Alleged 'iPad 3' photos showcase larger camera, tapered case

24567

Comments

  • carmissimocarmissimo Posts: 837member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    The screen is rumored to be manufactured by LG and Samsung. Sharp is having trouble with yields.



    Under no circumstances was Apple ever interested in LG or Samsung high-resolution screens that would have required a second backlight. With a device like the iPad, battery life matters and weight is critical. If you have to hold in your hands a device for long stretches, it has to be light and every small amount of weight reduction translates into a better user experience.



    Apple would, I believe, only bring out a high-resolution iPad when technology were available to offer such a product with no significant hit in terms of battery life and/or weight. Sharp's IGZO technology apparently does allow for higher resolution without compromises in weight and power consumption.



    It is also unlikely that in the late stages of developing the next iPad Apple would have considered two different technologies requiring major differences in overall design. Either Sharp's IGZO panels were ready for mass production or they were not. If not then the iPad 3 would have been using a screen similar to the current model.



    I remember when the rumour about Sharp's yield for IGZO hit and immediately it just seemed like a load of hooey.
  • carthusiacarthusia Posts: 556member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    The design is tapered now, so?







    No, it's not that kind of tapering. Look at the image.



    I took "tapered design" as a reference to the speculated MBA-style tapering of an iPhone 5 (thinner on the bottom and thicker on the top), not simply to a tapered edge around the device. But I see what you mean.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Carthusia View Post


    I took "tapered design" as a reference to the speculated MBA-style tapering of an iPhone 5 (thinner on the bottom and thicker on the top), not simply to a tapered edge around the device. But I see what you mean.



    Indeed, I agree that a 'thicker top, skinnier bottom' design is idiotic. And people actually thought the 5th or 6th gen iPhone would get such a design! It's crazy!
  • evilutionevilution Posts: 1,019member
    No way will they go from a 1MP to an 8MP camera in 1 step, that's not Apple's style. They always give them self room to grow. If the new iPad has anything more than a 5MP camera I will consume my own bumcheeks



    I also doubt quad core too.
  • irelandireland Posts: 15,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by meeksdigital View Post


    Agreed, I much prefer my original iPad's feel to the iPad 2.



    No way José.
  • alcoholicfrogalcoholicfrog Posts: 8member
    The biggest draw for me is a retina display. I love my iPad 2, and don't feel like I need more speed, a better camera, or really any of the other big draws. I do, however do tons of reading on it.



    Text on my iPad looks pretty good - until I look at my iPhone screen. Slap a retina display on it, keep the awesome battery life, and I'll probably upgrade.
  • gvoutgvout Posts: 8member
    Has anyone heard about the possibility of storage space going up? Like a 128GB

    model. Seems possible with solid state memory continually getting cheaper.
  • asciiascii Posts: 5,363member
    They want to make the whole thing thinner, but the technology's not there yet, so they have to settle for a bit more tapering. I think the iPad 1 design may make a comeback when they are finally able to thin the whole thing out.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gvout View Post


    Has anyone heard about the possibility of storage space going up? Like a 128GB

    model. Seems possible with solid state memory continually getting cheaper.



    I think that Apple would be well-served to do this:



    64GB iPad 2: $399

    32GB iPad 3: $499

    64GB iPad 3: $599

    128GB iPad 3: $699



    But they won't.



    16GB iPad 2: $399

    16GB iPad 3: $499

    32GB iPad 3: $599

    64GB iPad 3: $699
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by gvout View Post


    Has anyone heard about the possibility of storage space going up? Like a 128GB

    model. Seems possible with solid state memory continually getting cheaper.



    The more storage Apple gives us in our devices, the less incentive we have to pay for iCloud.



    I would not expect Apple portable devices to have lots of internal storage any more.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    The more storage Apple gives us in our devices, the less incentive we have to pay for iCloud.



    I would not expect Apple portable devices to have lots of internal storage any more.



    Bull. iCloud cannot and will NEVER replace the ability to have tons of movies and TV shows on your devices. Capacities will continue to increase until the telecoms are shut down and companies whose job it is to actually improve our infrastructure are put in place.



    Google was doing gigabit fiber to the home. Whatever became of that? I don't want Google doing it, I don't want Google owning the servers, I don't want Google involved. I want that fiber made and I want it laid. By other companies.



    This needs done. There's no excuse for it not to be. When more than 30% of the country has even a QUARTER of a gigabit fiber to a home, I'll start agreeing with you, but by then portable Apple products will hold a terabyte.
  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    (retracted by me)
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    They want to make the whole thing thinner, but the technology's not there yet, so they have to settle for a bit more tapering. I think the iPad 1 design may make a comeback when they are finally able to thin the whole thing out.



    The curve also allows for added rigidity and/or for a thinner backplate which could reduce weight and add more space in certain areas. Hopefully enough that the battery increases with the addition of the Retina Display. I'll take a few more ounces if it means as good or longer usage with that new display.
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gvout View Post


    Has anyone heard about the possibility of storage space going up? Like a 128GB

    model. Seems possible with solid state memory continually getting cheaper.



    Is it getting cheap enough that they can double it this year? Typically the doubling for the same price is because of a die shrinkage but there has been issues with that regarding speed and longevity. On top of that, if they are adding the Retina Display you have to consider of that component and marketing for doing both in the same year.
  • kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,108member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    I think that Apple would be well-served to do this:



    64GB iPad 2: $399

    32GB iPad 3: $499

    64GB iPad 3: $599

    128GB iPad 3: $699



    But they won't.



    16GB iPad 2: $399

    16GB iPad 3: $499

    32GB iPad 3: $599

    64GB iPad 3: $699



    At any rate, authorized resellers are beginning to clear the channel of iPad 2s by cutting prices. The Midwest market chain, Meijer, is advertising 16gb Wi-Fi models for $429, while the cart price for all models is cut by $50 at Micro Center, in-store sales only.
  • prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galbi View Post


    The screen is rumored to be manufactured by LG and Samsung. Sharp is having trouble with yields.



    That was just one rumour, from one source, out of hundreds of rumours.



    It may nor may not be true just like all the rest.
  • sunilramansunilraman Posts: 8,133member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Is it getting cheaper that they can double it this year? Typically the doubling for the same price is because of a die shrinkage but there has been issues with that regarding speed and longevity. On top of that, if they are adding the Retina Display you have to consider of that component and marketing for doing both in the same year.



    Yeah, hard to say. With Retina and 64GB + 128GB models that could be the premium iPad 3, then maybe iPad 2S with 16GB only. Or a full-on frontal assault with iPad 3 only at 16/32/64GB 3G/Wifi as per usual.



    I'm sure it's a hot topic in Apple management right now!
  • silverpraxissilverpraxis Posts: 290member
    I'm not the target audience for an iPad, however I really, really hope this high res iPad display, if true, can be the harbinger of higher res MacBook displays. While volume wouldn't be a roadblock because Apple sells many more iPads than Macs, I can only see display size as an impeding factor.



    Please Apple, usher in the ultra high res displays I so wish the entire PC market to adopt in notebooks.
  • prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Galley View Post


    I don't prefer the weight, but I do prefer the flat edges of the original iPad.



    I found that the flat edge cut into one's palm something fierce when doing thumb typing or even holding it in portrait mode. It took me a lot of training (and much soreness), to get my hands used to holding it for long periods of time that way.



    The new design also cuts into my hands in portrait mode because of the sharp edge created by the rounded back but it's lighter so it's not as pronounced. Personally, I'd like a double rounded edge with no sharpness at all. Same profile front to back. I think that's the practical solution although it's not quite as attractive.



    Since weight is always the biggest negative, it should probably be made out of plastic, but again, not as attractive. Ideally, from a practical viewpoint, it should be carbon fibre or something that can have a nice finish but be about 50% lighter while maintaining the same strength.



    IMO a tablet shouldn't really be any heavier than a thick magazine, and should be just as easy to hold in the hands.
  • notscottnotscott Posts: 247member
    The photo at the root of this article needs to be considered more. The perspective makes the camera and the taper (and volume switch, etc...) look MUCH bigger on the iPad three than the ones behind it.



    If you scale the proposed iPad 3 down to the size/placement of the iPad 2, the difference seems negligible. Of course, when you're talking about optics at that size, the improvement in image quality could be vast.



    But because the article is talking about size... it's not all that different.
Sign In or Register to comment.