Nice write-up on the retina iPad mini by Gruber

[silvarios]

Lew Zealand wrote:
So last year's Mini specs should have been Retina display and the A7 chip? That's really stretching an already hyperbolic ("cynical money grab") post.

Hyperbolic? You want less device for more money? What consumer wants to pay more for less? High end processor from last year, obviously not the A7 per se. The specs should have been better on the original mini. Better screen, higher end chipset.

Apple's market share in tablets since the iPad 4 and iPad mini release have only trended downwards. This years updates are probably the first significant update since the iPad 2. The iPad 3 was pretty cool, but was heavier, thicker, and not any faster. Nice screen, so-so everything else, and had the distinction of shortest iOS device life cycle to date. I bought one. Likely my last iOS device since it was a bit underwhelming, which coupled with my underwhelming iPod touch 2nd gen, I'm feeling a little burnt on iOS devices. Even still, why let my personal needs/desires color my opinion. The mini seems compelling, the Air not as much to me. With the devices being so close, I would likely bank the $100 and go with the mini retina.

[silvarios]

richorlin,
That's excellent hands on experience. Thank you for the report.

[silvarios]

RAMd®d wrote:
Maybe he changed his mind after getting a hands-on and actually using the mini extensively for three days.

I don't know that Gruber sees or calls himself an analyst. He's a tech writer as far as I know. Maybe a journalist, I'm not sure.

Your post reads more like you're doing some spinning of your own than your calmer, more reasoned fare.

Yeah, maybe it came off a bit harsh. I apologize.

I see Gruber as the Paul Thurrott of the Apple world, so his opinion tends to be unrealistically sunny when it comes to Apple. If he aspires to be an honest tech writer, not just random person with a blog (I give you he might not be an analyst, but he is certainly no journalist), Gruber needs to be more critical. And not only when one of his developer friends is complaining about some Apple policy.

Ron Amadeo is a great example of where Gruber should be in his analysis of Apple. Ron is an Android guy, but he hammers Samsung, Google and the rest when warranted. In some of his pieces, he comes off as so negative, you'd think he was writing for a pro Apple sight. But that's what we need. Here'e the facts, this is what matters, hand waving, and wishy washy marketing regurgitation aside. I want my tech writers to focus on the consumers and not make excuses why large, wealthy, multi national companies can't meet consumer expectations.

[deckeda]

All critical writing will contain perspective we either buy into or don't. Overall I'd prefer an enthusiast, not a technician, to write about what they like. The trick is to not make too many generalizations either way, when writing or reading.

Total impartiality just means they have no feeling about anything and will never love anything, or that it will be fleeting and therefore somewhat worthless ... because as soon as they cross the threshold they become a Biased Person, a fan.

I'll put in another plug here for John Siracusa's writing on arstechnica. He's a Mac OS fan from way back and yet never shies away in his OS X reviews to dig pretty deep into the "what were they thinking" curiosities of Apple's decisions.

[Filliam H. Muffman]

silvarios wrote:
I want my tech writers to focus on the consumers and not make excuses why large, wealthy, multi national companies can't meet consumer expectations.

:agree:

I like a lot about Apple products but their marketing department always seems to prune features out of hardware and software instead of making it better.

[silvarios]

deckeda wrote:
All critical writing will contain perspective we either buy into or don't. Overall I'd prefer an enthusiast, not a technician, to write about what they like. The trick is to not make too many generalizations either way, when writing or reading.

Total impartiality just means they have no feeling about anything and will never love anything, or that it will be fleeting and therefore somewhat worthless ... because as soon as they cross the threshold they become a Biased Person, a fan.

I'll put in another plug here for John Siracusa's writing on arstechnica. He's a Mac OS fan from way back and yet never shies away in his OS X reviews to dig pretty deep into the "what were they thinking" curiosities of Apple's decisions.

Great suggestion. Siracusa is a much better tech writer than Gruber. He actually understands the product he's discussing at a much deeper level.

On the other hand, I don't actually mind the alternative you suggested. A neutral voice giving pros and cons and then suggesting a user who might be interested in said product, is still a worthy review. I've reviewed things that were not for me , but I could still see the target market and make the proper suggestion to a client.

[RAMd®d]

All critical writing will contain perspective we either buy into or don't. Overall I'd prefer an enthusiast, not a technician, to write about what they like. The trick is to not make too many generalizations either way, when writing or reading.

Agreed.

Especially about the reading part.

My idea of a good journalist, tech writer, and enthusiast is Andy Ihnatko.

Even when he's negative about something, and he's been negative about Apple on several occasions, he doesn't come off as a ranter.

He make cogent, relevant observations without being a ranting loon. That has caused some people to refer to him as an Apple shill, but those people are obviously idiots with no business being at a keyboard. He doesn't dig way deep into technical minutia, qualifies statements as appropriate, and entertains.

[silvarios]

RAMd®d wrote: He make cogent, relevant observations without being a ranting loon. That has caused some people to refer to him as an Apple shill, but those people are obviously idiots with no business being at a keyboard. He doesn't dig way deep into technical minutia, qualifies statements as appropriate, and entertains.

I love Ihnatko. He isn't an Apple shill, in fact, with his switch to Android for his phone use, he was widely blasted by the more extreme Apple sites. Whatever his phone choice, I enjoy reading and/or listening to his point of view.

[datbeme]

Filliam H. Muffman wrote:
[quote=silvarios]
I want my tech writers to focus on the consumers and not make excuses why large, wealthy, multi national companies can't meet consumer expectations.

:agree:

I like a lot about Apple products but their marketing department always seems to prune features out of hardware and software instead of making it better.
I agree, and of course, and they should be taken to task for these things. But I side with deckeda in that I'm more interested in the thoughts of someone who is truly interested in the product. A review that is too even handed is often critical of minor, random things that someone who enjoys the product might disagree with...or not be concerned with at all. Objective or not, when this happens, I feel that the reviewer has failed.