Comment by micw
19 hours ago
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.
The carousel 2nd image appears to have erased the camera to make it fit the marketing narrative? That's pretty bold.
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/
Is that a real video or cgi? The motion reminds me of motion tweening.
1 reply →
> 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.
Definitely an odd choice. Especially when two images later has it again
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?
1 reply →
woah - that's pretty shocking to me actually. in the past they generally have just used flattering angles. This is downright deception.
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.
3 replies →
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.
1 reply →
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...
1 reply →
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.
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'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.
2 replies →
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 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)
Nah it’s just easier to pick up a phone when one edge is higher than the other.
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?
> phones that aren't resilient to drops out of the box
What year is it, 2012?
There used to be an "Active" line of Galaxy phones that had built in umpers before they discontinued them.
1 reply →
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.
>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.
5 replies →
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?
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.
2 replies →
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.
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.
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.
I use it quite often for scanning QR codes.
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...
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.
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.
9 replies →
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
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.
> 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.
> larger batteries and make the device the same thickness everywhere
thermals.
apple literally uses batteries as thermal mass.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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 ;)
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.
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?
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.
iOxygen and iNitrogen can be quite expensive, especially if you get the Apple+ option.
1 reply →
What about weight?
The extra volume can be air like it is in most consumer electronics.
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.
1 reply →
Yes that stupid camera bump ... I hope those designers lose their jobs to AI. Then again, perhaps they already did :)