iPad mini, iMac etc.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 6:36PM I sold my iPad 3 last week in anticipation of the iPad mini and nothing that happened tonight made me think that was an error. I would have liked the price of the lowest model to be £249 in the UK, but I can swallow £269 for what I have always considered to be a much more practical size, and one that does not reduce what I can do with a tablet much at all.
I owned a Google Nexus 7 for a week and it made me realise that the size is ideal for me, but I didn't particularly like the device overall once I had some time with it. For a £70 premium, the iPad mini feels like a much better buy for me and the fact I need an iPad for freelance work confirms the deal anyway. Even if I didn't need one for work, I would still get one- this is the best tablet for my needs I have seen to date.
The new iMac looks lovely, but there is little there to make me move from my one year-old iMac. The design is stunning, but so is the previous model and desktops are not like tablets and smartphones when it comes to longevity. I fully intend to use my current iMac until it can do no more for me and it is doing a 'lot' for me at the moment with no performance problems at all. The lack of a DVD drive is a problem for me as well and I don't want to add on an attachment for that. I am also far from convinced about the new starting price of £1,099- that doesn't make sense in the current PC market where the competition is so much cheaper. I accepted the premium price of my iMac because I knew it would serve me for many years, but the gap is too far now for many to even consider one. Bizarre move if you ask me.
The new MacBook Pro is perfect for the audience it is aimed at and so is the new Mac Mini. The Mini in particular continues to be a hugely impressive product that acts as the gateway to Mac for many and the price is about right for what it is.
So that's it. The iPad mini: yes indeed. The iMac: too expensive. The Mac mini and MacBook Pro: not bad.
All News
Reader Comments (17)
I'm seriously considering the 4th gen full-size iPad to replace my 3rd gen. The only real flaw with the 3rd gen was that graphical performance felt a little slower than the iPad 2, due to having to move 4 x the pixels. This, by all accounts, should be as snappy in games as an iPhone 5, which is the most fluid computing experience I've ever had.
Overall, quite a line-up of product refreshes from Apple, this Autumn. Regardless of what you think of Apple, that's been quite an ambitious set of new releases.
Agree Peter. An incredible product line refresh across entire range. All well made and desirable.
The Mini hits a sweet spot for me. But only if I sell my iPad 2 first.
The mini is sweet as a nut, Gavin - I think it meets all the criteria you outlined in your last post. Should be a great product. Sadly, I have no reason to buy one!
Some nice stuff, but nothing I need, or even really want...
Did anyone notice that Apple launched 24 new iPads today?
Two models x two colours x 2 types (wi-fi and 4G) x 3 capacities. That's 24 different devices rolling off the production lines.
Peter are those new iPads or new new iPads?
Interesting concept. The iPod 7" Noir.
Very bold move making it a retro black & white display device (except for the App store icon).
Makes for an interesting competitor for e-ink devices.
:-p
iPad Mini - Agreed it should do well. Points about cannibilising are obvious, but very few would own both. In short, I'd get one over an iPad if I didn't have one already.
iMac - too expensive
MBP - Good that the 13" retina is out, but I think it's under powered. Only HD4000 graphics puts me off - I have basically the same spec in my Macbook air, and it's fine on general use graphics. Add retina display to that and ...
I'm with Neil I think - some nice things, definitely nothing I need. If the missus starts making noises about wanting an ipad, then maybe I'll swap and get the smaller one.
So, why didn't they release the iPad mini with a retina display and the A6X chip, instead of the 1024x768 screen and the A5 chip? The iPhone 5 has a retina display and an A6 chip so the size of the device isn't an issue. Has Apple deliberately dummed it down so that, in 6 months, they can release the "iPad Mini S"?
Probably because that wouldn't be possible at the moment. The battery would have to be huge and the device would end up heavy and too thick for the smaller footprint. The iPad 3 / 4 is quite heavy already.
I agree with Niall. There is no reason why Apple couldn't have released the Mini with the better chip etc
Must annoy the competition that they release more advanced gear and Apple holds back.
Probably allows Apple to plan many years ahead. And if something revolutionary comes out elsewhere they can quickly respond as they already have future years in the bag.
I'm still very surprised that Apple didn't include a retina display in the Mini. Yes, I know, it's to keep costs down which is another way of saying to keep their profit margins up. However, it says to me that they figure the target market won't care, which does annoy me.
The dpi on the iPad Mini is the same as the iPhone 3G and 3GS at 163dpi. While I expect that the screen is much better, I'm very interested in seeing comparisons. Too bad you sold your iPad 3 Shaun. I would have been interested in your side by side evaluation. The old iPad was 132dpi and the new one is 264dpi. I have both and it's a huge difference. It's hard to compare the old iPhone because the current screens are so much better.
Hope you aren't buying it for the 4G connection as per Crave it probably will not work on a lot of the UK 4G networks due to a lack of support for certain bands (per Apple should work on EE network and 3's as they are going to use EE's network, however no O2 nor vodafone).
"I agree with Niall. There is no reason why Apple couldn't have released the Mini with the better chip etc" - Of course they could but that would prevent them from selling millions of the upcoming iPad miniS... that way they keep people buying their latest product and people keep that WOW factor - I can see Tim in 6 months from now... "and now the new iPad miniS! Look at that Retina S display! Isn't that amazing? The same portability, now even lighter and it also comes with the new processor A6X and NFC! Just look how easy it is for you to pass a picture or a video between iPads miniS!".... Oh... com'on :-|
Apple wants to keep compatibility with existing apps. When they change screen resolution they do it by doubling it or adding a bit on the top. Anything to avoid non-integer scaling.
That means with the miniPad they either had to make the resolution what it is or make it the same as the iPad 3 (which may not be do-able).
As for the processor, with the low res it's not necessary. It'd be cool though.
And the only reason they didn't call it the miniPad is because people would have called the big one the maxiPad. I'm going to just go ahead and do that anyway ;o)
I can't believe the Mini is thinner than my Kindle. It's 53g heavier though. But thinner.
Omg. I asked Siri as a joke to order me an iPad Mini. I just did. See my twitter for screenshot.