There was some rumor about Sharp making an IGZO display, but that doesn't seem to be the case now if Samsung is making displays for Apple.
I was wondering about that too. Especially since some comments here were rooting for Sharp to displace Samsung as an LCD supplier to Apple. I'd take a Sharp display over Samsung's any day. But I didn't believe Sharp could be a good LCD supplier. They've got excellent technology but can they meet Apple's price demands? I don't think so.
LTE is, at this point, a bag of hurt. It almost halves your battery life and this makes it a no no for Apple.
The again a rumored larger battery is a real way to address any power disadvantage.
Quote:
As an example, lets look at the Droid MAXX. It has a larger battery providing a capacity of 3300mAh / 12.54 Whr. With this battery you get the following usage times: 8.13 hours of 3G web browsing or 5.6 hours of 4G usage.
Yep but also remember that design is about a year old. Even if new tech is available you still have the RF problem of more data equaling more power even if the chip is power efficient.
Quote:
There is also the fact that only a tiny percentage of users can get LTE and they are all in the states. Europe have not even made moves towards LTE and don't look likely to do so until the beginning of 2013.
Means nothing! Seriously if you buy iPad to keep for a couple of years you will prefer LTE. Even if you buy new ever year an LTE based iPad will resell easier and at a higher price.
In any event I have to figure out how to do some OT. I really think this iPad 3 will be compelling.
Apple might be forcing cross licensing of technology to assure production capacity.
The Sharp rumors are BS, Samsung could have been in the running all along.
Apple could be partitioning the line with a low cost and a high cost high quality display.
The list goes on. If one follows rumors you need to take them with a grain of salt. Also this is business, Apple isn't going to jump ship with respect to Samsung over a few patents. People need to realize that Apple was some time ago using over 80% of Samsungs custom chip capacity, the relationship between the two companies is complex.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric475
I was wondering about that too. Especially since some comments here were rooting for Sharp to displace Samsung as an LCD supplier to Apple. I'd take a Sharp display over Samsung's any day. But I didn't believe Sharp could be a good LCD supplier. They've got excellent technology but can they meet Apple's price demands? I don't think so.
I do not think the next iPad will include LTE, and I won't be sad about it. I've had a chance to use Verizon LTE in the DC area and it is on par with my HSPA+ on my 4S. I've tested LTE using a Verizon AIr Card and have excellent reception. My best results were 9.4Mb/s Down and .97Mb/s Up.
I've consistently pulled gotten 6.5Mb/s Down and at least 1.4Mb/s Up using my 4S on AT&T.
As has been noted, there is no link to Apple in the photos. Maybe these are photos of components destined for Apple and maybe not. In addition, there is a real possibility that Apple is going to make two versions of the iPad, in which case there could well be several screen suppliers.
Consider, for example, a scenario in which we have a $429 iPad which will use current screen technology and specs, albeit with an update on the A5 chip, namely the A5X. Then we have a deluxe model starting at $599 that has a "Retina" display and an A6 chip.
The more expensive model would use Sharp's IGZO panels while the entry iPad would be using Samsung and LG panels like the ones found in the current iPad.
If there will be two iPads using different technology, imagine just how confusing the purported leaks are going to seem.
By the way, I think that if what Apple announces is different from what everyone assumes they are going to announce, whining about it will be rather absurd. Apple has been its usual tightlipped self about this whole scenario. Saying that such and such a specification is now confirmed is ridiculous. The only confirmation we can rely on will come from Apple when it unveils the iPad 3 some time next month.
And they will both disappoint everybody and sell in record numbers.
You could be right but yet wrong in that we could see the first time that Apple makes two distinct versions of the iPad, one with some significant upgrades and the other at a bit lower price that represents an minor update on the current model.
This makes sense because there are millions of people currently using iPads who are thrilled with the product as is. A minor boost in processor performance would make for a perfectly viable iPad for the coming year and bringing in a model around $400 that is basically the current iPad helps respond to any potential challenge at a lower price point.
Offering a more affordable iPad, yet maintaining a decent level of performance and complimenting that product with a more capable version for those who need or want more, to me that would be classic Apple. It's just the sort of approach that we've seen before with the Touch. It does make sense and I think we'd see a lot of consumers spend the extra money to step up to what we can refer to as the Retina iPad. Both models would sell in the millions and it would represent an expansion of the iPad line that makes sense at this time.
I do not think the next iPad will include LTE, and I won't be sad about it. I've had a chance to use Verizon LTE in the DC area and it is on par with my HSPA+ on my 4S. I've tested LTE using a Verizon AIr Card and have excellent reception. My best results were 9.4Mb/s Down and .97Mb/s Up.
I've consistently pulled gotten 6.5Mb/s Down and at least 1.4Mb/s Up using my 4S on AT&T.
I get maybe slightly faster speeds on LTE vs. AT&T 3G on an iPhone 4S (using a 4G hotspot) where I live. However, in major metropolitan cities, I've pulled close to 20Mbs down and nearly the same up. From what I can tell, the biggest improvement is the upload speed.
I'd still rather have it, as within 2 years, LTE will be even better.
Because the person they got this report from is totally full of shit.
Or they could be the 2560x1600 displays for the next Galaxy Tab (apparently being announced at MWC).
Full of shit, possibly. It's possible that the report is wrong about the displays going to Korea.
But one thing I did was load up the top photo and measure it. The display region of the panel has a 4:3 ratio, so it cannot be the 2560x1600 display you mention above. The aspect ratio is not the same. There's only one tablet with a 4:3 display.
Could be. But they didn't ever do that with the iPhone, so I'm skeptical.
I thought Apple was selling previous versions of the iPhone at the same time as the 4S. As we speak, here in Canada, you can buy an iPhone 4, as well as the 4S, via Rogers.
It seems to me that if a 10-inch Kindle is on the way and Apple can offer a tablet at a lower price point than $500 US without compromising quality, i.e. producing a product with serious flaws caused by corner-cutting, it would be a no-brainer to do so. If Apple can make a perfectly serviceable tablet that it can retail for let's say $400 US, that doesn't give the competition, such as it is, much wiggle room. I doubt any of them can deliver a proper tablet for much less than $400.
While the interest in a higher=resolution iPad is there, for many uses a tablet similar to the current iPad would do the trick.
Comments
There was some rumor about Sharp making an IGZO display, but that doesn't seem to be the case now if Samsung is making displays for Apple.
I was wondering about that too. Especially since some comments here were rooting for Sharp to displace Samsung as an LCD supplier to Apple. I'd take a Sharp display over Samsung's any day. But I didn't believe Sharp could be a good LCD supplier. They've got excellent technology but can they meet Apple's price demands? I don't think so.
If these displays are being shipped to South Korea, I think that's pretty good evidence they aren't for the iPad 3.
Totally agree, this article is BS.
LTE is, at this point, a bag of hurt. It almost halves your battery life and this makes it a no no for Apple.
The again a rumored larger battery is a real way to address any power disadvantage.
As an example, lets look at the Droid MAXX. It has a larger battery providing a capacity of 3300mAh / 12.54 Whr. With this battery you get the following usage times: 8.13 hours of 3G web browsing or 5.6 hours of 4G usage.
Yep but also remember that design is about a year old. Even if new tech is available you still have the RF problem of more data equaling more power even if the chip is power efficient.
There is also the fact that only a tiny percentage of users can get LTE and they are all in the states. Europe have not even made moves towards LTE and don't look likely to do so until the beginning of 2013.
Means nothing! Seriously if you buy iPad to keep for a couple of years you will prefer LTE. Even if you buy new ever year an LTE based iPad will resell easier and at a higher price.
In any event I have to figure out how to do some OT. I really think this iPad 3 will be compelling.
Apple might be forcing cross licensing of technology to assure production capacity.
The Sharp rumors are BS, Samsung could have been in the running all along.
Apple could be partitioning the line with a low cost and a high cost high quality display.
The list goes on. If one follows rumors you need to take them with a grain of salt. Also this is business, Apple isn't going to jump ship with respect to Samsung over a few patents. People need to realize that Apple was some time ago using over 80% of Samsungs custom chip capacity, the relationship between the two companies is complex.
I was wondering about that too. Especially since some comments here were rooting for Sharp to displace Samsung as an LCD supplier to Apple. I'd take a Sharp display over Samsung's any day. But I didn't believe Sharp could be a good LCD supplier. They've got excellent technology but can they meet Apple's price demands? I don't think so.
I've consistently pulled gotten 6.5Mb/s Down and at least 1.4Mb/s Up using my 4S on AT&T.
Consider, for example, a scenario in which we have a $429 iPad which will use current screen technology and specs, albeit with an update on the A5 chip, namely the A5X. Then we have a deluxe model starting at $599 that has a "Retina" display and an A6 chip.
The more expensive model would use Sharp's IGZO panels while the entry iPad would be using Samsung and LG panels like the ones found in the current iPad.
If there will be two iPads using different technology, imagine just how confusing the purported leaks are going to seem.
By the way, I think that if what Apple announces is different from what everyone assumes they are going to announce, whining about it will be rather absurd. Apple has been its usual tightlipped self about this whole scenario. Saying that such and such a specification is now confirmed is ridiculous. The only confirmation we can rely on will come from Apple when it unveils the iPad 3 some time next month.
My final predictions:
Dual core A6
Retina
No LTE, only HSPA+ same as 4S
8MP back camera
Facetime HD
Some revamped apps and new Apple designed ones
Siri
No Retina Display.
No multicore processor.
No 8 MP camera.
No Siri.
And they will both disappoint everybody and sell in record numbers.
Why is Apple still stuck on doing business with Samsung after all that has gone on these past few years?
Apple is desperate.
Apple is desperate.
No Retina Display.
No multicore processor.
No 8 MP camera.
No Siri.
And they will both disappoint everybody and sell in record numbers.
You could be right but yet wrong in that we could see the first time that Apple makes two distinct versions of the iPad, one with some significant upgrades and the other at a bit lower price that represents an minor update on the current model.
This makes sense because there are millions of people currently using iPads who are thrilled with the product as is. A minor boost in processor performance would make for a perfectly viable iPad for the coming year and bringing in a model around $400 that is basically the current iPad helps respond to any potential challenge at a lower price point.
Offering a more affordable iPad, yet maintaining a decent level of performance and complimenting that product with a more capable version for those who need or want more, to me that would be classic Apple. It's just the sort of approach that we've seen before with the Touch. It does make sense and I think we'd see a lot of consumers spend the extra money to step up to what we can refer to as the Retina iPad. Both models would sell in the millions and it would represent an expansion of the iPad line that makes sense at this time.
I call no LTE. Or, rather?
Retina, A6 quad core, LTE. Pick two.
Of the three, I'd say quad-core is least likely.
I do not think the next iPad will include LTE, and I won't be sad about it. I've had a chance to use Verizon LTE in the DC area and it is on par with my HSPA+ on my 4S. I've tested LTE using a Verizon AIr Card and have excellent reception. My best results were 9.4Mb/s Down and .97Mb/s Up.
I've consistently pulled gotten 6.5Mb/s Down and at least 1.4Mb/s Up using my 4S on AT&T.
I get maybe slightly faster speeds on LTE vs. AT&T 3G on an iPhone 4S (using a 4G hotspot) where I live. However, in major metropolitan cities, I've pulled close to 20Mbs down and nearly the same up. From what I can tell, the biggest improvement is the upload speed.
I'd still rather have it, as within 2 years, LTE will be even better.
Both models would sell in the millions and it would represent an expansion of the iPad line that makes sense at this time.
Could be. But they didn't ever do that with the iPhone, so I'm skeptical.
Was this worth posting?
I say it's a waste of our time.
Please wait until there is some real news, with some usefull pictures.
I'm sure for AppleInsider, it's worth the click traffic.
Because the person they got this report from is totally full of shit.
Or they could be the 2560x1600 displays for the next Galaxy Tab (apparently being announced at MWC).
Full of shit, possibly. It's possible that the report is wrong about the displays going to Korea.
But one thing I did was load up the top photo and measure it. The display region of the panel has a 4:3 ratio, so it cannot be the 2560x1600 display you mention above. The aspect ratio is not the same. There's only one tablet with a 4:3 display.
Could be. But they didn't ever do that with the iPhone, so I'm skeptical.
I thought Apple was selling previous versions of the iPhone at the same time as the 4S. As we speak, here in Canada, you can buy an iPhone 4, as well as the 4S, via Rogers.
It seems to me that if a 10-inch Kindle is on the way and Apple can offer a tablet at a lower price point than $500 US without compromising quality, i.e. producing a product with serious flaws caused by corner-cutting, it would be a no-brainer to do so. If Apple can make a perfectly serviceable tablet that it can retail for let's say $400 US, that doesn't give the competition, such as it is, much wiggle room. I doubt any of them can deliver a proper tablet for much less than $400.
While the interest in a higher=resolution iPad is there, for many uses a tablet similar to the current iPad would do the trick.
Why is Apple still stuck on doing business with Samsung after all that has gone on these past few years?
Business people dont take things personally like some people do here.
It's all about the bottom line.
There is no one who can top Samsung's production efficiencies and yield. No one.