hz monitors) and then one with a lower refresh rate, you’re probably more sensitive (and potentially annoyed) by the discrepancy.
You will notice this as soon as you use a low dpi device again for any length of time. First 10 minutes you see the pixels. After that you stop seeing the pixels.
Viewing distance plays a factor too. I realized 4k tvs are useless to me because I can't perceive 1080p pixels unless I'm comparison shopping in a TV show room from 2 feet away (probably why they don't let you experience appropriate TV viewing distances in these spaces in the first place).
I'm one of those who can't spot a difference. I've tried to with the mouse trick or scrolling and I just can't see it. I can see the difference between 30fps and 60fps but anything north of 60fps is imperceptible to me. Maybe it's from a lifetime of gaming on toaster specs where I'd scarcely break 25fps.
Motion picture film 24 frames per second, old line NTSC 30 frames per second.
While I agree 100%, I'm more interested in the variable refresh down to 1hz that comes with 'Promotion' to save on battery when viewing lots of static text.
If you give me a choice between buttery smooth >60Hz refresh rate animations, and better battery life, I'll choose the battery life 100% of the time. But that's just me. But then again, with the insides of a typical tablet being 90% battery these days (along with a little motherboard along one edge) maybe that's all a nonissue. Phones, on the other hand... my unambitious, cheap (from when you could still get half decent cheap phones) one goes two days on a charge easily, whereas a friend with an "advanced" phone struggles to get through one day with it, often running out during all-day outdoor adventures. Tradeoffs!
Phones use VRR displays, they don't always scale up all the way to 120Hz, only when justified by the content.
What's magical about 60 there? I'd naively think you'd just want VRR and some power saving render rate behavior rather than a fixed target framerate equal to the max framerate for all types of content all the time. The latter gives you neither good power saving nor good experience in most combinations.
This tradeoff doesn’t exist.
Look at Apple’s own smartphone lineup. The Pro models with 120Hz screens get better battery life than the low end iPhone models.
You could make up for the difference in battery life with an almost undetectable amount of extra battery capacity from both a cost and size standpoint.
I think you missed the point of their comment. The point is they are reducing features (marginal cost difference for them) to provide a worse experience for a cheaper model. I'm pretty sure it's less complicated to have a shared manufacturing process with fewer SKUs than to have two separate displays (if they're even different and not just software locked).
Do you think they couldn't add a refresh rate control to the device if you wanted to have lower battery? They already have variable refresh rate implemented, a much harder problem.
I remember the age of when Intel used to lock down hardware multipliers for overclocking behind the K versions, and GPUs did too. This is a well known practice, and Apple is not above it.
Even on the 120Hz displays, you can choose to cap them to 60Hz in settings.
the irony is that 120hz screens are actually 1-120hz vs constant 60hz which makes it more battery efficient most of the time except for when you're scrolling
To everyone over here stating the pro vs regular consumer argument:
- Apple introduces OLED and talks about deep blacks and 1200 bits
- Why do they think people care about the above and not 120hz as well?
To the average consumer, neither matters much. True. But the above did not make much sense to me.
Apple introduced Tandem OLED there is a difference most of the PC world is still using single OLED with all its shortcomings along with Thunderbolt 4.
120hz at 5k requires Thunderbolt 5 (ie better graphics card, more info down the pipeline.
Which is why most of the PC world is on cheap 4k monitors still.
LG were the first to ship products with Tandem OLED, in the automotive market. Apple were not even the first in the mobile or PC markets, being beaten by Huawei and Dell, respectively.
Most 5K monitors on the PC side are not going to be driven over Thunderbolt, but rather DisplayPort or HDMI.
And the most popular resolution on PC is not 4k, but rather 1080p and 1440p.
> And the most popular resolution on PC is not 4k, but rather 1080p and 1440p.
Because that market, in aggregate, only spends extra on monitors for gaming.
> Which is why most of the PC world is on cheap 4k monitors still.
According to the Steam Hardware Survey for last month, 47.91% of Steam users are on 1920x1080; adding the 2.56% on 1920x1200 means that a majority of users are still on 2K. The next biggest chunk of users are on 2560x{1440, 1600}, at about 32%. Only 5% of users are on 4K resolutions or greater.
And these are gamers, who are more likely than the average user to care about graphical fidelity. Most of the PC world just does not care about 4K, period.
To the average consumer, deep blacks will look great in the next Avengers movie.
To the average consumer, obsessing over scroll feeling not completely perfect is a distraction from watching the next Avengers movie, if not downright neurotic behavior.
To a prosumer, the value may be obvious but the price may not be worth it. Which can lead to a distaste for the company, for not being a more accommodating company.
To a professional, if you need it, you need it, and you begrudgingly pay for it. Because you need it.
I don’t even know what my phone screen has. Wasn’t why I bought the pro at the time. Wanted the additional ram. So I wouldn’t feel as pressed to upgrade now. (Prosumer, aka neurotic.)
Did it? Most devices are still at 60
Came in to say exactly that. That’s what’s holding me back from upgrading my older Pro. I refuse to go back to 60hz.
Why?
I could not care less about any refresh rate over 30.
You can care about it, but that just means it sounds like a differentiator to me, not something everyone should pay for just because you care about it.
You will have to somehow prove it if you would say that the panel and driver chip are all already ready to do 100+ hz for free by default, and are actually artificially limited, and that that artificial limitation doesn't come with some other advantage like battery life (allowing a smaller battery or less cost in some other way).
For movies, 30fps is good enough, but for a screen which you interact with, the change to 120hz is dramatic. And there is no reason why they should not be adding it.
Not sure if to give credibility and we will soon know but I bet the panels they are using are 120hz rate panels, locked to 60hz. Reading it from multiple sources. No clear data we will have to wait for ifixit
Why? Because.
Or, jokes aside, I honestly think that you might just have beefier time-integrating sensory-processing circuits in your brain than I do. Really. I do profoundly notice the difference, and it's a gritty and distracting thing. A slight but persistently intrusive and distracting perceptual thing. I honestly wish I didn't notice, but I do. I basically ask this: believe us when we ask for higher framerates and lower end-to-end latency.
And I'm fairly certain that the hardware and software to do higher frame rates across the board is a baseline commodity in the Apple source hardware ecosystem the build and integrate from. And it's certainly a better fit to consider it a line drawn between "pro" and "not pro" for marketing and pricing purposes than any fundamental and meaningful price-of-equipment threshold.
I always change back my devices to 60Hz. There's no brain here. I get motion sickness easily.
Usually it's low FPS (if FPS at all) that causes motion sickness. This comes up in VR discussion a lot. IIRC like 90Hz is considered a minimum.
I get horribly motion sick playing some games like Half-Life 2, Metroid Prime, or the original DOOM. I run my phone at 120Hz and like it. For games, cranking up the FoV tends to help, also disabling effects like viewbobbing, blur, shaking, etc.
I understand this is not fun to experiment with, though. Once I'm motion sick, I tend to be the entire day, only sleeping fixes it, so I'm not usually excited to keep trying to tweak the thing that makes me sick. I tend to dive into settings before playing any game now. I hate when it auto starts the game to appear cinematic.
Oh you should try the accessibility feature for that with the little dots on the screen.
Agreed.
If they INSIST that it MUST be 60 Hz, I'd accept the consolation/compromise of 60 Hz but 0ms-ish latency. (Maybe they already do it that way.)
As in waiiiiit until the 16.67ms between frames is almost up while sampling inputs, then bam!, render quicky, bam!, transfer it over a link that could carry more than 60 frames per second, bam!, fast OLED display. Each frame fresh and close to input.
To the why?-sayers: Because the difference is noticeable. We can get all philosophical and discuss whether it's a competitive advantage for someone to not notice the difference, or vice versa. Why the why?, why not just… take us difference-noticers on our word? Like… we're not taking your 60Hz 16.67ms crunchiness away from you?
> (Maybe they already do it that way.)... take us difference-noticers on our word
You didn't convince me.
"Maybe they already do it that way" refers to Apple's implementation of the iPad Mini OLED.
It's extremely interesting, and I'll be frank here, that people who just can't tell the difference are usually judgy and kind of status- and comparison-oriented towards people. In my experience. Others may not notice that difference.
Using a 60hz screen after you’ve been on high refresh rate screens for a few years literally feels like something is broken.
Like, is the battery running out or is a setting misconfigured somewhere? I won’t spend a dime buying any device that can’t hit at least 90-100hz+
> I won’t spend a dime buying any device that can’t hit at least 90-100hz+
Sounds like you'd buy the RapidWipe 120 wipers. Much smoother sweep, but you'll go through a windshield a week.
/s
Exactly why I refuse to buy any screen greater than 60hz. I’m fine with 60hz, and don’t want to ruin it for myself. Plus it’s cheaper.
I use 60hz monitors and they accidentally switched to 30hz and it felt so broken until I figured out the problem.
do people have NASA sensors instead of eyes? 48hz is fine, let alone 60hz. Probably they save a lot on battery as well.
Apple should also unlock the bootloaders on devices once they add them to their own "Obsolete" list.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102772#ipadobsolete
A 40% price increase compared to pre June pricing, a 60Hz display (that’s likely just software locked), and still starting at 128GB of storage.
I was actually excited for this, but now I’m going to pass.
128gb...
Thanks AI.
I wanted to upgrade my air(gen4) but with these prices it's just not happening. Oh and no support for the perfectly fine apple pencil I already got with it is just....
... AI and the RAM-pocalypse.-
Those are the same thing, not two independent factors.
It's a bit like the Trinity. I am singling it out for argument's sake, to make a point.-
Different "manifestations" of the same underlying.-
Value/$ in iPad basically has not changed since 2022. Inflation (general and AI/antitrust-driven component shortages) has cancelled out technical gains.
Now I get why they only announced it via press release...
I doubt the display is hardware locked. Apple is too good at protecting its margin to do that.
I would not assume it is software-locked. Display controller on 120Hz ProMotion displays is more expensive. Also, the panel itself is likely cheaper LTPS vs. LTPO.
Who can afford this shit?
I can, easily, wouldn’t feel the cost in any way.
The question you I think should ask is who finds this value reasonable?. To which, I can only answer my myself who can’t see any reason to upgrade from my iPhone 15.
I'm on iPhone 13 and only reason I'd like to upgrade is my battery is poor now and because I have a small crack on the back glass, Apple requires me changing both the back glass and battery which is $500 CAD.
> To which, I can only answer my myself who can’t see any reason to upgrade from my iPhone 15.
It's cool that you have extra cash to blow on pointless devices, but you were looking to upgrade from an iPhone to an iPad mini?
Cellebrite.
For humans that don’t follow every tiny little bit of news and recall it for one word non-secular answers to things…
I assume this guy is saying that I should upgrade my iPhone 15 because of an Israeli tech company, Cellebrite. Implying that I need to stay current on my phone hardware in order to be not targeted by a nation state actor.
Upgrade to the latest backdoors hah. In 2026, do we really still believe it's not baked in
“nation state actor” makes it sound unlikely. They sell boxes to many different governments, including the FBI. If you ever cross an international border you should have a modern device running the latest patches.
> I can, easily, wouldn’t feel the cost in any way
This is probably the single most well, excuuuse me, princess moment I have ever witnessed around these parts. Alright Mr Richie Rich.
Software engineers in a good chunk of Europe/US/Canada/Australia make 6 figure salaries, of course they can easily afford an iPad Mini.
Yep. That’s pretty much common knowledge at this point. What I’m surprised about is reading someone not-at-all-humble brag about it.
Keep looking at your feet, you might find the point there someday.
The point isn’t the money. It’s the value.
Is that easier for you to understand? Perhaps I should refute my own argument since you are having trouble getting to a point in which you can agree or disagree?
I don't know about the US, but not even FANGs pay six figure salaries to most of their European employees. Perhaps L7 and up.
Yeah, you phrased it better. I am really frustrated these days. The (more accurate) statement I should made is: "The only people who can afford devices like this are smart enough to question the value."
> I can, easily, wouldn’t feel the cost in any way.
You are not in the median. Half of Americans claim they do not have emergency funds, and over a quarter cannot pay their monthly bills.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/10/14/many-amer...
It's hard to even know what price to use to calculate the delta, since there are different processors with different memory capacities, different CPUs based on memory, and higher price for the nano-texture display.
But yeah, a top-of-the-line iPad mini costs well more than an MBA, which seems kind of nuts. Add on a keyboard case and Apple Pencil Pro and you're looking at $1,500.
it's water resistant
that's huge
Is it? I’m curious what use-cases you think are the most relevant here.
Putting the ipad right next to the sink when doing dishes is the best I can come up with. Or maybe if it’s used in a business context, such as for salespeople doing a promotion on a sidewalk
> I'm curious what use-cases you think are the most relevant here.
Watch, um... video podcasts while showering?
Such a shitty proposition. Why would anyone buy this.
They ticked all the boxes.
Add to that a locked OS, and you got a bingo.
It makes no sense to make the devices so thin and then having a fat camera. This requires a cover to equalize the size with the camera for haptic reasons. Better use this space for other stuff like larger batteries and make the device the same thickness everywhere.
What about weight?
The extra volume can be air like it is in most consumer electronics.
It makes sense for the manufacturer, they save a LOT of materials.
Like nitrogen and oxygen gas that would take up the extra space inside?
iOxygen and iNitrogen can be quite expensive, especially if you get the Apple+ option.
The most advanced form of Oxygen and Nitrogen ever seen. Steve Jobs himself invented the precise mixture of isotopes.
Density is insanely highly correlated with the perception of premium quality. No one’s increasing the volume of premium devices beyond what’s needed to hold components.
Aren't most people using their device with a case anyways?
Not sure about the iPad Mini, but I've really only seen the bigger iPads with a case. There's just so much screen to damage, and you do really want some kind of way to prop up the bigger iPads. I very rarely remove my iPad Pro from its keyboard case.
The carousel 2nd image appears to have erased the camera to make it fit the marketing narrative? That's pretty bold.
Definitely an odd choice. Especially when two images later has it again
It always reminds me of the imac from 15 or so years ago when they were touting how thin the imac was.
In reality the back was curved, and they took pictures from an angle that only showed off the edge of the screen and not how far back it curved
> In reality the back was curved, and they took pictures from an angle that only showed off the edge of the screen and not how far back it curved
You only see the thickness at the back from an angle where you can't actually use the computer (and for many people, that whole angle is going to be against the wall). This is the good kind of design - making something appear beautiful without compromising the core function.
I'm distinctly less convinced about ever-thinner mobile devices that I immediately have to slap a case on...
The older iMacs that were the same thickness all the way across, they still looked good. Except they were some of the best machines to service. Literally two screws in the bottom, the whole thing split in half, and your hard drive, memory and other components were right there. I worked on tons of them and they were fantastic. It saved people money in the long run when they needed an upgrade because it took less time. Even replacing the screen or logic board in them was a piece of cake.
woah - that's pretty shocking to me actually. in the past they generally have just used flattering angles. This is downright deception.
I presume it is a flattering angle instead of a falsified image. The camera bump is near the one large button, which was furthest from the camera when they rotate it, so the iPad could have been angled slightly to hide the bump. Maybe someone can try to reproduce it after it comes out to see if it is a false image.
Yeah, the picture of the iPad is probably taken like /, not like |.
This is literally just a flattering angle. Not saying it's not deceptive, but they didn't "edit" the camera bump out of the image.
https://www.apple.com/v/ipad-mini/a/images/overview/product-...
this is directly side-on. they've def removed the camera bump. In the initial animation at the top where the hand grabs it too. the bump is very clear in shots later!
wait... could they have hidden it under the hand? and why does that person's thumb seem extra long?! the more I look at this the less I understand it.
Perspective is still at play. At arms length, on my phone, if I make it so the flat surface is completely aligned with my center of vision, the bottom side covers at least 1mm of whatever is on the underside. The closer one gets to the phone, the more pronounced the effect.
The video keeps triggering my sense of seeing CGI, but the hiding effect on display can absolutely be accomplished in camera.
That thumb looks incredibly photoshopped (or AI edited).
It's the top image on the product page: https://www.apple.com/ipad-mini/
I would assume, however, that they didn't "fake" it - that they instead chose a filming position and lens such that camera was obscured behind the edge of the device (the edge facing the viewer is the far side from the camera). Bit of trickery for sure though.
For anyone curious, a diagram with the camera can be found here: https://www.apple.com/v/ipad-mini/a/images/specs/buttons_con...
from this page: https://www.apple.com/ipad-mini/specs/
> I would assume, however, that they didn't "fake" it - that they instead chose a filming position and lens such that camera was obscured behind the edge of the device
I’d suspect the same. From that angle, the camera bump is on the opposite edge; when I hold my iPad Air in the same position, the camera bump is also just about hidden.
That being said, I’d also suspect that Apple chose that angle deliberately.
Is that a real video or cgi? The motion reminds me of motion tweening.
Historically, Apple used real photos and video for marketing material, only lit and polished to perfection to create a sort of hyper-real effect. Nowadays, who knows.
The usual narrative is that Apple are meticulous, therefore it is only proper that we assume they did this on purpose.
I wonder if at this point a camera bump is too closely associated with quality.
A minimal camera bump means they've advanced the technology to make it small, but no camera bump makes it look like they're using a cheaper camera?
Nobody cares if a tablet has a shit camera.
I’ve seen enough parents at graduations and tourists to know people use it. Assuming they need the big screen because their vision is bad which undermines the need for a high res photo in the first place.
If I recall they did the exact same thing with the first iPhone that had the camera bump.
But don't you just need a big camera on your giant tablet? How will you ever manage if you don't have a nice camera on both sides of all your handheld devices? /s
If they put the tiny "front-facing" camera pointed out the back it would be enough for the vast majority of people I imagine.
That's the thing - I genuinely don't understand the user or usage Venn diagram : when and who will 1. Have an expensive ipad with them and require a good big camera, but 2. Not have an equivalently competent phone with them?
Don't get me wrong, I understand it happens - back when I did wedding photography, one of my massive pet peeves were the uncles and grandparents who stepped into the aisle with their massive tablets just as bride is starting her walk... But I do not understand it at all :-/.
I'd absolutely happily completely kill the rear facing tablet camera. I've had at least a dozen android and ipad tablets and I genuinely don't think I took a single photo with them - it'd feel weird and awkward and so ostentious.
(As always as a consumer, clearly I'm in minority here :-})
When I use the rear camera, it's part of a feature of some other app that clearly makes sense to use as a tablet. You're bogged down as it being used as a primary camera as a photographer. There are other needs for cameras other than portraits. Using the rear camera in an AR mode is quite handy in apps.
Fair - thank you for that context! :)
The most common use-case for the rear iPad camera in our household is stop-motion animation. There are some great apps for this, and the big screen (when effectively stabilized on a tablet stand or tripod + clamp) is lovely for composing and comparing frames.
Note that the uncles and grandparents are all old. When you get to a certain age, your eyes don't like to focus on small things like cameras. The elderly prefer tablets, and they want to be able to take pictures of their nieces and nephews and grandchildren.
More battery means more weight, and no one wants these to be heavier.
Then just remove the camera in return for nothing. Less weight and a slimmer form!
False. That is a false statement. You said that "no one" wants these to be heavier, when in fact, many people would gladly accept a few nanograms of extra weight for a better battery. Look at everyone with a Clutch or Anker attached to their phone.
Since basically everybody uses a case anyways, the important factors are weight and width with the case on. This design makes both of those significantly smaller than your suggestion.
The argument is most people use a case regardless, so if it were the same thickness across the device, the iPad would be considerably thicker once in a case. That and weight. I don’t use cases so it bothers me too, but it does make some sense.
It's still very strange how much work goes into the materials for the case and the ergonomics and weight of holding the devices without a case just to assume everyone will put it in a case. I'm with you on iPads, they get too heavy/thick for their primary uses once in a case. The phones I sort of get but I still think it ruins a lot of the aesthetic choices they make about the case design.
I find it annoying too, I assume it's because thin and light devices sell more (both in promo photos and when used in Apple stores).
My mum's Samsung S23 Ultra has a ridiculous camera bump and rocks back and forth when you use it, even with some thinner cases. You need a super thick case for it to stay stable.
I've always thought this too. An iPad with an integrated case would be able to fill the entire flat back area with a battery, and just have rubber on the edges where impact protection is needed. The existing design is really optimized around having an impressive experience in the store when holding an uncased product, before you inevitably cover it.
Why would you want an integrated case? The soft impact absorbing materials degrade much faster than the aluminum. Look at the average ipad users case and it's falling to pieces, you don't want that permanently fixed to the device.
There's also many users who don't need a case. A lot of ipads are POS systems that are fixed to the bench so they don't need a case either.
> Why would you want an integrated case? The soft impact absorbing materials degrade much faster than the aluminum.
Given that the impact-absorbing parts could be [0]
and could obviously be designed to be replaceable, either by a handy user or an Apple Technician, why wouldn't you want Apple to design the feel and balance of a device with a case that has built-in impact protection?
Apple's decision to make most of its handhelds out of various grades of "fragililum" has boggled my mind since they sold the first iPhone with an easily-shattered glass back. That choice makes sense for a conspicuous status symbol that people are going to take very good care of... but most folks either end up with one with damage that makes plain how theirs is not the kind of life that makes that possible, or they have installed some aftermarket shell that ruins the effect by covering up the conspicuously fragile part of the hardware.
[0] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50247743>
Yes that stupid camera bump ... I hope those designers lose their jobs to AI. Then again, perhaps they already did :)
Isn’t the bump already used to pack components that don’t fit in the rest of the device body? I don’t believe it’s only used for the camera.
Though I do hate that bump. I just tried a duo and the bump makes it awkward to hold as a tablet
A lot of their devices do that, but I doubt there is space in the iPad mini bump to fit anything.
The big examples are iPhone Air and iMac.
From my experience, the iPhone bumps are a lot more noticeable than their iPad siblings.
Even stupider for iPads because who even is using the back camera? Just get rid of it entirely and the device will be exactly as functional.
WAT. Just because you do not does not mean you get to dictate how others can use it. I know lots of people that use the rear camera on iPads. I'm one of them.
> Just because you do not does not mean you get to dictate how others can use it.
No one attempted to dictate anything. They expressed an opinion. HN is a discussion forum. This is exactly what it’s for.
Your point would look stronger if you had only included your last two sentences without the indignation of the first two.
"Just get rid of it entirely and the device will be exactly as functional."
That is not expressing of an opinion but dictating an action. "I think they should get rid of it entirely..." would be the expressing of an opinion.
then everything would be just tiptoeing and nothing would be interesting.... it's not like someone saying that will actually cause Apple to get rid of it
Yes they are just whining into the void about something they can’t change. Great use of everyone’s time all around.
More likely though they’re trying to signal their membership to the in-group that’s always circle jerking on every iPhone/iPad post about SD cards, removable battery, thick small phone, flush camera, etc.
Whining into the void is most conversation online is. It’s what you are doing, too.
The top comment thread here is complaining about the camera bump.
No, I’m whining to the source
Literally you are not. You whined to r_lee about paxy’s comment.
Literally I am
it's what actually starts conversations.
it's not super "ethical" if you're like triggered by (maybe) harsh opinions, but it gets people to chime in vs just lurking
Do you imagine that Apple designers are trolling HN to generate their next device plans?
He’s literally expressing an opinion. There is no in here to “dictate” to.
To be fair, the iPad mini is a way better form-factor for camera use than any of the big iPads. I think the only time I've ever used the rear camera on the 12" iPad was to scan a document...
A surprising amount of people use the back camera for document scanning.
Probably if the (in)famous airdrop was more reliable, people could figure out they can scan with their phone and airdrop to their tablet.
Too bad though, there's no way to put a scanned document onto iPad in Apple's ecosystem other than the otherwise useless camera.
Some people don't have iPhones though. Rare, I know. I have an iPad and my wife has an iPhone but I have never owned one at all and instead have always used Android right from the HTC G1.
I use it quite often for scanning QR codes.
I've seen asshats at concerts holding their iPads up to record. Bad enough when people hold their phones up, but this was next level.
Yeah it's infuriating. I love how even Apple are embarrassed by it, since in the first two animations of people holding and rotating the device they've left off the camera bump, making it look smooth flat.
If they levelled it out you could surely fit a far larger battery in it too. I'd far rather have a device 1.5mm thicker with a battery lifespan twice as long and no silly bump on it.
Would you also like the extra weight of such a device?
Everyone I've ever known, would gladly make that tradeoff.
what premium would you pay for this? asking for a friend.
Zero. Ignoring that Apple prices are already inflated beyond all reason, a larger battery would add a single digit dollar amount to the BOM.
Ok, so they'll continue making thinner devices that appeal to more people then.
>implying that Apple cares about what users want
They do. That’s why they discontinued the mini phones. Nobody likes those.
I have a hard time believing the camera bump isn't the result of intensive consumer psychology experiments. Setting a bare apple device down on a flat surface feels like chair with a leg sawed off. They need you to buy the accessories. This is part of making the ecosystem viable.
Half the time their mid-year fresh is just a new color, with a huge marketing push. If everyone has a case, colors become a moot point.
I also don’t think I’ve ever seen an Apple exec use a case, as it would imply the phones are durable and a case is needed, which they don’t want to convey. (Bumpers for antenna-gate aside)
The correct answer. The camera bump is intentional and so is building phones that aren't resilient to drops out of the box. What do you mean I can't have a phone with rubber bumpers on the corners?
There used to be an "Active" line of Galaxy phones that had built in umpers before they discontinued them.
> umpers
To "b" or not to "b". Apparently the latter.
I have my iPhone 13 in a $10 cover for years now. I don’t like the bump, but I don’t think it’s a scheme to buy covers.
Also my favorite smartphone was a motorola with a cloth back (ballistic something) and a metal frame. No cover was needed for this one.
> phones that aren't resilient to drops out of the box
What year is it, 2012?
>resilient to drops
I would be content if they'd stop making phones slippier than a wet bar of soap. My Pixel 8a is ridiculous, I don't know how they do it. If you have dry hands, it's nearly impossible to hold on to.
Yeah, I added a boring case on day 1 and would have trouble describing the feel of the bare device right now.
Found one on Amazon so I dodge Google's exorbitant plastic markup, and it is a relatively minimalist wrap that smooths out the camera bump and makes it more grippy in hand, in pockets, and on flat surfaces.
The behavior of those slippery phones in pockets is almost the bigger gripe to me. Like they are a new class of motion amplifier, trying to rotate and squirt their way out at the slightest twitch.
This made me realize I have an inconsistency I never noticed.
I would never use a case with a phone of any sort. I don't like the extra bulk, and the friction they add is annoying.
Meanwhile I never use a tablet or kindle device without a cover.
like the apple tv remote.. plus those are so sensitive too
Google Chromecast remote is bad, too.
The curvature on the back of those is such that it's harder to rotate into a position so the thumb can hit the right button than a flat surface would be.
It also means that resting it on the arm of a recliner produces about the same result as just dropping it into the void to begin with: It's going to wind up there either way.
Airpod cases are horrible. Best wrapped a rubbery non-slip case
Nah it’s just easier to pick up a phone when one edge is higher than the other.
This is why I believe the Pixel 10a is the best designed phone to date.
It looks like 1:1 iPhone copy minus camera bump.
All phones are just rectangles. The no camera bump is the most important part. It is completely flat on both sides.
The iPad Mini has never had a camera bump.
Looking at my now "old" ipad mini 2024: you might want to delete that comment - and google picturesearch a bit ;)
> larger batteries and make the device the same thickness everywhere
thermals.
apple literally uses batteries as thermal mass.
Tangentially related: this is the funniest rant about this "devices with a fat camera bump that don't lay flat" rant that exists: "Why?" - Lazy Posy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP7lYuyGTmg
> This requires a cover to equalize the size with the camera for haptic reasons.
Not really! The cover just follows the seam. And larger batteries will increase the weight as well, which Apple definitely doesn't want.
I always keep my phone in a case... I've had one too many drops, and I'm super-careful.
That being said, even with my Pixel in a case, the camera still protrudes.
It would be interesting to try a camera where the lens extends out when the camera is activated; and flat otherwise.
More material, bigger battery = heavier device. For something this size I figure people want something they can comfortably hold in one hand for a session.
Perhaps if they put a very small lip around the camera lens and a physical bump on the other side so the device doesn't rock, at least it would be symmetrical and the glass would be slightly less prone to surface contact.
I'm ok with the bump, but make it not wiggle on a damn table. Google figured this out. The first MacBook Airs figured this out (wedge).
They came up with the plateau, just make the whole plateau flat already.
[read in Steve Jobs voice]: "You are putting it down wrong" If you put the screen size on the table, the device does not wobble ;P
before you vote down, this is not a serious response
A real pro model would be chunky and blocky with lots of connectors, ports, and user replaceable parts.
Why can't we have two product lines. Classic/Elegant and Pro/Chunky
I am so glad that I bought so much new tech before 2025 that I can make do without them for a while now.
These prices are insane and there is no sign of things slowing down.
I would happily give up on the entire AI industry in exchange for more affordable hardware. No hesitation. The worldwide inflation resulting from the AI rollout is shameful to say it politely
I've thought a lot about that actually. I have a number of hardware purchases I'd like to make but I'm delaying due to the insane prices. That said, would I give up LLMs for the prior prices? No. Prices will come down eventually once more factories come online (it's just slow to bring up a new factory/fab, especially for RAM) and LLMs are such an awesome tool that I'll take the short-term pain of higher hardware.
That’s if you’re considering your personal situation. The increase in hardware is impacting every single institution that needs computers. Smaller hardware companies with low margins cannot operate in the current situation. That means less consumer choices, new projects delayed or cancelled. The impact on less developed countries is of course exacerbated. Hospitals, schools, government agencies are getting less for the same level of spending. And of course that results in worst services, worst infrastructure, more expensive services and goods
Maybe institutions and companies are gonna have to get smarter at making use of stuff that they have instead of just churning thru hardware. It's hard to see it being sustainable anyway to be constantly turning over hardware every few years if not yearly. In a way, this chilling of consumerism is kinda neat.
Yeah my 2006 core 2 duo running linux was more productive than any corporate Windows laptop I have ever used.
This is due to 20 versions of enterprise spyware running in the background + Windows being garbage.
Luckily absolute performance still exists, it's just that we've normalized shipping less efficient software slopped out because there'll probably be new silicon in a few years so it doesn't matter.
Commodity hardware is plenty powerful and can be taken advantage of should prices signal efficiency is important again.
But it is impacting everything. Even the new Sony RX camera has a slower sensor readout from the years old model simply because they can't get hold of the DRAM.
The Apple TV really threw me, $299 new but last gen started at $129
In Europe, it’s closer to $400, which is downright insulting for what is essentially a cheap smartphone without a screen or battery.
It's especially bad if you're non-American with multiple TVs.
e.g. I've got three screens in my house (office TV, living room TV, basement projector) in Canada — upgrading to the latest Apple TV on each of them would cost me $1,287.
I have two televisions - living room TV with an AppleTV and bedroom TV with some Roku device. I'm going to buy the new AppleTV and put it in the living room, then move that AppleTV to the bedroom, then recycle the Roku (finally, I hate that thing).
It should be less expensive but I rely on it (cancelled cable TV and just have streaming now) and so I'm just happy they are still working on it.
Depending on what you subscribe to, streaming services are now as expensive (if not more) than cable was if you got premium channels. I hear also Disney will add ads to all tiers as well.
I'm sure we're spending more money, but the AppleTV just works so much better than any cable box I've ever had.
The key is to subscribe to Jellyfin, but even THAT is getting expensive if you buy drives.
You can choose to not upgrade, or forego Apple TV altogether.
I say this as an Apple shareholder.
> You can choose to not upgrade, or forego Apple TV altogether.
Sure, and I can also complain about the pricing being unreasonable — which I also say an an Apple shareholder.
Root-cause analysis suggests blaming the monopolists hogging all the silicon fab.
The original iPad had a 9.7" screen; it was later bumped to 10.2", and today the smallest iPad/iPad Air screen is 11".
The iPad Mini started with a 7.9" screen, bumped today to 8.5".
The iPhone Duo inner display is 7.6", there are already rumors saying a gen 2 or gen 3 might be 7.9".
It's interesting how smooth the iPhone/iPad continuum is becoming.
Unlike the iPhone getting bigger, the iPad with the 9.7/10.2/11" screen is still basically the same size though. It's just the bezels getting smaller.
Quick look at the Mini dimensions also seems like it barely got bigger overall since 1st gen.
I love this dude's "reviews" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTiiZTi3aC8
when he goes "iphone small (big)" "iphone big (bigger)" and so on. He has a bunch of them.
What isn't smooth is the separation between the iPad and iPhone teams. I'm pretty sure new things being visited on the Duo such as the split keyboard interface have already been tried on the iPad side.
This iPad mini is actually slightly smaller than the previous gen; it's just the bezels that got smaller; the device footprint didn't grow.
Still waiting for a 13 Mini refresh :(
iPhone Air is leaps and bounds better (source: owned 13 Mini)
I reluctantly upgraded to the Air from the 13 Mini after I accidentally dropped it in water. After 3 weeks of using it now, I completely agree.
It's bigger in all the wrong ways: https://phonesized.com/compare/#2739,1863
Make it 3/4 an inch narrower and an inch shorter and I'll get one
The iPhone Air is larger than an iPhone 17 in height and width. Every non-plus/max iPhone since the 13 Mini came out is smaller than the Air in height and width. Wouldn't they be a more logical upgrade than the Air?
The main body of the iPhone Air is thinner, of course, but including the camera bulge, I think it's thicker than all non-pro iPhones up to the 16.
Is there something about making the main body thinner that makes the iPhone Air more comfortable to hold than other smaller phones? Is it the weight? The 17e is only 4 g heavier than the Air, and the 16e is only 2 g heavier.
I have never been interested in the Air because of the size, so I can't even remember if I have picked one up in an Apple Store.
Forget the dimensions and size on paper. I tried the iPhone 17 for two weeks, came running back to the Mini. Later on, I upgraded to the Air and I'm very pleased. Yes, it's slightly larger in hand but it's still delightful to use like the Mini. Even though its 25g heavier than the Mini, it feels lighter because it's less dense.
Interesting! Thanks for the opinion. I'm very skeptical that I'll feel the same way, but I'll check it out next time I'm near one.
I just replaced the battery in my Mini, and got the bonus free screen (I understand it is hard even for Apple to replace the battery without breaking the screen), so I'm probably set for a while, but it would be nice to have an upgrade path in the future!
How is it better exactly, apart from the new SOC ?
The outer dimensions are largely the same, it's mostly a reducing the bezel size to increase the display size.
There's an obvious gap where the iPhone mini used to be. Please fill that gap Apple!
I see what you did there!
I kinda feel that way too, but I can see why 3% of iphone sales wasn’t a compelling case at apple.
An easy fix, just name it iPhone 18 and all the people will buy it because it’s the default. Have a Max for all the actual big screen addicts.
Hopefully as Apple's own N-series Wifi chips mature and get rolled into more products, they will include GPS/GNSS capabilities into the chips, as right now if you want that functionality you have to purchase the "Wi-Fi + Cellular" variant:
* https://www.apple.com/ipad-mini/specs/ § Location
Edit: to perhaps make it more clear, I meant still sell a +Cellular variant with the C-series chips (or whatever), but move the GNSS functionality into the N-series chips. So you'd have a non-cellular and a cellular, but both would have GNSS.
I wouldn’t hold my breath. I think the +cellular is enough of a differentiator that Apple will always charge for it.
The buyer is also signing up for a monthly payment. So clearly they have the cash to make an “extra monthly payment” or two up front.
It's part of it. Another part of the reason is patent related royalties that they have to pay to the likes of Qualcomm, Nokia, etc. for any device that has a working 5G stack inside of it. Apple actually has had their own 5G modem implementation for a few years now; they clearly have the technology to deliver this with a clean full in house chip design.
But any device that has that embedded would have some royalty overhead added to the BOM. Which is why they've always had ipads with and without 5G and have so far never really bothered with adding this on laptops (which actually would make a lot of sense from a technical point of view). Operators would probably love that because it's a nice up-sell opportunity on monthly subscriptions. And with soft sims there would not be a need for a hardware sim card.
For the same reason, you don't see this feature on many other laptops either. There are a few obviously but it's a less common feature than you'd expect given how important good connectivity is to most laptop users.
I'm partially wondering if we're going to see a cellular Macbook this week on a C1/C2-derivitive modem for 'mobile computer' use.
The C3 modem is just around the corner though, as is the satellite network Globalstar's been building behind the scenes for it.
https://investors.globalstar.com/news-releases/news-release-...
It's now live and on-air for testing...
So the reason they have not released a +cellular MBP is down to them not wanting to make royalty payments? What do they care? They just roll that payment into the +cellular price bump. It's not like they are dipping into their own billion dollar cash on hand balance.
Do you have a better reason? I think the price difference is probably too high to justify the feature. I don't see any technical reason why they wouldn't do this. But patent royalties and additional overhead related to device certification would definitely add some complexity and cost.
No, but there's a lot of examples of "I don't have a better reason" regarding Apple decisions. I know that there's a lot of bad blood between Apple and Nvidia hence AMD GPUs every where before the M-series chips. Clearly, they are tired of of their cellular vendors, otherwise they would not have developed their own chips. But they already have the cellular relation for the iPhone/iPads, so what would extending that to allow MBP inclusion mean that makes it a non-starter for Apple?
I can only speculate. But my guess is that they don't anticipate additional mac sales if they were to ship this feature. So, the only reason to do this for them would be if it would bring in more revenue. And given the cost overhead related to patents that I outlined, it might just not be that interesting. My guess is that a lot of the agreements they have for this might cover iphones and ipads but not laptops.
It's not just Apple. 5G stacks in laptop are just very uncommon. Most vendors seem to independently come to the conclusion that they are better off not bundling that. Of course the difference is that Apple now has their own modems and chips for this. Which might change things but so far hasn't.
The reasons Apple want to vertically integrate everything and own it are easier to grasp: chips, firmware and software made by them are easier to control and upgrade by them. With qualcomm, they are basically getting them, their development teams, their supply chains for chips on the critical path to shipping products. And they are outsourcing what is a pretty major part of the whole phone experience to a third party.
Apple has been working on their own 5G modem for many years before they shipped it. I don't know for sure but I would not be surprised if efforts for that started when Steve Jobs was still alive even. This was always the logical move for them to make as soon as they got the idea of doing their own chipsets for their phones.
Is it possible its related to data traffic with carriers?
I would say this is the main reason, given tethering has caps, but maybe also how cell tower capacity probably would not do great with a whole new product market segment that's also high-bandwidth during the LTE days. With 5G's promise of increased capacity and 6G on the way, maybe it'll be possible soon enough.
> The buyer is also signing up for a monthly payment. So clearly they have the cash to make an “extra monthly payment” or two up front.
I know of pilots who buy the +Cellular simply for GNSS and do not get a separate plan.
Charging more for the C-series hardware is understandable, but if there's enough of a 'transistor budget' it would be nice for the GNSS functionality to be more universal (since the N-series seems to be going into everything).
AI Doomer: AI is going to rise up and destroy humanity!
AI Optimist: AI is going usher in an era of unparalleled productivity and achievement
The reality: RAM/Chip prices are way, way up. The starter iPad mini is $700.
The cheapest configuration of the original model was $329 in 2012 [0]. Even when corrected for inflation, that would still be less than $500 in today's money -- so quite a bit less than $700!
Is the comparison unfair because today's model is much more powerful than the one from 14 years ago? Perhaps. But perhaps it shouldn't be compared to the past, but to its relative competitors?
[0] https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2012/10/23Apple-Introduces-iP...
Not really unfair, as the basic use case is still the same for either model.
A toilet from a hundred years ago in the same product tier serves the same function as one today. Old models were also more expensive when adjusted for inflation, but today's toilets can tackle more turds with less water.
The alternative approach leads to those "costs have dropped by 7 orders of magnitude in the last 50 years" style of deceptive graphs popular among people with an agenda to insist AI memory price inflation isn't a real problem.
The CPI component for IT does also get adjusted based on quality, but it's not linear. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1WYYo Hm, would you say computers are similar in cost:utility as late 2022? I think that's fair if you aren't looking specifically at GPUs.
Oh I long for the days when every 2 years prices for compute FELL.
On the plus side, devices are designed to last longer, be more repairable and be updated for longer than they were in 2012.
The upfront cost of a device is less important than the total cost of ownership, which highly depends on the lifespan of the device. An ipad that lasts 2.5 years needs to be half the price of one that lasts 5 years.
Sorry, but as someone who's owned a v1, the first 12" Pro, a Mini, and now an M4 Pro: hahahaha, no.
Durable, yes. Given how many hours each of my iPads has spend in my kids' hands I can't really complain on that front.
But repairable? Not in any meaningful way. When the battery gets too weak you can use it as a tethered control panel for media or smart home apps; when the screen cracks you can slap a protector on it. Aside from that, any hardware fault outside of warranty means it's DOA.
In 2012, that iPad mini ran YouTube videos at the same resolution as today but without ads!
…progress?
How does AI explain the mini being $250 more expensive than the regular 11-inch iPad?
When did Apple last refresh that? (not a rhetorical question sorry!)
It got a price bump 3 months ago.
The iPad mini is not a mini version of the base model iPad. It's more or less a scaled down iPad Air.
Sure, but that tells you that the upgraded specs and pricing is a conscious decision made by Apple, not something forced by AI. Making an entry-level small screen equivalent of the 11-inch iPad is always an option. They’re choosing not to take it.
Memory and storage is expensive as hell, so they're gonna ration it for their more expensive devices.
Same reason this year, for the first time ever, Apple announced their new Pro phones (and the ultra-expensive Duo) but no base-model iPhone 18. They're paying more for memory so they're gonna use it on the devices where they make more on a sale.
> How does AI explain
> RAM/Chip prices are way, way up
So that cloud providers can have servers and GPUs sitting unpowered in warehouses and datacenters.
Right. The prices are up for Nvidia’s benefit (and Micron, Sandisk by extension).
I know it’s now a trope to say “an incoming Democratic Congress should…” but there are really serious questions to ask about the means by which Nvidia is securing such a radically high value buy-and-hold strategy, and whether it amounts to deceptive channel stuffing.
The whole tech industry is using apparent demand for Blackwell GPUs as a proxy for AI demand, when this is a wholly broken metric because Nvidia seems to be gaming it, and everyone (consumer and business alike) is paying more as a result.
> The reality: RAM/Chip prices are way, way up. The starter iPad mini is $700.
This has tiny 128 GB of storage and unknown but obviously not too high amount of RAM. At best 16, but probably less.
That's just Apple beeing greedy as usual.
Apple was "greedy" before too and were able to sell it cheaper. So obviously they're being impacted by increased storage/memory/whatever prices.
More like they were not able to find a pretext to sell it for more.
I can open my local store and will see shitty 8/128 Android tablets for less than 150 euro. If memorypocalypse was the main reason for pricing new ipad mini as it is, the budget tablet segment would be completely dead because manufacturers just wouldn't be able to afford memory at all.
Is it new model or from last year, the shortage only began in last year.
The whole supply demand spherical cow model of capitalism really breaks down when suppliers decide they'd collectively use their cartel to not engage in demand and instead gouge prices.
It doesn't, capitalism is the free association without coercsion. When the government can mandate that you cannot sell certain GPUs to customers in specific areas or that your model is too scary and you must shut it down and can give or take government contracts that are work hundreds of millions or billions of dollars, and the federal reserve will bail out the banks If they make mistakes, you have a crony capitalist environment that has very little to do with the free market.
Literally the one thing it needed was 120hz. I could somewhat understand that being a "Pro" feature in 2018, but in the big '26 there's no excuse.
Apple: Just fix the software. I have an iPad Mini (6?) and it's clearly just such an orphaned product. They're not even TRYING to make it usable. The on-screen keyboard takes up the majority of the screen when in landscape mode. In portrait mode, the "drawer" on the left side of the screen takes up so much space in apps like Maps/Flighty that it covers the location you're currently at.
They've clearly given almost no thought into how the (already marginal) iPadOS renders on a smaller screen.
Agentic coding has slowly but surely allowed me to enhance many aspects of my life, big and small, with self-made software and automation. These systems are just for myself and my loved ones.
I left the mess of Android years ago in favor of iOS. The restrictive distribution system always irked me but never affected me personally. Now though, having to jump hoops and resort to PWAs for many different things I want to do with my devices, iOS truly feels maliciously crippled. I’m in the market for exactly this kind of tablet, if only they’d let me run my own code in peace maybe I’d buy it.
isn't android about to push an update that nerfs most of its advantages in this regard? the duolopoly sucks. (yes, other options exist but with pretty drastic tradeoffs.)
No you will still be able to sideload software onto Android.
I’ve had a side quest of finding a true Linux tablet with cell service with similar battery life to my iPad. They don’t seem to exist, or there’s one or two that cost double my iPad. It’s unfortunate
Why are these things always The Biggest Update Ever.
If that were literally true, by now we'd be walking around with devices the size of Mt. Rushmore.
"We just changed a couple things, no biggie, don't buy it" is the reality, but that doesn't sell. Marketers optimize for sales saying what they can get away with.
That's just the nature of (slow) exponential gains. If the processor gains 1% in flops each generation, the absolute flop increase is always the largest ever. Now consider that a device has tens of marketable metrics and that is always a defensible claim.
You're not wrong. The video video on Youtube gives a very good (and quick) overview of the marketing behind phone screen glass marketing claims; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YrdI7h2XoY
The same will apply to everything any company is marketing, at the very least it will always be their 'best' 'new' product.
Last iPad Mini I bought in 2015 was 32gb for $379CAD, one today 11 years later is $949CAD for 128gb, 2.5x over 10 years, I know there is different tech, inflation and times are different but I always though the mini as the budget option, now with this recent releases Apple is just going for: it's expensive because that's the only way we can keep growing....
8.7% annual inflation is pretty high but most luxury goods have kept up with that
Check Porsche 911 / Boxster pricing in Canada over those years or Chanel bags
Luxury inflation > normal inflation
Computers are a “luxury good” now?
Ones made by Apple? Definitely. There are other cheaper options.
The cheap ones have gone up in price even more as a %
In what world is the latest and greatest Apple product NOT a luxury good?
If we remove the last year of AI-related storage/RAM cost increases, the rate of inflation is way lower if not flat.
The iPad is not the only device that has had price increases in the last year.
Yes, Apple iPad minis are luxury goods
Luxury inflation is more than normal inflation, but this isn't a luxury even though it's not necessary, and the price isn't going up due to the steady cause of inflation (money creation).
Their budget iPad I think got 70% increased in price a couple of months ago. I was planning to upgrade my iPad mini to the normal 11inch iPad and when I checked the price it was nowhere near the price I remembered I last saw it.
The mini is not the budget option, at least not anymore. The base 11" iPad starts at $450 in the US (and can often be found on sale for less). It is the cost-down with lower-spec components, and is probably a more compelling product for the consumer looking for the cheapest iPad option than a cost-down mini would be.
It is a very rare event what is going on right now. The prices are mostly up due to memory shortage.
I wish this was somehow listed as a separate line item with the price, assuming prices will normalize at some point. I don’t want these prices to be considered the new normal, even after memory prices come down. I think transparency in the pricing would help with that.
> I don’t want these prices to be considered the new normal
“Oh, ho, ho… you sweet summer child.” —Capitalism
Plenty of prices have risen and fallen before
In 1974, soda prices spiked with a sugar shortage.
- They never came back down.
- Diet soda and seltzer prices spiked too.
> I always though the mini as the budget option
Keeping up appearances:
Lease from $14.99/mo. per month for 36 mo.months with Apple Upgrade Footnote ※
Exchange rate is also a factor.
The iPad mini hasn’t been the budget iPad for quite a few years now. It is more like a small iPad Air now.
I have a 2022 mini that I use constantly. I was looking forward to this update. I like the oled and the lower weight, but it's just too expensive for what you get. The processor upgrades etc. mean nothing to me, my 2022 mini isn't slow. I don't want the camera on the side either.
It's too bad because Apple only updates these things every couple years and the price never goes down, so this is the best moment to update. Oh well. Maybe I'll buy a new cover for my old mini.
Whenever I get bored with my m1 ipad, I buy a new cover for it, and then I enjoy using it again :)
I bought a used iPad for my daughter for her birthday about a year ago for about $500.
M4 chip.
Her mom's cats chewed on the corner of the screen. It won't turn on.
The cost to replace that screen: $1200.
Apparently OLED screens break completely if just a single pixel is damaged.
I don't think that's unique to OLED. There's all manner of things that could've gone wrong when breaking a corner in both LCD and OLED
That happened to my MBP without OLED. Fortunately I had Applecare.
You mean that the corner was damaged, not that a cat also chewed on the corner of your MBP, right? I'm still in shock that a cat would chew on glass and metal enough to damage it - two cats doing it is too much in one day!
Yeah it was my cat. One bite and the screen turned black. He was a kitten at the time. Kittens chew on everything.
> The cost to replace that screen: $1200.
That's Apple saying to you: omg, stop being so poor and wasting our time, just buy another one
Yup. Had an MacBook Air. Slight water damage near charging port. Laptop functioned correctly on AC power. Extensive battery diagnostics: Healthy. Just the charging circuit saying "go ahead, charge device"...
At the Genius Bar expected something reasonable, realistic... $300? Parts and labor.
"So we have a quote for you, $950. Perhaps we go out and look at the new Macs together?"
90% of the cost of the laptop to replace the charging port.
Only Apple can properly replace these screens and pair the parts (FaceId etc), so setting the standard repair cost high enough helps push people toward Apple Care eligible new devices, handicapping the second hand market.
That has been the case basically since Apple Care existed IMHO.
> Only Apple can properly replace these screens and pair the parts
Not true. Apple has a self-service repair program for most of its products, including the iPad mini.
All the repair manuals are available online and you can buy official Apple parts. [1] They'll even sell or rent the tools you will need.
[1]: https://selfservicerepair.com/en-US/home
You're right, the self-service repair program exists. It doesn't clear neither the pairing issue nor parent's hurdles though, as Apple parts are still required , you can't get any similar enough screen you'd want, and they'll be priced the same as in Apple Stores.
As far as I remember, the self-repair kits only make sense in very niche cases (I think repair shop get a different contract ?) and won't work around any limitations Apple puts on parts or repairs.
I did not call Apple, this was a local "fix my iPad" shop.
It was funny, the guy was narrating as he is searching saying "Whoa, this is the most I've ever seen... Wow, oh man... Hold on..."
I knew it was not going to be good.
I asked if there were any DIY options for me.
He said I could possibly find a used iPad online and swap that screen. But, given the insane prices of the replacement screen, I assume the secondary market for a salvageable iPad that works is really tough.
At this point it makes sense to just buy another used iPad.
Her mom keeps jungle cats or something?
your ex’s cat chewed on the corner of an iPad? Does the cat have some more interesting stories of destruction since it apparently likes chewing on metal/glass, a higher level of destruction setting than the standard cat.
Because you gave the context clues of M4 chip and OLED screen and $1200 repair cost, this means you somehow snagged an iPad Pro 13” with the cellular modem for $500, which is way below market value.
The current version of this model of iPad purchased brand new is $1700.
In other words, this is the highest end iPad available. Any other lower spec model reduces the repair cost lower than what you were quoted.
Where do you find an iPad with M4 and OLED screen for $500 ?
I bought it off Facebook marketplace. The guy selling it apparently was granted the device from his work and then didn't need it. I didn't get the sense it was sketchy at all but now I'm wondering a bit. I had no idea it was that expensive new, I'm sad that this thing appears to be a brick now!
Given the criticism the Duo has had for not being a very good iPhone[1], I was hoping for a foldable iPad mini, which would seem to dodge those problems. Maybe in a year or two (does anyone remember the iPod Touch, which was an iPhone without the phone bit? I loved that thing.)
[1] - See "far the worst iPhone experience ever" Daring Fireball review: https://daringfireball.net/#:~:text=one.%20The%20outer%20dev...
I expected the Duo to closer to the size of a normal iPad. I didn't realize it was a foldable iPad Mini that's also a phone. imo It's too small for the bulkiness that it adds. Also sacrificing the camera was not worth the fold.
The point of foldables is that they fit a big screen in your pocket. What's the point of a foldable display? Fit a 10 inch in your tiny purse? Very hard sale for double the price.
We will eventually see "foldable MacBook" because I genuinely want a 20" screen in my backpack or even just a smaller 16" MacBook. I guess not coming before 2035
Your comment reminded me of the old Thinkpad foldable keyboard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChlD_ZfpPdw
It makes me think of a Bento-box laptop with a foldable keyboard and a tri-fold display, where both the display and the keyboard unfold when you open the computer. Extremely thick, but a very small footprint when closed.
I'm not sure whether that's amazing or something that'll bankrupt any company that tries to sell it with longer than a 3-day warranty.
Just curious, is that based on your own experience or negative reviews you’ve read online? I’m using the Duo now and quite like it. It’s a first-gen device, so it has its quirks, which is expected. Calling it the worst phone is a bit of an exaggeration though. It’s a foldable, not a conventional phone, so you can’t really expect to use it the same way.
Oh absolutely based on those reviews! I was surprised that John Gruber of all people was so harsh on it. As an Apple Vision Pro owner, I'm fairly tolerant of first-gen devices :)
Ctrl+F "ProMotion" 0 results
non-starter
Seriously, what’s the point if it doesn’t have ProMotion? 60hz feels so sluggish.
I really dont understand the hardon for refresh rates.
This isn't even a "people dont see that fast".
It just, it seems more like a perceptual addiction to a trivial feature. A penis measuring contest more than a useful advancement of technology.
It's not just the maximum refresh rate, the variable refresh rate allows for power saving.
That's a problem already solved by having a lower refresh rate, though. You can't get extra battery drain from 120hz when your device can only achieve 60hz.
But can save more by dropping the refresh rate to 1hz and upping to 30, 60, 120 as needed.
I don't know about for phones/tablets.
The only genuine performance increase I could see is if you're using it for drawing/notes because the Apple Pencil samples at 240/s so you would see a difference in drawing smoothness between 60/120/240hz screens. This would mirror the use case in fast-paced and high action games - more info for your eyes sooner allowing better reaction times.
Also, isn't ProMotion just branded VRR? Allowing for lower battery use in static/low change applications?
There is an entire field of study dedicated to this sort of thing called Psychophysics. It’s hardly trivial. Perception isn’t an absolute measure of sensory input as it’s influenced by context, comparison, as well as prior experience. Improvements in one experience can change the standards by which we judge subsequent ones. These principles have had profound implications across entire industries. A good primer is the book Priceless: the hidden psychology of value by Poundstone.
And what is it being used for though? To better scroll instagram and various message app inboxes? We needed 120hz for this? I mean a lot of people including here on HN are just buying this to scroll x. It is an iphone after all, walled garden means that's about all the sort of things you can do with this thing.
It's not a trivial feature. The Class A surface on an iPad is the screen.
If you plan to look at moving things, like scrolling, which is a central part of using the device, 120fps makes the scrolling less blurry and therefore more pleasant to look at.
This is like asking why people have a hardon for cars with nicer materials for seats and interiors if a normal cheap plastic interior could pass all the same crash tests.
It's probably very subjective, but I actually feel dizzy using my phone in 60 Hz mode.
It’s weird too I use a 60hz monitor all day and it doesn’t bother me. But if my iPhone switches to 60 it’s really noticeable.
It is a real thing. If you experienced the shift from CRT to the first generation of LCD screens and the CRT bros are not moving to the new technology because it gives them headaches and the majority of people are OK with the refresh rates. The 60fps to 120fps perception is hard to explain.
I agree. I have an iPhone 18 Pro. I don’t notice the difference between it and my older, non-ProMotion iPad that I use side by side.
It’s a penis measuring contest for display enthusiasts, much like gold connectors are for audio enthusiasts.
Im usually big on refresh rates but this one doesn’t bother me. I move between 60hz iPads and iPhone to 120hz iPad Pros and my mind doesn’t register a difference between them.
I can see the 120hz nice scroll when I’m paying attention but I’m normal use on these devices I forget about it. Basically it wouldn’t be a dealbreaker for me but I agree it should probably be the standard
you don't need promotion if you're going to use it for movies, but OLED is a huge improvement in this regard.
the price is a bit high, but that's all apple products.
i do think this means a lot of android tablets on this form factor are going to start coming out with OLED screens as well though, which is good, as they will be much cheaper.
120hz is nice for movies because you get non fractional frame pull down for 24, 30, and 60 fps which the more common video frame rates.
I think the Mini's primary use case that benefits a 120hz screen is art apps, but the artists I know would prefer OLED over 120hz. For entertainment, video is video, and games on tablets often lock to 30 by default to preserve battery life.
For the iPad Air (especially the 13" model!) I agree 100%.
60hz is the reason i sold mine. Otherwise I loved that little ipad
Yep, I've long been envious of my wife's iPad Mini for the form factor, but my eyes want to scream when using 60hz refresh.
This is a major reason why I'm ponying up the dough for the iPhone Duo.
The iPhone Duo is as close as we're getting to the iPad Mini Pro we've all been asking for.
Apple likes to slow roll features out. It's kind of a necessity when Wall Street expects you to put out a desirable hardware version every few years. Gotta protect that runway!
I was hoping the next mini would. Guess I’ll keep my 6th gen around.
Same. But thats what drives me to duo. Probably the whole point
Shouldn't it rather drive you to a Samsung Fold?
I'm shocked Apple haven't acquired Procreate yet. It's nearly always in iPad marketing material. Personally I know so many artists who've bought iPads, and the only app they have installed is Procreate.
It’s possible they simply don’t want to sell. ProCreate parent company is extremely successful on its own, it’s possible being part of Apple wouldn’t bring anything to the table for them. Looking at some apps Apple acquired it’s not clear that being part of a mega corporation benefits creative tools.
Everyone and everything is for sale for the right price.
Especially when you have Apple money.
The largest acquisition in Apple’s entire history is only 3 billion dollars (Beats). Apple doesn’t waste money like Microsoft, Google or Meta on large fit them in later acquisitions.
Seems like they made their decision when they acquired Pixelmator.
> in an even thinner and lighter design
Never once did I hold my iPad mini with a case and think, "damn this thing is heavy"
I thought the same thing about iPhones, then I got an iPhone Air and can’t imagine going back to those fat bloated bricks people lug around daily. Worse, they put a thick case on it making it even more portly, because the aluminum bodies dent so easily. iPhone Air is what Steve Jobs would have wanted: a super thin strong Titanium phone that doesn’t need any case to feel complete.
Just because it's good doesn't mean it can't be better
The novelty of how thin my M5 iPad Pro is still hasn't worn off. Sometimes it's just nice to hold some tech in your hand that feels like it's from the future.
Since when have we established "thinner and lighter" equals "better"?
In the case of iPhone Air and Galaxy Edge phones, there were notable compromises to achieve a thinner body, for which many people don't consider an improvement.
Granted, I have not seen or used the new iPad mini, and I don't know if any such compromise has been made. But probably should leave it open until we conclude this is a plus.
I’ve been raw dogging my mini for the past couple of days because I removed the Smart Folio to wash off all the accumulated gunk. The sudden thinness and lightness was amazing.
You don’t really understand how heavy devices are unless you have something to compare to.
Supports extended display - with Apple ignoring the capabilities of Pro iPhones (give us the Dex already!), this is now the smallest device you can take on trips to have it become a (nerfed by software) workstation when plugged to USB-C monitor.
$700? Dang. Prices are climbing so fast.
That plus an iPhone cost less than a Duo. But yeah that's expensive.
No need to involve dang in this. He's had nothing to do with these price hikes.
Yes, those AI subscription prices have a hidden cost ...
I saw a lot of people say the homeview is stupid, they can get an iPad and a dock
The homeview at $299 is the great value Apple product by far, compared to the price of new iPads
The 512 nano texture iPad mini with a case and pencil and Apple care and tax and tip in Canada is well over $2000!!!
I don’t see homeview being worth it unless they allow app installs. $300 for a display that shows photos and smart home controls is kinda pointless. You can’t even put up your home assistant dashboard on it.
I think there will be be app integration, but hopefully no App Store. We know that apps can work on HomeView using CarPlay. Not sure that is sufficient long term, perhaps just to jump start things. They may need to enhance that library to allow more kinds of apps to work with HomeView.
Right now, I think they are bringing out an MVP and waiting to see how people react to it and what kinds of things turn out to be useful. When they launched the Watch, no one was sure what kinds of things we would want to do on it. It took a while to see what was useful. I think a model where apps on your phone provide HomeView widgets like the Watch might be better than writing apps specifically for such a device.
Sure, but it’s weird to consider a device to be good value when the reason for that value is features you hope will launch in future updates maybe years down the line.
You tip for purchases from a shop in Canada? Or is that a joke that's gone over my head?
That was a joke lol Tipping culture is so insane in North America
The homeview is DOA, I'm sorry. Who is the target for this?
There is no app store. I mean maybe they will add one later, but still until that happens I really dont see any use case besides setting some kitchen timers.
Yes, smart home is a thing, but tons of people need apps like Hue or Shelly to control their setup.
Old people
I’m buying one for my parents and in-laws
They have iPads
iPads are never charged and in some random spot in their being empty houses
This will make sure my kids can FaceTime their grandparents whenever they want
That’s worth $300 to make my kids and my parents happy
> This will make sure my kids can FaceTime their grandparents whenever they want
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that charged iPads are not the primary constraint here. If you can't trust them to keep their iPads charged, there's a good chance that you'll come back in a year and the HomeView hasn't left the setup screen, or is sitting in a box somewhere.
I haven't been in Canada in a while. I don't understand why you are tipping on an iPad mini. Are you Doordashing it? What changed since I left?
I don't like when they force a storage upgrade just to get a matte screen. I have no need for more storage, but would like a matte screen. As a $100 upgrade for nanotexture, it already seems steep, but forcing it to a $200 upgrade due to a needless storage bump is too much to ignore.
I also question what is required for nanotexture. I read the iPhone Duo has this in a replaceable screen protector, effectively. A replacement, under AppleCare is $15. Are we being charged $100 for a factory installed screen protector? If so, why does that need to be tied to certain levels of storage to reduce SKUs?
Nanotexture on non-folding displays is etched glass.
Higher brightness and nano-texture make this a must-have for ForeFlight. Too bad it'll probably require a new yoke mount.
Costs as much as the full-size one did until recently.
Tech price appreciation is really throwing me off!
OLED is really good for media consumption, and IMO, this form factor is one of the best for carrying around in trips and watching movies on the car/plane/train/etc.
But the price is a bit high, that's the history of Apple though. On the other hand, I think this particular screen is probably going to be sourced by cheaper small android tablets at a much more competitive price, and if you're using it for media consumption, there's no difference between an Apple and an Android tablet.
So I'm happy to see OLED on this model.
Is Stage Manager with an external monitor possible with this new iPad Mini or still artificially limited to M chips? I mean it’s more powerful than the M1 iPad Air which supports it.
I'd like to have that confirmed too. Size wise, I'd love to get a Mini, but only being able to mirror to an external display, especially at this price, is a no from me.
I don't see anything suggesting it can perform this, so likely the artificial limit is still in place.
Tech pundits should just talk to me. I bought AirPods the week before the new ones came out, and I bought a new iPad 48 hours ago!
Luckily I didn’t buy a iPad Mini, but I really like the form factor.
Lucky 10000, there is a return window of 2 weeks :)
As a life long and continuous Apple user (and iOS SWE), I recently got a $150 Samsung Android tablet that I can use as a claude interface. It can take in voice commands, and create new builds of itself on a network Mac. So I can essentially have whatever screen or interface I want for any given moment. Right now I'm tuning my motorcycle with an OBD bluetooth device and recording engine behavior on rides.
I looked at the tech specs but I don't see how much ram it has. I ended getting more storage than I needed on my pro because it also gave it more ram.
The 512GB option actually has a better chip with 1 more CPU core and twice the neural engine...
What does twice the "neural engine" get me?
For about the same cost, I can get a used M5 chip with both a Neural Engine™ and GPU cores each with Neural Accelerators™
Gizmodo thinks it will have at least 12GB RAM, but it sounds more like an educated guess than a confirmed fact:
https://gizmodo.com/ipad-mini-oled-a20-pro-chip-2000830541#:...
The price justifies even a supernote manta if you're looking for some nice tech to write on.
Boneless iPhone Duo
There’s a tiny segment of folks (like me) who have been waiting a very long time for an 8ish inch OLED tablet. For some reason, until mid 2025, they were extremely rare, even in the Android multiverse. I’m excited because I read a ton with white text on black, and an OLED display (especially with this nanotexture stuff) will make a huge difference.
I wish Apple did an iPhone Uno or iPad nano — basically a wide phone with camera cutout, status and dock on the right or left side. Yes, two design versions for both left and right handed people. It will be so amazing for multi-tasking on mobile by quickly changing between apps with a permanent dock.
Nice, but I don't see anything that compels me to trade up from my current-gen Mini (which I use daily).
Since this iPad is a different size, it will need a new case (I use a Moshi), and those may take some time to show up.
How would an OLED screen be an improvement over an ipad 8th generation? I'm debating on what to upgrade to but I mainly use my ipad for reading comics nowadays. Movies/TV are for the big screen.
They have better blacks and no light bleed. The colors are more vivid and spectral too. That's cool for watching movies in the dark
However, whether you really notice a difference reading on the thing I kinda doubt.
I own no iPads but all my screens are OLED and I would never buy anything else. The true black is an absolute killer feature. It makes the device just a glowing wonder at night, magical feeling, no way to overstate it.
OLED + dark mode after sundown are awesome. On Android we also get the extra dim mode which makes it perfect for lights-out.
For nighttime viewing with my Pixel 8 Pro (OLED), I wish I could make the screen even dimmer at night. The extra dim mode barely does anything.
I use GrapheneOS on my Pixel and it gets very dim. Also, I have the night mode (orange tint) cranked way up - something that the stock OS should allow you to do.
And furthermore Apple’s OLED screens tend to have more color reproduction issues. I don’t have an iPad any more but gather a group of people using OLED iPhones. Use light mode and open the Settings app at the same time. You will see that different OLED screens render the same white menu items differently. Some will have a yellowish tint, others an unpleasant green tint. This happens regardless of whether one turns on or off TrueTone. This has been going on since the very first OLED iPhones. The old LCD iPhones never had this problem. It is highly subjective but it bothers me way more than a 60Hz refresh rate.
In general display technologies are highly subjective. Besides LCD versus OLED, there are people who love nano texture and there are people who hate them. There are people who absolutely need 120Hz and there are people who can’t tell the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz. It’s a shame that we can’t customize the display technology exactly as we want.
LCD iPhones defo had this. I thought it was to do with panel supplier
Nano texture was the entire reason I upgraded to an iPad Pro M4. The camera on the long edge is a major regression as far as I am concerned, however. The only drawback is fingerprints are harder to remove,you really need that special microfiber cloth or one of the cheap Chinese clones.
It's not. OLED screens use PWM, i.e. they are switching to almost black 256 times a second. That's tiresome for the eyes. Especially when you read from it with artificial lighting which is dim, that makes those black periods long and noticeable. Yes, recent iPhones sometimes don't go full black, but that's only for near-100% brightness.
Can I please have an iPhone mini next?
Call me when it can boot into macOS and they all have some standard docking
I have the gen 6 mini for reading and notes. It'sthe least needy, most capable of my devices. I bring it everywhere.
I'm excited for the OLED display because it would make bedtime reading easier on the eyes. I'm also happy about the weight reduction.
Still, it's €749 vs €549 in 2021. I will use mine until it stops fulfilling its role, which might take a few more years.
I hope you’re a patient person. My 2017 iPad Pro is still getting security updates.
That's why I buy Apple products now. This iPad still feels as good to use as when I bought it.
I gave my mom an iPad 2, she used it to play candy crush for close to a decade.
Not in a snarky way but who is the target market for this?
from previous [1] threads on the iPad Mini, at least aircraft pilots are a target audience
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19421163
Can definitely attest to this. When I was doing my PPL I had an iPad that had a built-in cellular modem loaded with ForeFlight for GPS positioning mounted to the inside of the cessna's window.
They only sell around six million minis per year, so it's not a large market (for Apple).
I predict it’ll be less than 6 million a year at these ludicrous prices.
People waiting for >v1 Duo? Same processor, 1" larger screen, lower cost but you still carry a phone.
I've been hoping for a water and dust resistant tablet for use in the pottery studio for a while (for photographing work in progress, cataloguing glaze ingredients, taking notes, etc), as it's a wet and dirty environment, but the price kills all interest.
I can give you at least one group that loves them. Taxi/uber drivers who use them as bigger displays for their maps and apps.
And with a 1-nit minimum brightness, iPad mini is even more suitable for dim environments, from users reading in bed at night to pilots checking their electronic flight bag in the cockpit.
As per other comments, my guess is somewhere between 1% and 5% of ipad mini sales are to pilots. It's gotta be significant or they wouldn't drop a line that in their main copy!
I like using my 6th gen as an erader. With the right color settings the screen doesn’t fatigue me, and it’s nice to be able to read from any source (kindle, Apple Books, Libby, a pdf, etc).
Nurses and elderly homes are a large market for minis in Japan. You get up to date patient data without the bulkiness of a regular iPad or the minimal screen of an iPhone. It also surprisingly fits in the pockets of nurse uniforms.
It’s an Apple device so tech support is minimal.
I understand ram shortages but what is the justification behind selling the mini as a “pro” product? People want a smaller base iPad, that’s it.
In what way are they selling it as a "pro" product?
By putting the A20 Pro chip in it rather than A16/A17/A18 which is on base iPads and iPhones.
Perhaps they are planning to launch application features that require or benefit from the A20. Anyway it looks like the base model of the new iPad is using binned CPUs that were not quite good enough for the iPhone 18: 5 cores instead of 6, 1 neural engine instead of 2.
That's not the same thing at all as "selling it as a Pro product". They just happened to put a chip in it which has "Pro" in the name, and which this press release accurately names. They're still selling it as an "iPad Mini" at the same segments and value props that they've always sold iPad Minis at.
And the "Pro" in the chip name doesn't mean anything anyway, "Pro" is actually the lowest-power suffix for A/M-series chips (behind "Max" and "Ultra").
One of my beloved devices was the Nexus 7, it was an excellent affordable template that didn't feel cheap, nor fancy or pro. Just a good media consumption / general purpose small tablet.
I wish Apple would make a similar device. I'm fine with recycled chips and getting a bit gimped on RAM size.
Like the MacBook Neo of iPads; I just really want a media consumption device. A20 Pro means nothing to me.
Unlike the rest of the comments I actually do think this is the biggest upgrade to the iPad mini lineup.
Everything looks really good and way better than I’d expected.
Yes, the price increase sucks. I feel it is kinda warranted given the feature increase and current market. But only kinda.
Yes, 120hz would have been nice, but we all now Apple is gating that for their pro lineup. So no surprise.
Yes, the camera bump is stupid. An iPad that doesn’t lay flat is silly. But all the other I-devices has a big bump so again, no surprise.
I’ve been in the market for a mini and I am glad I hesitated.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I love that they are advertising minimum NITS and not just max!
They have enough bezel room to make it into 8.7" or even 8.9" version without changing the dimensions of the mini.
I believe this is the lightest iPad at only 255g. I just wonder how much more weight can they shave off.
And if they are going to kill the iPad? The current iPad line up is split into Pro, Air, (iPad) and Mini. Surely the mini could replace the normal iPad?
> Apple gives iPad mini its biggest update ever
That's it! Hitting "Buy". This was all I needed to read. Even though the ™ symbol is missing it will do.
iPad still don't support multi-user profiles, which makes it really uncomfortable sharing my iPad with my kids (Tailscale, Bitwarden etc).
It would be great if it can use fingerprint to unlock different profiles.
Starting at $949 before tax (~$1050 after tax in most provinces) in Canada for 128GB
Zoinks
It's the same price as a MacBook Neo
£700 here (VAT incl). That's ~$1,310 CAD!
Starting at $1,099 AUD. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
edit: That's more than a MacBook Neo, they're only $1,049!
Goodness, Apple is going back to the luxury item category... thanks ai
Only the 512GB version gets the full fledged A20 Pro CPU (6 core 7 core GPU), the 128 and 256GB version only gets the 5 core CPU.
I don't understand why the color gamut is only P3. With an OLED display, I assume it's quite easy to push gamut > P3, no?
Well this is great news for ereaders. Guess I’m upgrading my kindle now
Anyone use a cell version instead of a phone?
Promo picture looks like it says iPad Nini.
So it's like my iPad 3 but newer. Hope I can read epubs on this one too ;)
What's the value proposition compared to the iPhone Duo? Aren't they relatively similar now?
Screen won't kill itself
The iPad Mini has more screen real estate. The taskbar on the Duo eats up a noticeable portion.
Less than half the price and less fragile, for people who often carry a bag or purse with them.
It is just over a third of the starting price of the Duo
Is iPad mini finally smaller than iPhone maxi?
Or this exciting marketing twist still to come?
With a 5G radio, this is so much more appealing than the Duo
My iPad Pro is six years old now, the last generation before they started putting M chips in them. Still not interested in buying another until I can run a Linux VM on it.
It's year 2026 and still no use-case for the iPad in sight...
Media viewer wherever you want it. Planes, trains, treadmill, whatever. I don’t have one but it’s an obvious (nice to have, not needed) use case?
This is it, they are media consumption devices.
Nice to have until you need to charge because you forgot about it. Tbh the only use case for me was using it to study; afterwards it collected dust.
Mine is a notebook, a sketch book and a reading device. I read books and queued Instapaper articles, take meeting notes, and make digital art. I love that device to bits.
The iPad is great for sketching, and for making music. It's like having a precision tool, such as a quality chef's knife. If you like to cook, you may not need a nice knife every day, but when you do need it, it's outstanding.
People who want to consume movies without a TV, people who want to read more comfortably on a non-e-ink tablet, millions of POS terminals.
You can look skyward. I don't know a pilot who doesn't use one.
Lack of 120hz display on a $700 device is non-negotiable.
Whats the closest Android equivalent to this?
There is none when it comes to software/hardware combo, long life and resell value.
I can only point to a big one, without a camera and with non-glossy oled high refresh rate screen - wacom movinkpad 14
https://www.oppo.com/en/accessories/oppo-pad-mini-matte-disp...
Sadly not available in the West...
I would love Apple to actually make something that is worthy of the name Apple. When Steve was alive, Apple was A-P-P-L-E and now it is just a shell of its self.
AKA non-foldable Duo.
The true innovation is hidden deep in the announcement:
"iPad mini supports both Apple Pencil (USB-C) and Apple Pencil Pro,.."
Like literally FINALLY. Having the wrong pencil for the wrong device sucked so much. (Deal with many iPads/iPhones at work, demo units, just such a hassle).
And again a useless camera with a bump forcing clients to use it with cover, otherwise it will wobble on a table..
As much as form factor is intriguing, I'd rather keep my 'old' pixel9a and wacom movink 14 combo.
(Bonus points, not supporting Epstein crowd with my money)
Delivering iPad mini but no iPhone mini is double disappointing.
interesting this would come out so close to the iPhone Duo release.
Double the price of the original iPad mini when it first released in 2012
interesting this is so close to the iPhone Duo release.
The second image in the carousel (well, video, really) hides the camera bump. This seems highly disingenuous of Apple.
Back in the mid 2000s, Palm sold Treo smartphones with the camera removed, for high-security places that forbade cameras. Why do I tell this story? It means there is (was) a market for it. I would LOVE and iPad mini with the camera (and its bump) removed. A nice thin slab.
I don’t know about everyone else but I’m just so sick of Apple releasing marginally improved products, calling it their biggest update ever, and then jacking up prices. $700 for an iPad mini is absurd RAM price increases or not.
749 € starting price WTF ?
I want to upgrade my old Mini 5 with Lightning since I want one with USB-C, and the OS is getting slower and slower, but at these prices?
All I do is read websites and watch Youtube on it anyway, so maybe I'll just get an Android Tablet for 300 €.
This is getting ridiculous!
Do there exist any good small Android tablets at a reasonable price?
There were none available in Canada with cellular when I looked a few years ago so I ended up buying an African-region Galaxy Tab A9 for $170. It's functional, but by God is it slow, and that's after adb-removing about 50 pieces of Samsung bloat.
Samsung Galaxy Tab A11 X130 with 8GB of RAM costs around 220 EUR, I haven't tested that one though.
Another alternative is the Lenovo Legion Tab TB321FU, 12GB RAM, 256GB, but this one costs 500 EUR.
But you are right, there are not a lot of alternatives with 8GB RAM out there. Most Android Tablets with a screen size of 8-9" have 4GB, which would make them slow.
> Samsung Galaxy Tab A11 X130 with 8GB of RAM costs around 220 EUR, I haven't tested that one though.
This unfortunately looks to be basically the same as the A9 - the A11 is just lightly refreshed with a newer stock OS and higher refresh screen — the SoC and memory are the same.
It's the SoC that's really killing these tablets, the Helio G99 is about on par with the A10 Fusion from 2016.
The Google Pixel Tablet can be degoogled with GrapheneOS, but it was discontinued last month. It also does not have cellular connectivity. But it’s an excellent device, and the one I am using as part of my effort to wean myself off dependency on fast-enshittifying Apple.
The pixel tablet is still supported and will be until after June 2028.
Lenovo Legion Y700, Well built, a little too flashy, put it in the case if you mind.
Unfortunately no cellular connectivity - I use my mini tablet when travelling light.
$699 for 128GB is wild. Between this and HomeView apple has two meh launches in a row now.
Everything old is new again - return of the phablet.
$700 bucks entry level model in this economy?
It’s not the entry level mode, that’s the base iPad.
Not being able to receive phone calls is the single greatest feature of the iPad.
Another (earlier?) post:
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50243646
As I understand the model with cellular still can't make calls without iPhone?
Right, iPhone and iPad must be on the same wifi network for normal phone calls to work.
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/ipad/ipadf97892b2/ipad...
Facetime / Signal will work fine over just data.
Meanwhile you put a regular SIM in a Samsung tablet and you can make phone calls
With Apple ads there is always something uncanny with the hands, like the fingers get unnaturally longer behind the device.
this would be nice with an eSim and an agent application so I can control DSH on my M5U at home. would that be possible?
Oh yay, they made a kindle
I wish they would do that. I'd love a dedicated $200-$300 ereader from Apple.
No Face ID, still Touch ID. Are they serious?
I was considering buying one, but will skip until the older model becomes unsupported or when Apple adds Face ID.
> 60 Hz screen
lol, no, thanks
will it run Omarchy?
$1,099 CAD for 256GB. Yeah, no.
60hz. hard pass
The 60Hz display is pretty disappointing. The size is just right, though.
A bit disappointed it lacks ProMotion adaptive refresh.
where iPhone mini
do it you cowards
"We have released another mind-enslavement tool for your kids! It's the most potent ever!"
Thought China would have flooded the ram market by now
You can't just spin up factories producing top of the line components like RAM. It's an extremely expensive process
Maybe with enough money. Terafab ~ Q3 2027
10-20 billion dollars and 2-3 years, witch is nothing to the Chinese or a company like Apple or TSMC if the will is there.
They are working on it (CXMT for RAM and YMTC for NAND flash) but not having access to ASML’s EUV lithography equipment hobbles them.
The US government is also trying to kneecap them, threatening Apple with tariffs if they went ahead with YMTC storage, even if only for the Chinese market.
They are thus primarily focusing on the Chinese market, but if they weren’t there, DRAM and flash is a global commodity market and prices would have gone up even more insanely than today.
two-three years out.
This is a disappointment. Apple has so much potential with iPad minis, but they consistently hold back simply because they don’t want to cannibalize their pro models.
Ok, how is this a disappointment - what does it not have that the pro does that you're seeking? To me, this just looks like a large phone without cellular. Not sure I'd want this, as I already have a large phone - good enough.
Pro-motion, 120FPS display.
That's the whole iPad line. No multi-user because they don't want families to buy only one iPad, no support for running apps outside of the app store, etc.
Isn’t all that potential shown off in the duo?
I’m not interested due to the inclusion of parts designed in israel.
Also https://appleinsider.com/articles/25/01/03/apple-ceo-tim-coo...
Okay, he's not a CEO anymore, but the aftertaste remains.
Not questioning your motivations, but that seems like a tough exclusion to make. Do you exclude every product with an Intel chip?
Yes I believe so since 2017, though not for political reasons at first. I do wish mediatek the best.
With OLED, this is going to be the best e-book reader in dark mode, and given that it's water resistant you could even use it in bath/hot tub w/o destroying the device - if you're willing to put down $700 for an e-reader that is.