May 20, 2013 - 04:00 PM EDT — AAPL: 442.93 (0.00, +0%) | NASDAQ: 3498.965 (+33.722, +0.97%)

Mashable hands on with Apple iPad mini: A one-handed wonder

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 · 5:32 pm · 42 Comments

“As much as I love my new iPad — and it is the device I gravitate towards during non-work hours — there’s always been one nagging problem. Whether reading iBooks at a cafe or watching videos on the couch, you just can’t hold the 10-inch tablet in one hand,” Chris Taylor reports for Mashable. “That’s the main reason why the iPad Mini, launched Tuesday in San Jose, is a big deal. Hold it in one hand, as I did, and your forearm relaxes. It may not simply be a large smartphone, but it certainly feels as light as one. It’s 53% lighter than its new cousin, the 4th generation iPad.”

Taylor reports, “So the screen has roughly a third more real-estate than comparable 7-inch tablets. Is it enough? Not for me, personally. I’ll stick with the larger 10-inch iPad size, even at the cost of two-handed discomfort. As I’ve often said, there’s just something magical in that screen size, where it fills just enough of your field of vision to take it over entirely. But I knew that going in. After spending some time with the iPad mini, I was impressed with just how much of your field of vision the 7.9-inch tablet can fill. For those looking for a lighter, cheaper tablet, this will be the right device.”

Taylor reports, “Is it worth $329 for the basic 16GB model? That’s going to depend entirely on your budget. It’s certainly not a price tag to wow the average consumer… But it does give you an entree into the iPad world. If you’re going to be spending a lot of time with your tablet, then to my mind, it’s worth paying a $129 premium for significantly more real estate. You will feel the difference on just about every website.”

Read more in the full article here.

Categories: News

Tags: hands on, iPad, iPad mini, iPad mini hands on

Thank You for supporting MacDailyNews!

 Apple 13.3" MacBook Air dual-core Intel Core i7 2.0GHz, 8GB RAM, 512GB Flash Storage, Intel HD Graphics 4000, Mac OS X Lion (Z0ND-20GHZ8GB512) only $2,159.99
 Secret Sale Exclusive for MacMall Valued Customers Only
 Apple 15.4" MacBook Pro (with Retina display) quad-core Intel Core i7 2.3GHz/16GB RAM/256GB FS/IntelHD Graphics4000/OS X Lion (Z0MK-15-2.3-16-256RT) only $2,333.99
 Apple Blowouts: Up to $649 OFF on Last Gen Macs. Prices start at $1,999.99 w/ Free Upgrade to OS X Mountain Lion & Free FedEx Overnight ends 02/08 6:15PM PST.
 Apple 13.3" MacBook Pro dual-core Intel Core i7 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM, 750GB 5400-rpm hard drive, Intel HD Graphics 4000, Ships with Mountain Lion (MD102LL/A) only $1,419.97

Comment Feed

42 Comments

ken1w

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 5:45 pm · Reply

It’s basically the same as an iPad 2, with HALF the weight and a $70 discount. What a deal! If an iPad 2 is worth $399, iPad mini is a steal at $329.

This “field of vision” comment is nonsense to me. It displays the exact same 1024×768 content of iPad 2. Since it is so much lighter, just hold it 20% closer to your eyes to get the same “field of vision.” Since the pixels are about 20% smaller, things will even appear a bit sharper compared to the iPad 2 (although obviously NOT “retina”).
- Bandit Bill
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:00 pm · Reply
  
  Did you say the same thing when you bought your 30″ flat screen TV for the living room? Honey, we’ll just move the furniture 20% closer.
  
  Moving something closer to your face, isn’t always the answer.
  
  I think the author makes a very valid point.
  - ken1w
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:26 pm · Reply
    
    When you go to a movie, do you sit in the front row 10 feet from the screen (or whatever distance you are from your HDTV in the living room)? No, you move back in the theater to adjust your “field of view,” as desired. Changing the distance to the screen IS the solution.
    
    With the larger iPad, you hold it with two hands and it is twice as heavy, so there is a comfortable hold position that is less flexible. If the iPad mini is small and light enough to hold comfortably with one hand, then it’s position relative you your eyes becomes much more flexible, and you will be able to hold it 20% closer (or whatever distance desired) to adjust your field of view with no problem.
    
    People typical hold an iPhone closer to their eyes compared to an iPad for the same reason… because they are adjusting their field of view.
    - Bizlaw
      
      Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:51 pm · Reply
      
      And moving something closer to your eyes is not particularly useful to most people over the age of 40 unless they want to REALLY zoom in.
      - ken1w
        
        Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 8:31 pm · Reply
        
        It’s about the same distance as reading a book, so anyone who needs glasses to read should be wearing those glasses to use an iPad (regular or mini).
        
        I’m the opposite, nearsighted. When use a computer screen at two to three feet, I wear my glasses. When I read a book, I don’t wear glasses. I used to be able to read fine with my glasses on, but I’ll probably have to get bifocal glasses soon. So for me, getting the desired “field of view” on an iPad at a slightly closer distance is preferable, because I usually don’t wear my glasses with I use an iPad or phone. Right now, iPhone distance is very comfortable. iPad distance is fine, but a little closer would be ideal. So iPad mini should be ideal for me…
    - Bandit Bill
      
      Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - 12:24 am · Reply
      
      “Changing the distance to the screen IS the solution.”
      
      The recommended THX viewing angle is 36 degrees, distance is part of the equation, it’s not the solution.
      - ken1w
        
        Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - 1:00 am · Reply
        
        So, you are saying that in a movie thither, the SOLUTION to changing the “viewing angle” is NOT changing your distance to the screen (by moving to a different seat)? Is the theater’s screen magically going to change its physical size based on a magic button on your armrest? Ridiculous.
        
        Changing the distance between the screen and your eyes IS the solution, not “part of the equation” (when the screen size remains constant). It’s the same, whether the screen is on an iPad or in a movie theater.
        
        Bandit Bill
        
        Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - 3:21 am · Reply
        
        The screen size isn’t constant. The author was comparing a 9.7″ screen to a 7.9″ screen. Sure you can hold an iPad mini “20%” closer to your face, but not everyone wants to. Nor does it necessarily make for a better experience.
        
        Anyhow, if the iPad mini works for your eyes, buy one. I’ll enjoy my retina display.
        
        ken1w
        
        Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - 4:24 am · Reply
        
        For EACH iPad, the screen size is constant. To change the “field of view” or “viewing angle” (whatever you want to call it), the user changes the distance between screen and eye. They do not switch back and forth between iPad models and maintain the same viewing distance. BUT, before you say not all users change the distance between screen and eye when using an iPad… (OF COURSE) they (YOU) DO, without even knowing you are doing it.
        
        There something a lot of people do not realize as the KEY difference in usability between “desktop” computers (including laptops) and iPads. For any given user, a desktop computer is typically used at a more or less constant distance between the screen and the user’s eyes. For a laptop user, that distance may vary more, but still, there is a certain “comfort level” at a certain distance. The computer display is stationary and the user must move his/her body to that comfortable distance. That is why there are MANY screen size options, because the distance is more or less constant (for each user), so to get the desired field of view (viewing angle), the screen size must change. And the user buys the computer with the display that fits this preference.
        
        The iPad is the opposite. The screen gets moved to achieve the desired field of view (viewing angle), not the user’s body. A single screen size (or two now) can accommodate a large diversity of users, because field of view changes simply by moving the screen closer and father away. If I’m reading tweets or emails, I don’t need to see the entire screen, so I move (without really thinking about it) the iPad closer to my eyes. If I’m watching a movie, I want to see the entire screen, so I move the iPad farther away from my eyes. Not only does my “20%” comment make perfect sense, I’ll bet YOU change the distance between your iPad and your eyes MORE than 20% over the course of using it during your day, based on the tasks you are performing.
        
        This difference is also why the people who continue to think Apple will eventually release an iMac-sized touchscreen “hybrid” Mac/iPad are dead wrong. In order for an iPad to work the way it does, the screen must be highly mobile. The user must be able to move the screen easily to accommodate their current task, NOT move their body to accommodate the screen location. I predict the largest iPad screen will be around 12 inches. A 12-inch iPad of the future will probably weigh about the same as today’s Retina Display iPad, so that would be doable. Anything larger (and heavier), and the screen starts to become a stationary object (like a desktop computer display) and that destroys the iPad user experience. Apple won’t do that…
        
        This new iPad (at less than HALF the weigh) enhances the iPad user experience. Just use it like everyone ALREADY uses their “big” iPads and change the viewing distance to accommodate best what you are doing at that moment (without even thinking about it). The screen is only 20% smaller, but its weight makes it TWICE as mobile!
radtech5000

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 5:56 pm · Reply

Looking forward to seeing one myself in person, I can’t make any judgments from a video it’s just not the same. With that said I sure like the look of the thinner bezel over the original iPad, just looks better.
- kingmel
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:08 pm · Reply
  
  Reducing the width of the sides of the bezel (in portrait mode) was an engineering compromise to reduce the width of the 4:3 aspect ratio display to facilitate a one-handed grasp. The thin side bezel may bother some people who are used to the wide bezel of the 9.7″ iPad and, as a result, initiate unintended touch inputs in the portrait orientation. But it does make the iPad mini appear to be more svelte.
  - Now, Now...
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:12 pm · Reply
    
    Not me… The past two years I’ve had my original iPad, I hardly ever hold my iPad ‘vertical’. I enjoy the landscape or horizontal view for web browsing and apps. So the widths of the iPad mini being reduce are of little consequence to me.
  - disposableidentity
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:48 pm · Reply
    
    I thought the thin side bezel was a little strange at first. But it makes so much sense on this device. In a vertical position you just won’t need it, and holding it horizontally, you’ve still got the bezel there.
    
    They keep saying it, and it’s true. Apple really does re-think all of this stuff when they tackle a new product.
    - ken1w
      
      Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 8:18 pm · Reply
      
      In this case, Apple did not really need to “re-think” it. The iPad mini has the thinner side bezel compared to top and bottom for the same reason as iPhone. Supposedly, you can grip it from the sides with one hand.
      
      However, I think it’s a more “compromised” design decision on the iPad mini. I’m not sure it would have passed the Steve Jobs usability test. I recall seeming the commercial of the old Dell tablet/phone (I think it was 5-inch) and thinking it looked odd and uncomfortable being held with one hand, gripped from its sides. The iPad mini is significantly wider…
      
      However, I personally think it’s a good compromise. I use an iPad more in the horizontal position, and the mini still has large wide “handles” at the top and bottom. I looks very good with the thin “frame” along the sides (makes the big iPad look “fat”), and it makes the overall body significantly smaller, which reduces weight even more than a straight 20% scale down. For me, weight is a very important consideration because the big iPad feels too heavy to me.
      
      I think iPad mini is a BIG winner…
  - Bizlaw
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:53 pm · Reply
    
    I don’t think so. People will likely hold it in one hand, just like an iPhone, so they won’t be holding it on the front and back in their fingers/thumb, but on the sides. However, if it is an initial issue, people will adjust to how they hold it. Human beings are pretty good at that.
gallowaycreations

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:00 pm · Reply

Heck, I can hold my iPad 2 in one hand just like the guy in the picture does the iPad mini. Of course, my fingers also stretch an octave and a half on a piano, so maybe I’m the exception
- kingmel
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:11 pm · Reply
  
  So many things must seem disappointingly small to you relative to the size of your hands…
  - gallowaycreations
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:13 pm · Reply
    
    Not as many as you’d think
  - gallowaycreations
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:14 pm · Reply
    
    You know what they say about big hands. Big hands… large… gloves.
    - auramac
      
      Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:54 pm · Reply
      
      Big, clumsy hands… wham, bam, thank you ma’am.
      - auramac
        
        Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:55 pm · Reply
        
        Just kidding. I want the maxi-Pad. Tough I always sit in the first row at the theater..
Karen

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:04 pm · Reply

I’m sure it’s the best 7-8″ tablet out there. But it will be interesting to see how well they sell at that price. I bet Apple would have sold a lot more for $279-299, just based on human psychology, and still made a TON of money.
- Ashoka
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:32 pm · Reply
  
  My 2c opinion!
  
  May be Apple is holding the release of 8GB for $250.00 depending on the fan’s reaction to the price of 16GB for $329.00!
  
  Who knows?
- Rick
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:48 pm · Reply
  
  They will sell a bunch at $329. But many of those sales will be cannibalizing full-size iPad sales instead of luring potential Kindle and Nexus buyers.
  - Bizlaw
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:59 pm · Reply
    
    I don’t think so. Few people with very little discretionary income are buying tablets – they really don’t need one. If you can barely afford $200 for a Kindle Fire, you’re not even looking at an iPad. If you can barely afford $329 for an iPad mini, you’re probably not really in the market for a tablet anyway.
    
    But if you are, then Apple will gladly sell you an iPad mini for $329 instead of you buying a Kindle Fire for $200.
    
    Apple just made a true iPad closer to a reality for many people who were settling for Kindles and Nexus tablets. Instead of being less than half the price of an iPad, now a Kindle Fire is only about 1/3 less than an iPad mini.
    
    The other point is that places like Walmart and Target don’t sell Kindles any more because they’re mad at Amazon. So people can use layaway to buy their iPad because no Kindles are available on layaway at Walmart.
Gaelic1

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:06 pm · Reply

I have the iPad 3 and love it. I also bought the iPod Touch. That easily fits in a shirt pocket, has a great camera and I read books on it all the time but not as comfortably as my iPad. Presently, I see no need for the mini but i can see the need for it for others. It fits into the iPad family quite well and priced as a great quality tablet.
Tommyr

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:09 pm · Reply

I’m not paying $300+ for it. I’ll get a Kindle Fire first. Again, the price is a bit too high. Get real Apple.
- ecrabb
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:12 pm · Reply
  
  I’ll be much more happy to pay $329 for the iPad mini than I would $199 for the Kindle Fire. In fact, I wouldn’t pay $99 for the Kindle Fire.
- kingmel
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:16 pm · Reply
  
  Enjoy your Kindle Fire, then. Apple is not going to drop the price of the iPad mini unless sales are very disappointing.
  
  You should consider the value of the utility of the iPad mini in terms of your situation – iTunes, iCloud, etc. That might be worth a $100 over the course of a couple of years?
  
  In addition, if you already have a significant investment in apps, music, videos, books, etc. that you could easily load on an iPad mini, then that sunk cost just might impact your decision.
  
  If, however, you would prefer to make an emotional purchase just because Apple did not hit your price point, then go right ahead.
- Rick
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:03 pm · Reply
  
  Skip the Kindle and get the Nexus 7 if you’re looking for a lower price point. I bought my daughter a Kindle Fire for Christmas last year, and although it is nice, it is somewhat crippled by Amazon’s limited app store. Google’s app store is much more comparable to Apple’s, although tablet content is still somewhat limited. On a 7″ tablet, however, tablet optimization isn’t as crucial as it is for a 10″ screen.
  
  I bought myself a 7″ HTC tablet last Christmas, and it is much more functional than the Kindle Fire. Only problem is that HTC has abandoned it as far as updates go. So really, the only good option for a 7″ Android tablet is directly from Google.
  - Tflint
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:27 pm · Reply
    
    The only good option is Android? If you’re nuts, maybe!
    - Error601
      
      Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - 1:08 pm · Reply
      
      Read it again: ‘the only good option for a 7″ *Android* tablet is directly from Google.’ I agree – Google keeps their Nexus devices updated MUCH longer than 3rd-party devices. Though I would MUCH rather pony up the extra $129 for the iPad mini – such a great new interpretation of an already great device!
  - Tommyr
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:44 pm · Reply
    
    Thanks for the info. I’ll look into it.
- Tflint
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:25 pm · Reply
  
  If you pick cheap over right, you don’t deserve an Apple product!
  - Tommyr
    
    Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:47 pm · Reply
    
    I’m a Mac user and love their products. I go back many years. My 6 + year old Macbook’s HD just shit the bed. I’ll get a new one and install it soon and get it back online. I also have a Mac mini that older and it’s HD shit the bed. For now I’m on an HP laptop that works great with Win7. Can’t wait to get back on a Mac. Those new iMacs look sweet.
- disposableidentity
  
  Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:52 pm · Reply
  
  $329 for a computer. And not just any computer, but a stunning machined-from-a-lu-minium fit-in-your-coat-pocket APPLE COMPUTER!
  
  Amazing machine at a fantastic price.
cashxx

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 6:28 pm · Reply

As with any Apple product you have to get it in your hands and then make a decision.
Nerd Beautiful

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:01 pm · Reply

As they said with the first iPad, they are certainly prepared to get aggressive with the price if necessary. You can bet on that. But the consumer forgives price DROPS only. You can’t start at $249 and then raise the price to $329 when it sells like mad… at least Apple won’t and therefore can’t.

So give everyone a break. It’ll either sell at an insane rate or not. And if not, look for a price drop in 3-6 months.
Richard S.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 7:56 pm · Reply

For me, with 2 first gen iPods, 3 year old iMac, 2 year old MacBook Pro, and a 4S iPhone, and a gifted kindle reader that broke after 9 months use, the easy to transport and hold iPad mini looks like a good way to upgrade to an iPad.
CitizenX

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 8:28 pm · Reply

Had they priced it at 299 it would have reflected badly on the new Touch.

329 to limit demand. 5 months down to 299 and the Touch to 249.
silverhawk1

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 10:45 pm · Reply

I’ll order a iPad Mini Friday. It looks perfect for reading.
John G

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - 10:50 pm · Reply

Isn’t the iPod Touch $299? If Apple does desire to make a price change the will need to do it on the touch as well. It did not take long for the price to drop on the first iPhone.