It may be a trend they'll expand to the iphone but keep in mind that the ipod lineup has always been numberless... so, it's no guarantee that the iphone, after sooo many generations of numeric names would drop it's name now.
I agree that people saying the next iPhone will necessarily be called simply "iPhone" or "the new iPhone" don't really have any evidence to base that belief on.
On the other hand, while Apple has been using numbers for most iPhone releases so far, the numbers rarely if ever correspond to the version of the phone, so even if they continue with numbers no one can really say what the next number or letter combination will be.
Out of all the possibilities however, iPhone 5 is probably the most unlikely choice of all and no one with any real knowledge of the industry would use it, so the original criticism is still apt.
On the other hand, while Apple has been using numbers for most iPhone releases so far, the numbers rarely if ever correspond to the version of the phone...
The iPhone 4 is the 4th generation iPhone. No other iPhone was appended with a lone number.
Apple appears to have chosen the 'A5X' name because the CPU is unchanged while there's more RAM and more GPU cores. If they change the CPU itself, they will probably change the numeric designator.
But why would they make a new processor for the iPhone? The iPhone gets the die shrink of that year's iPad processor, so it'll get an A5X, too.
Or performing production test runs. Testing the production process rather than the product itself.
That's what I thought, too.
On the eternal naming issue - the reason Apple will not name the increments of a product is partially because by not doing so will give journalists, bloggers and pundits alike another thing to endlessly discuss, which in turn translates to free marketing.
On the processor, though, I wouldn't be surprised if the next iPhone does, indeed, have an A6 processor.
To what end. What would make a higher CPU needed in the phone. The highest load is graphics and the A5x has offloaded that to the better gpu. Frankly I think Apple is looking at the iPad as the computer killer, not the iPhone. So the iPad will likely led, not follow, on processor/SoC upgrades
It will look a bit out of place for someone to back their pickup truck to an Apple store to load their 50" Apple TV.
What seems as an obvious evolution to create such a product, just feels so disconnected to me.
I'll believe it when I see it.
Or see it when I believe it.
The more I think about it, the less likely I believe Apple will produce a TV. IMHO, the recent changes to the ATV interface don't really evidence a deep commitment to TV on Apple's part in general - meaning, a lot of people here (myself included) were underwhelmed by both the ATV3 and the new interface; neither seemed to evidence that "generational leap" for which Apple's so highly regarded. It just doesn't seem like the next step after the ATV3 is an integrated TV set itself.
This is the first Apple TV review I have decided to believe. Reason: No reference was made to Walter Isaacsons book and Steve Jobs quote "I finally cracked it".
I know Steve hated them, but if the TV doesn't include an integrated CableCard, then people would still need an external box. And I thought the whole point of AppleTV was simplicity. So hopefully everything is included so all my TV watching options are covered.
If they really wanted to be forward thinking, they'd include an integrated Tru2Way card so things like VoD would work.
But why would they make a new processor for the iPhone? The iPhone gets the die shrink of that year's iPad processor, so it'll get an A5X, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
To what end. What would make a higher CPU needed in the phone. The highest load is graphics and the A5x has offloaded that to the better gpu. Frankly I think Apple is looking at the iPad as the computer killer, not the iPhone. So the iPad will likely led, not follow, on processor/SoC upgrades
While a faster CPU would have made more sense on the iPad, Apple has also increased the performance on the iPhone when technology allowed. The technology keeps improving and after some time period, going to a newer technology doesn't cost you any more than you paid for the old technology.
Furthermore, the extra GPUs are of less value on the iPhone than on the iPad due to the number of pixels. I could, for example, see the next iPhone having 4 CPU cores (or 2 much faster CPU cores) and only 2 GPU cores to reduce energy consumption. Then, the 2013 iPad would have the same CPU as the then-current iPhone but would have twice the GPU cores to make up for the added pixels.
I know Steve hated them, but if the TV doesn't include an integrated CableCard, then people would still need an external box. And I thought the whole point of AppleTV was simplicity. So hopefully everything is included so all my TV watching options are covered.
If they really wanted to be forward thinking, they'd include an integrated Tru2Way card so things like VoD would work.
I'm guessing it won't - you'll still have to plug your box in to the back. Which means you will have two interfaces, but as more content becomes available through Apple, more people will do without regular cable content. At a certain point the tide will turn for real and the set-top box will be a thing of the past.
I heard he just increased the price target by $0.99 to 699.99. He stated the key is to keep the estimate just under $700 to reduce the effect of skepticism that a company can really defy the economy.
You just want the new buyer to ask for an iPhone, then they are shown the buy in points and make a choice.
It is far better that way, instead of feeling deflated cause they choose the older one (indicated to them by the model number), they feel successful/wiser or whatever because they selected the model they can afford and still have an iPhone.
Nothing like getting your customer to haggle price themselves between your products, it stops them needing to do it against other brands or between other shops. I have used the strategy successfully by offering two pricing models for the same services, the prospect then played the value propositions off each other and most of the time went the one that made us more profit because in their mind it had the opportunity for them to pay less overall.
But Apple also didn't keep old iPods (or Macs) as new products after the new ones dropped. The iPhone (and now the iPad) are the only ones that have done that.
I do hope they drop the numbers. I think people understand the year-old device is cheaper concept.
That said, I think you may have missed his point about calling the 6th generation iPhone the iPhone 5.
2X on RAM and GPU seems the most likely reason to call it A5X to me.
During the New iPad introduction, Cook said that the X stood for the 4 Core GPU
He expects the full-fledged television set to launch in the fourth quarter of calendar 2012.
Not long to wait then
Of course he could be just talking it up in order to propel the share price higher and make a lot of money for his clients, but that would be unethical.
I wonder if it doesn't appear in Q4 he will come out and say that Apple had component and/or production problems delaying the release until next year?
Do many people buy a new TV for Christmas? I always thought they launched new TVs around major TV events like the Olympics or the World Cup (football/soccer).
Comments
It may be a trend they'll expand to the iphone but keep in mind that the ipod lineup has always been numberless... so, it's no guarantee that the iphone, after sooo many generations of numeric names would drop it's name now.
I agree that people saying the next iPhone will necessarily be called simply "iPhone" or "the new iPhone" don't really have any evidence to base that belief on.
On the other hand, while Apple has been using numbers for most iPhone releases so far, the numbers rarely if ever correspond to the version of the phone, so even if they continue with numbers no one can really say what the next number or letter combination will be.
Out of all the possibilities however, iPhone 5 is probably the most unlikely choice of all and no one with any real knowledge of the industry would use it, so the original criticism is still apt.
On the other hand, while Apple has been using numbers for most iPhone releases so far, the numbers rarely if ever correspond to the version of the phone...
The iPhone 4 is the 4th generation iPhone. No other iPhone was appended with a lone number.
Apple appears to have chosen the 'A5X' name because the CPU is unchanged while there's more RAM and more GPU cores. If they change the CPU itself, they will probably change the numeric designator.
But why would they make a new processor for the iPhone? The iPhone gets the die shrink of that year's iPad processor, so it'll get an A5X, too.
Or performing production test runs. Testing the production process rather than the product itself.
That's what I thought, too.
On the eternal naming issue - the reason Apple will not name the increments of a product is partially because by not doing so will give journalists, bloggers and pundits alike another thing to endlessly discuss, which in turn translates to free marketing.
I don't take rumors seriously from anyone who's still calling the NEXT iPhone the iPhone 5.
Agreed. There is no logic to using the number 5. It is the sixth model release, and if the shape is redesigned the 4th form.
If they give it a tag beyond a (xx) it will be 4g or lte, not a flat number
Mhmm. And we're definitely going to see the iPhone nano before Christmas, too.
I'm waiting for the iPhone shuffle - randomly conferences in different people over the course of a call.
I couldn't care less about the name.
On the processor, though, I wouldn't be surprised if the next iPhone does, indeed, have an A6 processor.
To what end. What would make a higher CPU needed in the phone. The highest load is graphics and the A5x has offloaded that to the better gpu. Frankly I think Apple is looking at the iPad as the computer killer, not the iPhone. So the iPad will likely led, not follow, on processor/SoC upgrades
It will look a bit out of place for someone to back their pickup truck to an Apple store to load their 50" Apple TV.
What seems as an obvious evolution to create such a product, just feels so disconnected to me.
I'll believe it when I see it.
Or see it when I believe it.
The more I think about it, the less likely I believe Apple will produce a TV. IMHO, the recent changes to the ATV interface don't really evidence a deep commitment to TV on Apple's part in general - meaning, a lot of people here (myself included) were underwhelmed by both the ATV3 and the new interface; neither seemed to evidence that "generational leap" for which Apple's so highly regarded. It just doesn't seem like the next step after the ATV3 is an integrated TV set itself.
If they really wanted to be forward thinking, they'd include an integrated Tru2Way card so things like VoD would work.
But why would they make a new processor for the iPhone? The iPhone gets the die shrink of that year's iPad processor, so it'll get an A5X, too.
To what end. What would make a higher CPU needed in the phone. The highest load is graphics and the A5x has offloaded that to the better gpu. Frankly I think Apple is looking at the iPad as the computer killer, not the iPhone. So the iPad will likely led, not follow, on processor/SoC upgrades
While a faster CPU would have made more sense on the iPad, Apple has also increased the performance on the iPhone when technology allowed. The technology keeps improving and after some time period, going to a newer technology doesn't cost you any more than you paid for the old technology.
Furthermore, the extra GPUs are of less value on the iPhone than on the iPad due to the number of pixels. I could, for example, see the next iPhone having 4 CPU cores (or 2 much faster CPU cores) and only 2 GPU cores to reduce energy consumption. Then, the 2013 iPad would have the same CPU as the then-current iPhone but would have twice the GPU cores to make up for the added pixels.
The iPhone 4 is the 4th generation iPhone. No other iPhone was appended with a lone number.
Pretty sure that was part of my point.
I know Steve hated them, but if the TV doesn't include an integrated CableCard, then people would still need an external box. And I thought the whole point of AppleTV was simplicity. So hopefully everything is included so all my TV watching options are covered.
If they really wanted to be forward thinking, they'd include an integrated Tru2Way card so things like VoD would work.
I'm guessing it won't - you'll still have to plug your box in to the back. Which means you will have two interfaces, but as more content becomes available through Apple, more people will do without regular cable content. At a certain point the tide will turn for real and the set-top box will be a thing of the past.
It is far better that way, instead of feeling deflated cause they choose the older one (indicated to them by the model number), they feel successful/wiser or whatever because they selected the model they can afford and still have an iPhone.
Nothing like getting your customer to haggle price themselves between your products, it stops them needing to do it against other brands or between other shops. I have used the strategy successfully by offering two pricing models for the same services, the prospect then played the value propositions off each other and most of the time went the one that made us more profit because in their mind it had the opportunity for them to pay less overall.
It addresses a psychological need.
But why would they make a new processor for the iPhone? The iPhone gets the die shrink of that year's iPad processor, so it'll get an A5X, too.
The A5X doesn't have a new CPU. It appears to be the same in every major way except for a doubling of two components that need to run the display.
By this Autumn I think we're set for a new chip that is higher performance while using less power.
But Apple also didn't keep old iPods (or Macs) as new products after the new ones dropped. The iPhone (and now the iPad) are the only ones that have done that.
I do hope they drop the numbers. I think people understand the year-old device is cheaper concept.
That said, I think you may have missed his point about calling the 6th generation iPhone the iPhone 5.
2X on RAM and GPU seems the most likely reason to call it A5X to me.
During the New iPad introduction, Cook said that the X stood for the 4 Core GPU
During the New iPad introduction, Cook said that the X stood for the 4 Core GPU
Which is 2X more GPU cores than before.
He expects the full-fledged television set to launch in the fourth quarter of calendar 2012.
Not long to wait then
Of course he could be just talking it up in order to propel the share price higher and make a lot of money for his clients, but that would be unethical.
I wonder if it doesn't appear in Q4 he will come out and say that Apple had component and/or production problems delaying the release until next year?
Do many people buy a new TV for Christmas? I always thought they launched new TVs around major TV events like the Olympics or the World Cup (football/soccer).
My Samsung flat screen TV caught me reading this article and now it's all nervous.
And so it should be.
So it should be.
That's just nuts. Samsung is Apple's only hope to manufacture products.
Did you hear the latest?
Samsung to Supply Apple With IPad Screen After LG, Sharp Miss Requirements
http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...n-for-new-ipad
Without Samsung, Apple would be in DEEP trouble.