Analyst: Apple’s next-gen iPad mini ‘getting pulled-in’

“Chipmakers are preparing for the second-generation iPad Mini,” Brooke Crothers reports for CNET, citing a research note from RBC Capital Markets.

“RBC Capital Markets analyst Doug Freedman — who is in China visiting chip companies this week — offered this ambiguous Apple note: ‘iPad Mini Gen-2: Apple’s gen-2 iPad mini is getting pulled-in, and is likely to have several new suppliers, with TXN gaining content,'” Crothers reports. “‘Pulled in’ would seem to imply that Apple is moving up introduction of the next iPad Mini. That would be helpful if we knew when the gen 2 Mini was actually slated to ship in the first place. As the current iPad Mini is still in short supply, we may be getting a little ahead of ourselves.”

Read more in the full article here.


  1. Assuming the next iPad mini gets a retina display it would need a chip at least as powerful as that currently in the iPad, but would there not be a logic to the mini geting what the A6X the iPad has now (or a smaller version of it) with the iPad always having a faster chip so as to distinguish itself and further justify the price differential beyond just having a bigger screen (which would have a lower dpi if they’re both showing the same number of pixels).

      1. That would involve yet another sizing for developers. If they weren’t leaving themselves open to double it to keep consistency across apps, then they could likely have picked a higher resolution to start with.

  2. Yeah I have to say a retina iPad mini really makes no sense at all.

    First what makes the mini great is, it is, inexpensive (for a quality build; plastic wannabes need not apply), super thin, light and fast. In full retina trim (and there is no “in between” resolution as that would splinter development) it would loose two and possibly three of those qualities. In other words; to move the gigantic pixel load of the retina iPad display takes large amounts of horsepower which means more processor, more heat more batteries & a much larger case.

    So now you have built a significantly larger, heavier & more expensive version of the mini with marginally better display. That just makes no sense (because using the newest iPad as the reference the Mini’s display is only marginally less (IMHO it sits somewhere between the iPad2 and the iPad4’s retina display))

      1. Good thought, howaboutanewton, except that the iPhone 5 and the iPad have completely different aspect ratios. The iPhone 5 is even closer to a 16:9 aspect ratio that the older iPhone models, which used a 3:2 ratio. In contrast, all iPads use a 4:3 ratio. So a doubled iPhone won’t work if you want to maintain square pixels, which is important.

        Unless Apple implements resolution independence in iOS or is willing to risk app fragmentation via a third pixel strategy for the iPad mini, the current iPad options are 1024×768 or 2048×1536.

  3. They were able to make an iPhone 5 and iPod Touch 5G both of which are crazy thin despite adding a retina though.

    Not only do they have retina but also lighter than the predecessors.

    1. Except their predecessor’s also had a retina display (4 & 4S) and were only a bit smaller (in only one dimension) So your comparison falls flat there.

      You are talking about pushing around the same amount of pixels as an iPad 4. Do you think they could have made the iPad 4 thinner and lighter but just decided Naaaa….?

    2. Oh, and I forgot to mention… I love what you are doing at MS. Stay the course My friend, you know in your heart it is the right direction for MS, no matter what they tell ya.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.