iFixit's iPad teardown finds huge dual battery, 256MB of RAM in A4 - Page 2

Actually, every time you want to charge your iPad you must send $5 to Steve Jobs in an envelope.

There is absolutely nothing in the RAM amount to suggest this or not, so please stop parroting this is nonsense.

I second that.

Haha I have a phone that has as much memory as iPad!

I agree as well. I have no desire at all to web conference from my iPad. The viewing angle would make it look odd. I don't understand why people aren't mentioning the possibility of an external camera. There is already an attachment which allows you to connect your camera to the device. If I were apple I would sell a small external USB or Bluetooth camera. You could position the external camera at angles appropriate for video capturing. Thus leaving the iPad free to position at an angle which optimizes viewing the screen and the images of the person to whom you are video chatting. I don't know why more people aren't thinking of this as a possibility. Apple had the iSight camera well before they started embedding the cameras in the monitor, they've done it before.

OK smart guy. Perhaps you can point out where it (his link) states that, "[he] will be forced into a another 3 year long agreement."

BTW, when you quote someone, at least spell it out as written.

I as well.

The problem with video conferencing is that most people don't realize that you have to look directly into the lens. Otherwise, it looks as if you are talking to somebody else. As such, it becomes frustratingly boring looking at an offset view.

To compound the issue, if you are looking directly into the lens, you can't truly see the person to whom you are conversing with.

Until the lack of eye contact is resolved, as proposed for example in Apple's camera hidden behind display patent filing*, teleconferencing and video chatting will be a problem.

*http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...d_display.html

I can't make amendments to the main article in the news section but I added the new information to the original thread post. The article writer will probably make some changes later on.

I'm reading you. An external camera would look like a kludge because of the eye contact issue. That being said I'd prefer a lack of eye contact to staring up someone's nose while chatting.

I know this isn't official, but 256Mb? That's really disappointing. In fact, this may be my first REAL disappointment w/ iPad... I was hoping for 1Gb, or at least the more realistic 512Mb, 256Mb seems to be a waste of processing power, this really limits the level of graphic detail games could have, not mention a decent overall speed boost.

And yet, it would be so much nicer for us all if you'd have abandoned Apple and this forum before posting here. Seriously, though, see it from inside of Apple. The poor team that is going to release the laptops and desktops. How boring it must be to release another laptop upgrade while other teams are reshaping the computer industry. I bet they can't wait until things catch up in their space and they can innovate some form factors to facilitate multitouch screens as an option.

The small amount of memory is interesting. From using these apps, It's amazing how much you can do without the overhead of a monstrous OS.

++ on using the shiny Apple that way. I just thought it was a nice distinguishing style thing.

The graphics in the games for iPad look pretty good to me. How much memory do the psp and ds have? I don't particularly care about the specs. I haven't noticed any lag while simultaneously downloading apps, listening to music and reading on my iPad. That's all I really care about, this thing isn't a laptop.

The evidence and experience from game developers and now reviewers/users/experienced gamers does not support your contention at all.

I disagree, some families are separated by huge geographical distances these days and video conferencing allows grandparents to see and interact with their grandchildren and is one of the experiences they look forward to most in life. While it's not perfect, it would be a hell of a lot easier to get a kid to stay focused on an iPad video-chat than at a desktop or laptop. They could even allow the child to interact with apps while on video so they could play a piano or read a book or finger-paint a picture of their grandparents and email it. The uses go beyond just video-chat too, as I said before, a kid could take a picture of themselves and use a photobooth app or costume app to play around with.

There's no sense in excusing the lack of features on a device by saying the features are useless anyway when Apple puts those same features on a huge number of other products. It's quite obvious that the focus here was on cost, which is why they went with lower RAM too. The compromise was to cut everything else down that adds to the production cost and make sure the focal point of the product (the display) is excellent quality as that's what people will judge it by.

If I was offered the choice between a 1GB RAM iPad with a webcam and a TN screen or a 256MB RAM iPad, no webcam and an IPS display, I'd take the latter any day. But while I have no use for the webcam, it's still a good feature to have and they could have gone with a cheaper one just to have the functionality. It's not as if they were struggling for space or anything.

It is a given that someone would choose a device with superior hardware for the same price. It is my opinion that what they are attempting to do is hit a price point not minimize space. I find more things to agree with in your second paragraph. Folks contending that they wouldn't use a camera are excusing the lack of a camera. It makes sense that we would excuse the lack of this feature because we don't think we'd ever use it. I understand a lot of people really want to web chat on this device. I'm just not one of them. I would like more efficient multitasking for 3rd party applications though. Sign me up for that.

It doesn't matter.

I now have both an iPhone and an iPad with 16 gb of storage, and 256 mb of RAM.

Guess what? Only one of them has a custom Apple A4 at the helm...

And only one of them has unbelievably fast, outstanding performance.

Interacting with this thing is really nothing like using the iPhone. I can't possibly explain how much of difference the large and responsive screen makes. It in itself is a new experience all together.

Wow. 512 MB of RAM would've been slightly disappointing, but we'd all just shake our heads and accept it because it was Apple. 256 MB is self-sabotage looking forward. And I must admit I'm a little irritated by all the trolls yes, trolls saying that every possible inadequacy in the iPad is automatically excused (and perhaps even a feature!) because its display happens to be bigger. Cameras aren't useless, or there wouldn't be one in the iPhone and numerous apps that take advantage of it in interesting ways. Multitasking has limited, specific, and legitimate use cases on a 9.7-inch tablet. Yes, the larger display does make it "a new experience altogether", which is why it's a shame that Apple disagrees.

You are mistaken afterall in quoting iFixit on 512MB of RAM since they've since changed their interpretation of 2Gb to refer to both RAM chips together for 256MB of RAM total. This reportedly matches software developer feedback finding available free memory on the iPad being similar to the iPhone 3GS.

I've used Skype for a while and I agree. As usual, Apple doesn't do it until they find a way to do it well enough. I mean yeah, the Macs of today still have this issue but they are starting from zero with this new platform. Webcam will be there only when they come up with something that blows your head.


In the mean time,everyone else settles for Dell or something.

Wow, that's rather surprising. How does this thing perform the way it does with so little RAM? I spent better than 6 hrs yesterday playing on my wife's iPad. I played games, watched movies, listened to music, and browsed many of my favorite sites - all without a single hiccup.

Could someone with a better understanding than I have, explain how this is even possible? I'm assuming it's the OS and perhaps the processor.

i am sorry for my poor joke

only kidding

ok dude

ragu is a food
i agreed w/ you
not HIM !!!
peace 9

Seriously? You are going fuss like this knowing that Apple does routine updates?? Is this just a bid to get attention or are you really this immature? Kidding!! But for me - the idea of the iPad plus a good desktop like the iMac i7 suddenly became my solution for portable computing. For most of everything I do in mobility mode the iPad is the dog's bollocks. Light-weight, compact, portable NOT clamshell (so 20th century), and I can remote back to my desktop anytime I want to do something. So I have, for just a little more change than a full laptop/notebook, ultra portability and ....wait isn't there a disney film quote I can abuse - oh yeah: "phenomenal computational powers - itty-bitty portable device" Yeah that sez it.

Not the right solution for everyone else, just me. I see the need for nice kick-ass MBP, but it's not necessary for me any longer.

i agree. what a bunch of crybabies. this sounds like the old 'copy/paste' whine. imagine if apple put out copy/paste feature before they perfected it for their hard/software. the trolls would be all over the shit.

if the ipad isn't your ideal piece of technology right now, don't buy it and stop whining.

i think it's an amazing piece of technology. and, yes, because it's by apple. it probably runs beautifully so users can spend more time doing what was intended, rather than tinkering with it and trying to get it to work or worrying about 3rd party apps that crash the software.

i think we'll see the real impact of the ipad in a few years when apple has had time to rethink or retool some of the features, but more importantly, the developers will have some amazing real world applications to bring to the formatnot just fart and game apps.

i'm perfectly content with my apple products and with a company that doesn't wait around to innovate. this just gives apple's competitors something to copyershoot for. and, as most of you trolls say, 'competition is good'. i agree.

I think it performs well at this point because in most cases you are only running 1 app at a time. In such a case 256MB of RAM is plenty. How much RAM realistically does a browser really need to display a web page or does a word processor like Pages need? It shouldn't be in the 100s of MBs. It's only on desktop that the price of RAM is so cheap and people generally have so much of it that software is becoming so bloated.

I think the concern with 256MB of RAM is not right now, but in the future if multitasking is coming with iPhone OS 4. If everyone is writing their apps on the basis of the third-gen iPhone and iPod Touch and the iPad having 256MB of RAM, it's going to be a problem when you try to run multiple apps of that size at the same time. 512MB of RAM would have definitely provided breathing room.

http://twitter.com/zodttd/status/11592511853

On another note, it's been confirmed that the iPad has the same PowerVR SGX535 as the iPhone 3GS. Given that the iPad has more than 5 times the pixels to draw and the iPad GPU is most likely not clocked 5 times higher, the iPhone 3GS does still have the most GPU power per pixel. The iPad's advantage though is that iPad apps are optimized for OpenGL ES 2.0 and 256MB of RAM so they aren't limited by held back by having to accommodate code reuse for OpenGL ES 1.1 and smaller textures to fit 128MB of RAM to be backwards compatible with older iPhone models. There is probably still a while yet before the SGX535 is fully utilized, but the iPad will peak before the iPhone 3GS.

Not true! Steven Colbert proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it can make salsa.

I don't feel any need to argue the cost positioning issue but I frankly have used the webcam on my iMac maybe a handful of times in its entire seven year existence - notably on major holidays to connect up with my family scattered all over the US. And some quick and dirty photobooth shots. That's it. Now try to figure out how, with a physical format that is meant to be flexibly horizontal or vertical - depending on your immediate need or desire, to position a camera, angle it so that it can be used conveniently, configure your software to be able to hard-disable it for things like government and medical practice use (privacy/confidentially issues) and sell that as a feature. Why not let 3rd party devs take this on as an add-on to the device rather than build it in? That way the marketability for it remains very wide (to include those uses that would be restricted or not used) and the lack thereof is not that big a deal. It's a win all the way around - you leave it fully useable for government, medical, lab development where recording and photo devices are restricted, you don't have to devote dev time to engineer a decent camera solution, the software to support it, and the restriction solution that probably won't be acceptable to those restricted use situations anyway. As a cross-over device, this makes sense. And to consign those who don't see the need as simply in denial is rather presumptuous. It would be like me saying "you "feature-fanatics" aren't satisified until it does everything except pick your nose and wipe your ass". Equally unfair and equally untrue.

Not in a hundred years. The circumstance you described is best suited for a mounted camera of some kind. The current frame rates for video chat is just barely usable for a fixed camera. Add any amount of motion to it (let alone, a lot) and you've destroyed any sort of usefulness.

Its a nice idea, but not feasible, or usable.

Your best option for realistic video chat is a bluetooth camera accessory that mounts on a desk or table near you. I'm sure they're coming, eventually, maybe even soon. Regardless, it's a far better option for anyone who wants video chat.

Wait until the first iPad case with built in WebCam and battery pack emerges. Its usefulness (or lack thereof) will prove itself.

(Save yourself any diatribe about this being a stand-alone device, as this absurd assertion suggests that no accessories should ever be made as all conceivable features should be built in.)

That is what I found when I ran iStat. I have to say x-raying a chip to get internal part numbers is much cooler and sounds much more definitive, even if the end result is incorrect.

It's already been jailbroken so many more secrets will be opening up.

BLUETOOTH? How the hell are you going to get video transfer rates across Bluetooth? I mean, you would have to compress the HELL out of it.

I find a plugged-into-the-dock-connector's-USB-bus camera FAR more likely.

wow. really?

either you're lazy or you have some lazy-ass kidsor, gee, maybe they're simply too young to be dealing with the technology.

seriously. if it's this difficult to control your kids, do us all a favor and think twice about having them.

That's really it. Jailbroken 3GS phones manage multi-tasking with 256MB and it seems ok but still, iPad apps are expected to be more fully featured eventually and even the 3GS does struggle to multi-task certain apps. Like drawing apps will suck up nearly all of the RAM and Safari is a major memory hog. You'd have to assume they must have tested it though or decided multi-tasking isn't the way to go. They can do what Windows Phone 7 will do, just hibernate background apps then kill them if the RAM is needed.

But you worded it right, more RAM just gives you breathing room so for example Brushes or Sketchbook for iPad wouldn't have to restrict you to 6 layers. You could go nuts and have full layer effects and be able to do all sorts of transforms.


That's interesting, I expected a better GPU for the larger screen. The games seem to play ok, though NFS looked like it had a bit of jitter. The main issue with games is going to be the controls at first:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=654fMjzv52U


Yeah the privacy issue could well be a strong factor in the camera removal. Even with schools these days - you never know who's watching. It's just a fun element though. If they can let you use a mobile phone camera as a webcam, over bluetooth or peripheral webcam as mentioned, it would solve the issue.


I won't be able to pick my nose with it but iPad is just asking for an ass-wiping. I'll use an in-store model.


Children can use computers from a very young age just fine and I don't think they have to be turned into lifeless drones before they are considered adequate to be allowed an existence. Children have short attention spans, it's just a fact of life.

yes. that is correct. you won't be able to plug your ipad into your iphone. i guess technically that should be doable via bluetooth, but the providers probably don't like that idea.

iirc at&t still doesn't offer tethering for the iphone, even though i believe one of the cell companies lets you turn a pre (?) into a wireless access point. maybe in the US the competition will make similar features more likely, but in canada we seem to be suffering from the collusion between rogers, telus, bell and the CRTC.

that's also why we're still stuck with 3 year contracts.

leave his kids out of this. seriously.

Wait a sec.

"X-raying" shows 512
Software shows 256.

Is it possible that the OS is purposely hiding away half the RAM so that it can be used on iPhone OS 4.0?

I think that your comments were out of line because you took Marvin's comments out of context. Also please keep rude comments out of this forumespecially when you are talking about someone else's kids. If you had any children of your own, you know that at a certain age, it is hard to keep the children's attention focused for any length of time.

I agree with:

I dunno - I think the choice to omit the "nasal cam" was a quite deliberate one. I would expect at least one add-on camera for the dock in the near future (ESP after OS4). And I would expect it to have a very important feature - the ability to swivel!

LOL @ nasal cam. You have a good point, perhaps the implementation was always off in their concepts. It's also possible that it was part of the lowering costs and/or make it something to add in a future generation.

We really don't know and it seems silly for anyone to complain about it. I figure other tablets competing with the iPad will add one in a likely vain attempt to "one up" it. It'll be curious to see how they fare with a camera. The Notion Ink has one that swivels 180°.

There is nothing stopping anyone from adding a camera to the iPad right now. v3.0 allows access to the Dock Connector.

It's a shame that Apple hasn't sold an external iSight in a while.

Getting this to work with the iPad would be nice.

http://www.tuaw.com/2009/07/07/road-...ving-one-away/

Or even this:

http://macdaddyworld.com/2008/01/12/...iew-iphonecam/

I think a lighter iPad would be better than 2 batteries. Most people on this board are saying they will use this device at home. If that's the case then recharging would be a snap. If you're at a cafe or wherever you can use the outlet to recharge if you plan on using it for more than 4 hours at a cafe. All of you said you wouldn't be using it for more than brief FaceBook and email moments anyway so going past a few hours on a single battery shouldn't be an issue. Right?

So now you have to choose what camp you're in. Either you stick with your camp which means you don't need a dual battery (which means it's not the best design after all) or you switch camps which means that the iPad isn't the ideal portable device becaue you can't use it like a netbook.

I'm just going by what you guys have been flaming about.

Personally I'll still buy a 2nd gen iPad and hope for a wireless keyboard solution made out of fabric or other non-hard-plastic material that I can fold up and use on the go.

I have the iphone case that apple manufactures for typing and viewing. It does three positions very well horizontal/vertical and inclined like a keyboard. While in those positions it is rigid. It isn't very adjustable. It's possible that someone could come up with a less rigid stand for the ipad.

That being said I still think an external camera would garner more flexibility on small mobile devices like the ipad and iphone. Someone could potentially use the external camera on either device, thus eliminating the need for an extraneous front facing camera. I personally wouldn't purchase a camera for web conferencing but at least it would give folks like you who really want this functionality an option.