or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple forecast to sell 100M iPhones, 48M iPads in 2011
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple forecast to sell 100M iPhones, 48M iPads in 2011

post #1 of 67
Thread Starter 
Predicted to grow by "nearly 100 percent" year-over-year, Apple is planning to produce as many as 48 million iPads and 100 million iPhones next year, according to one analyst.

Analyst Brian Blair of Wedge Partners issued the forecasts Tuesday after checks with Apple's supply chain, financial publication Barron's reports. Blair sees 100 million iPhones sold in 2011 as "a staggering number any way you look at it," and believes Apple is preparing for the "nearly 100% year over year growth for iPhone in 2011" required to make that number possible. Additionally, the iPad supply chain suggests Apple intends to product 45-48 million iPads next year, according to the analyst.

Blair's numbers, which should be taken with a grain of salt, represent a significant jump in analyst predictions. For instance, Oppenheimer analyst Yair Reiner predicts Apple will sell almost half as much in the 2011 fiscal year as Blair's estimate: 52 million iPhones and 23 million iPads. After fourth-quarter 2010 sales of the iPad were lower than Wall Street expectations, Needham & Company analyst Charlie Wolf predicted Apple will ship just 18 million iPads in 2011, warning that the iPad could miss even that target depending on growth in the tablet market.

According to Apple's recent Form 10-K for fiscal year 2010, the company sold 39.9 million iPhones, a 93 percent increase year-over-year, and 7.4 million iPads.

Undaunted by last quarter's less than expected iPad sales, Blair sees Apple as "incredibly bullish" with its growth predictions. We believe Apple remains the best-positioned company in the tech sector as we exit the year and look into 2011, Blair wrote in the research note. With the iPhone and the iPad, the company continues to experience tremendous product momentum across two core areas that we believe are still in the early stages of growth: with global handset units at 1.1 billion/year and the tablet opportunity still nascent."

iPad growth will be driven by the arrival of the iPad 2, which Blair believes will include a front-facing camera and a thinner unibody form factor.

According to the analyst, Macs will see a lift next year as well. "We additionally see meaningful opportunity for Apple in its Mac line, particularly with the companys new $999 11 inch screen MacBook Air, which our checks show to be selling higher than expected units both online and in Apple Stores, wrote Blair.

MacBook Air unit momentum will cause Wall Street to raise its expectations for Mac units next quarter, Blair predicts. Apple has created something rather spectacular with the new Air, but has done so in almost a stealthy manner," he wrote. "We believe the 11 inch Air will be both [sic] provide solid incremental units to Apples December quarter Mac units, but also add meaningful incremental revenues to the company over the next year.

In 2009, Wedge Partners correctly predicted that Apple would refresh its iMac and MacBook offerings "in the next several weeks." In July 2009, Wedge Partners analyst Matt Mathison predicted a Chinese iPhone launch would arrive before February 2010, but the device launched just a few months later in October 2009.
post #2 of 67
I'm a big Apple fan and a long time Apple investor but.... these estimates coming from no name analysts are getting out of control.

Who the freak is Brian Blair and what freak is Wedge Partner? Anyone who can grab a number out of their butt can call themselves analyst now?
post #3 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by bunnyturd View Post

I'm a big Apple fan and a long time Apple investor but.... these estimates coming from no name analysts are getting out of control.

Who the freak is Brian Blair and what freak is Wedge Partner? Anyone who can grab a number out of their butt can call themselves analyst now?

...+1... and anyone with the username Bunnyturd most surely knows something about Wedgies
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #4 of 67
Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.

What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
  1. More RAM!
  2. A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
  3. More than double the amount a Flash storage!
  4. Factime support!
  5. A faster GPU!

Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners. They address issues of performance and value. The items should be self explanatory but I will offer up my thoughts on each one below.

RAM is very important for a number of reasons. One is to better support multitasking, that is almost obvious. Another is to get better performance out of current apps and to enable a new generation of apps that really could use more RAM. One app of special concern is Safari, one could cut their data usage dramatically if Safari wasn't constantly reloading pages.

Dual core A9 would also significantly help performance and hopefully would give us performance approaching a G4. This again would enable a new class of apps and hopefully help out those apps that strain the CPU right now (VLC).

Flash storage should be another obvious need. For many uses you can't have the latency of the network nor deal with the availability issues.

Facetime in and of itself could sell a lot of iPads. In fact I'm waiting on that right now. You get a 100 million device out there running Facetime and there will be some synergy that will drive sales even more. This is one reason why I think Apple needs to come out with an Apple TV dedicated to face time usage, all you really need is a small monitor/ camera and a Blutooth headset.

A better performing GPU is just for completeness, the one in there does surprisingly well. However for games and visualization apps you can never have to much GPU. Plus Apple needs to bring OpenCL to the iPad.

In any event enough background, given an iPad 2 that addresses those issues I'm certain Apple could sustain 2 million a month easy. Now that isn't 48 mill but lets just say I see it as a low side number. Now this does not take into account every initiative Apple may have up its sleeve to drive iPad sales, improvements to the OS and whatever they are doing with that data center might very positive factors. I really don't think 48 mill is impossible and they may be trying to scale production to hit that capacity. Plus people have to remember that the roll out isn't even complete yet. Still 3 million a month is an easier target to hit.

Another way to look at this is the old rev A arguement. Many are sitting back and waiting for the next rev due to the expectation it will address the current models shortcomings. I know personally Facetime has put me on hold iPad wise and many others feel the same way. If anything Facetime has stifled iPad sales. On the other hand iPad has been one of Apples best rev A devices ever so maybe the pent up demand isn't that great.

In the end I think 24 million would be the low side figure for a revamped iPad. The high end really depends upon strong acceptance of rev 2.

IPhone sales are another thing and frankly no one knows what demand is because they have yet to meet demand. Only yesterday did they shorten wait time to 24 hours, so we are talking a half a year here of demand outstripping supply.
post #5 of 67
48M? They better have something good planned for iPad G2!
post #6 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.

What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
  1. More RAM!
  2. A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
  3. More than double the amount a Flash storage!
  4. Factime support!
  5. A faster GPU!

Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners. They address issues of performance and value. The items should be self explanatory but I will offer up my thoughts on each one below.

I'd put a Retina display as a priority. It's not quite as necessary as on an iPhone but it would make most pdf's readable without having to zoom. Facetime camera is a given but a decent camera on the rear would be excellent for documenting faults or logging visual information for anyone who works on their feet. Oh and tweak the rounded back so it doesn't rock when it's resting on a table.
post #7 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners.

Apple do not publish processor & memory metrics for consumer platforms. They don't sell like this because it isn't effective. The vast majority of iPad customers would not be able to say the amount of RAM or the number of processor cores. For typical consumers these metrics are meaningless.

Consumers care about what it does and how well.

Apple should focus on...
  • Facetime
  • The benefits of iOS4.2..iOS5.0
  • The stand-alone iPad

The stand-alone thing is important. Apple should reduce the necessity to dock to iTunes. If software updates, content management and other functions are all made possible without docking. The iPad becomes more of a platform and less of a satellite.

I am sure the iPad 2.0 will see some under-the-hood hardware changes. But these changes will not be presented as user-facing changes.

C.
post #8 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Apple do not publish processor & memory metrics for consumer platforms. They don't sell like this because it isn't effective. The vast majority of iPad customers would not be able to say the amount of RAM or the number of processor cores. For typical consumers these metrics are meaningless.

Agreed. Those that care about cores, GHz, RAM, etc. seem to still be stuck in the PC realms of the 90's. Time to move on. These issues are moot. If the entire widget is fast, the software is tightly integrated, and polished, most consumers could care less what's under the hood.
post #9 of 67
As far as the future of both the iPhone and the iPad - Verizon Wireless will be their additional carrier.
post #10 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.

What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
  1. More RAM!
  2. A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
  3. More than double the amount a Flash storage!
  4. Factime support!
  5. A faster GPU!

I think this post is upside down. Tech geek freaks get jazzed about these specs, but users just want a device that is useful, fun, and easy. My iPad would be better if:

1.I could quickly switch between apps without losing my work and where I am in the app

2. It were easier for me to organize my files on the iPad and move/sync those files to a computer

3. If scrolling through PDFs were faster

So what is needed to achieve these things?

1. Software update to get better multitasking (coming soon)
2. Either more ram OR faster access to flash to support multitasking
3. Software update to improve file management and syncing (hopefully in ios 5, but who knows)
4. Increase in overall processing speed, but I leave it to apple to figure out the best way to get that speed -- I don't care if it's a higher clocked a4, a dual core chip, or a faster gnu -- whatever works

So if the new iPad comes out with a 1 ghz single core CPU, I won't complain IF I can scroll through PDFs faster thanks to a faster gpu. If there isn't any more ram, I won't complain IF it has lightning fast access to flash, making more ram less necessary.

I want results, I don't care how apple gets them. Getting hung up on a spec sheet is silly.
post #11 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Agreed. Those that care about cores, GHz, RAM, etc. seem to still be stuck in the PC realms of the 90's. Time to move on. These issues are moot. If the entire widget is fast, the software is tightly integrated, and polished, most consumers could care less what's under the hood.

The Samsung Galaxy has more RAM and a fast processor.
But scrolling through web-pages seems to be choppy and sluggish.

Consumers don't care about inputs, they care about outcomes.

C.
post #12 of 67
48 million ipads seems more plausible to me than 100 million iphones. But both seem a little high to me. I'd put ipads at about 30 million and iphones at about 70 million.
post #13 of 67
Geez people...wizard69's list is just fine.

Apple users may not care as much about specs or how to get performance increases but exactly how do you expect Apple to gain performance improvements on the iPad without more RAM and moving from the A8 to A9? It's not as if there is a 10-20% performance gain in iOS that can be found like on Android and the current A4 seems to me about the best expression of the A8 as reasonably possible. The A9 represents both improved computation and greater potential battery life.

Or are you asking folks not to display any intelligence at all about computers on a geek site and simply state they want better pixie dust in their next iPad?
post #14 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

Agreed. Those that care about cores, GHz, RAM, etc. seem to still be stuck in the PC realms of the 90's.

C'mon. Apple differentiates most all of its products based upon exactly that stuff. Look at the laptop lineup. Look at the desktop lineup. Look at the brand-new Mac Minis - they have different models, differentiated by that unimportant 1990's stuff.
post #15 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

The Samsung Galaxy has more RAM and a fast processor.
But scrolling through web-pages seems to be choppy and sluggish.



C.

Did you use one? They are not yet available to consumers. Did you get your hands on a review or a pre-production model?

How long did you use it? How many web pages were like what you experienced? What sort of background stuff did you have running?


Or what?

What do you base your conclusion on if not actually using the Galaxy Tab?
post #16 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.

What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
  1. More RAM!
  2. A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
  3. More than double the amount a Flash storage!
  4. Factime support!
  5. A faster GPU!

Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners.

What parallel universe do you live in anyway? Did you read the "other" thread on AppleInsider? You know, the one that reports that 90% of iPad users are extremely pleased with their gadget? Current owners want none of the things you think they do. Your wish list is yet another fantasy of the tech spec nerdocracy. Complete baloney.
post #17 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

What parallel universe do you live in anyway? Did you read the "other" thread on AppleInsider? You know, the one that reports that 90% of iPad users are extremely pleased with their gadget? Current owners want none of the things you think they do. Your wish list is yet another fantasy of the tech spec nerdocracy. Complete baloney.

Current owners don't want facetime and better performance and more storage in the next iPad they buy? Talk about baloney. WTF would they buy a replacement iPad if it didn't have more features, better performance and storage?
post #18 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Personally I expect iPad2 to really take off it it comes to market real soon. It will need to have the right ingredients though.

What do I mean by the right ingredients? Well how about:
  1. More RAM!
  2. A dual core Cortex A9 based CPU!
  3. More than double the amount a Flash storage!
  4. Factime support!
  5. A faster GPU!

Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners. They address issues of performance and value. The items should be self explanatory but I will offer up my thoughts on each one below.

RAM is very important for a number of reasons. One is to better support multitasking, that is almost obvious. Another is to get better performance out of current apps and to enable a new generation of apps that really could use more RAM. One app of special concern is Safari, one could cut their data usage dramatically if Safari wasn't constantly reloading pages.

Dual core A9 would also significantly help performance and hopefully would give us performance approaching a G4. This again would enable a new class of apps and hopefully help out those apps that strain the CPU right now (VLC).

Flash storage should be another obvious need. For many uses you can't have the latency of the network nor deal with the availability issues.

Facetime in and of itself could sell a lot of iPads. In fact I'm waiting on that right now. You get a 100 million device out there running Facetime and there will be some synergy that will drive sales even more. This is one reason why I think Apple needs to come out with an Apple TV dedicated to face time usage, all you really need is a small monitor/ camera and a Blutooth headset.

A better performing GPU is just for completeness, the one in there does surprisingly well. However for games and visualization apps you can never have to much GPU. Plus Apple needs to bring OpenCL to the iPad.

In any event enough background, given an iPad 2 that addresses those issues I'm certain Apple could sustain 2 million a month easy. Now that isn't 48 mill but lets just say I see it as a low side number. Now this does not take into account every initiative Apple may have up its sleeve to drive iPad sales, improvements to the OS and whatever they are doing with that data center might very positive factors. I really don't think 48 mill is impossible and they may be trying to scale production to hit that capacity. Plus people have to remember that the roll out isn't even complete yet. Still 3 million a month is an easier target to hit.

Another way to look at this is the old rev A arguement. Many are sitting back and waiting for the next rev due to the expectation it will address the current models shortcomings. I know personally Facetime has put me on hold iPad wise and many others feel the same way. If anything Facetime has stifled iPad sales. On the other hand iPad has been one of Apples best rev A devices ever so maybe the pent up demand isn't that great.

In the end I think 24 million would be the low side figure for a revamped iPad. The high end really depends upon strong acceptance of rev 2.

IPhone sales are another thing and frankly no one knows what demand is because they have yet to meet demand. Only yesterday did they shorten wait time to 24 hours, so we are talking a half a year here of demand outstripping supply.



"Note that those five things seem to be almost universally wanted by current owners"

I disagree (mostly). I'm not sure any of these things is particularly important. And all would probably lead to a hotter device, with less battery life. Oh, and a much higher price tag. The iPad is not supposed to be a desktop/laptop replacement. I think you'd be happier if iOS features were brought to MacOS X.
post #19 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

I think this post is upside down. Tech geek freaks get jazzed about these specs, but users just want a device that is useful, fun, and easy. My iPad would be better if:

1.I could quickly switch between apps without losing my work and where I am in the app

2. It were easier for me to organize my files on the iPad and move/sync those files to a computer

3. If scrolling through PDFs were faster

So what is needed to achieve these things?

1. Software update to get better multitasking (coming soon)
2. Either more ram OR faster access to flash to support multitasking
3. Software update to improve file management and syncing (hopefully in ios 5, but who knows)
4. Increase in overall processing speed, but I leave it to apple to figure out the best way to get that speed -- I don't care if it's a higher clocked a4, a dual core chip, or a faster gnu -- whatever works

So if the new iPad comes out with a 1 ghz single core CPU, I won't complain IF I can scroll through PDFs faster thanks to a faster gpu. If there isn't any more ram, I won't complain IF it has lightning fast access to flash, making more ram less necessary.

I want results, I don't care how apple gets them. Getting hung up on a spec sheet is silly.

Maybe I'm a fool, but I don't want multitasking. I don't want to manage background apps. That's a pain in the butt. But since I already know it's coming, I can only wish that Apple will let me turn it off. (oh, and turn off cut-and-paste as well).
post #20 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Current owners don't want facetime and better performance and more storage in the next iPad they buy? Talk about baloney. WTF would they buy a replacement iPad if it didn't have more features, better performance and storage?

Can you be specific? For what task does performance lag? Granted I don't do too much with mine, but it seems to speed right along for what I do.

And please don't confuse Apple's need to differentiate the product so that they can sell upgrades to existing owners, with people's actual needs.
post #21 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post

Maybe I'm a fool, but I don't want multitasking. I don't want to manage background apps.

There is no requirement for users to manage background applications in the Apple implementation.
It's fully automatic, and there is no penalty for it being there.

C.
post #22 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-J View Post

Did you use one? They are not yet available to consumers. Did you get your hands on a review or a pre-production model?

I am looking at the video from the Engadget review.

Check out the 5 minute mark.

C.
post #23 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post

Can you be specific? For what task does performance lag? Granted I don't do too much with mine, but it seems to speed right along for what I do.

And please don't confuse Apple's need to differentiate the product so that they can sell upgrades to existing owners, with people's actual needs.

Current apps may or may not lag depending on app and usage...not that I mentioned lag...but anyway. Want to use the iPhone (orig) CPU/GPU/RAM with iOS 4 and current apps? What? You can't? Gee. Even the 3G isn't teh snappy or able to run all aspects of iOS anymore.

Please don't confuse iPad's current performance with what that performance will be like with 2 more revs of iOS and generations of apps. Unless you happen to think iPhone user needs haven't evolved much since the original iPhone.

Movie Quote: Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away?
post #24 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Apple do not publish processor & memory metrics for consumer platforms. They don't sell like this because it isn't effective. The vast majority of iPad customers would not be able to say the amount of RAM or the number of processor cores. For typical consumers these metrics are meaningless.

Consumers care about what it does and how well.

Apple should focus on...
  • Facetime
  • The benefits of iOS4.2..iOS5.0
  • The stand-alone iPad

The stand-alone thing is important. Apple should reduce the necessity to dock to iTunes. If software updates, content management and other functions are all made possible without docking. The iPad becomes more of a platform and less of a satellite.

I am sure the iPad 2.0 will see some under-the-hood hardware changes. But these changes will not be presented as user-facing changes.

C.

The way I read wizard69's post I didn't feel he did say Apple would 'sell like this' he was simply saying what should be under the hood, be it mentioned or not in marketing blurb. I agree with what he said and what you did BTW and I am waiting for the next model before buying another for all of those reasons.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #25 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

The way I read wizard69's post I didn't feel he did say Apple would 'sell like this' he was simply saying what should be under the hood

He opened with "universally wanted".
That's the part I disagreed with. Because engineering specifications not universally wanted.

C.
post #26 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Geez people...wizard69's list is just fine.

Apple users may not care as much about specs or how to get performance increases but exactly how do you expect Apple to gain performance improvements on the iPad without more RAM and moving from the A8 to A9? It's not as if there is a 10-20% performance gain in iOS that can be found like on Android and the current A4 seems to me about the best expression of the A8 as reasonably possible. The A9 represents both improved computation and greater potential battery life.

Or are you asking folks not to display any intelligence at all about computers on a geek site and simply state they want better pixie dust in their next iPad?

Going from the A8 to the A9 is not the only way to improve performance. A higher clocked A4 on a newer fab process would improve performance. A better GPU would improve performance. Faster access to flash would improve performance. To throw down a dual core CPU as some arbitrary "feature" that the new iPad "must" have is narrow-minded.

As a consumer, I'm focused on outputs. It's Apple's job to figure out the best combination of inputs to achieve those outputs. As a tech geek, I'm certainly intrigued by those inputs and will be interested to see how Apple does it. But I don't see the use of specific hardware components as a reason for me to buy or not buy an iPad.
post #27 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

He opened with "universally wanted".
That's the part I disagreed with. Because engineering specifications not universally wanted.

C.

I don't see how that appertains to marketing terminology but whatever, you both made good suggestions. I can't wait for Mk 2 but I guess it won't be in my Christmas stocking.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #28 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I don't see how that appertains to marketing terminology but whatever, you both made good suggestions. I can't wait for Mk 2 but I guess it won't be in my Christmas stocking.

I wonder what Apple would have to do to allow the iPad to work without the need for a PC or a Mac.
Imagine if it could do all this stuff over WiFi or over the Internet....
  • Backup and restore.
  • Media syncing and organisation - From media library larger than the device capacity
  • OS Upgrades.

Perhaps this is the reason for that big data center?

C.
post #29 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

I am looking at the video from the Engadget review.

Check out the 5 minute mark.

C.

My guess is that she started scrolling before the website was finished loading.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #30 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

My guess is that she started scrolling before the website was finished loading.

Why should that matter?

Users often want to scroll through the loaded content. They should not be punished by choppy frame-rates, and un-responsive user interfaces.

Like I said, users care about outcomes, not inputs.

C.
post #31 of 67
I'll be responsible for two of those sales as I next summer upgrade my 3GS to iPhone(5) and make my first iPad purchase as I waited for v2 with better features (camera, etc.) than v1. And can count two for my friend and his wife who will make the same purchases. I know no one cares about "my"plans, as I seldom like to read about others, but I felt like sharing anyway. Good day.
post #32 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

I wonder what Apple would have to do to allow the iPad to work without the need for a PC or a Mac.
Imagine if it could do all this stuff over WiFi or over the Internet....
  • Backup and restore.
  • Media syncing and organisation - From media library larger than the device capacity
  • OS Upgrades.

Perhaps this is the reason for that big data center?

C.


All this talk about faster and more ram is nice, but what I want before I buy an iPad is for it to REPLACE my laptop, not tether to it. For that to happen, I need it to be an independent device. It needs iLife. It needs to be able to back up to my Time Capsule like my lappy does. It needs to be able to sync directly to my iPhone (Perhaps through the cloud in NC). Until then, no iPad for me. My 11 inch Macbook Air should be here tomorrow. And although Mac nerds will shun it because of it's slower processor and only 2 gb of ram, it more than meets my needs. In fact, it more than meets the needs of the majority of computer users out there. And yes, my computer earns me my living too. Just not building websites or rendering video.
post #33 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post

I'll be responsible for two of those sales as I next summer upgrade my 3GS to iPhone(5) and make my first iPad purchase as I waited for v2 with better features (camera, etc.) than v1. And can count two for my friend and his wife who will make the same purchases. I know no one cares about "my"plans, as I seldom like to read about others, but I felt like sharing anyway. Good day.

Agreed. I have never been an early adopter for anything. I tend to always wait for (at least) version 2. I remember when all those people bought an early iPhone and then the priced dropped dramatically just a few months later. Yeah, Apple gave them credits, but they still had to spend that money with Apple. I may be wrong, but I suspect a lot of people are taking the same position in waiting for Version 2.

There is little doubt that the iPad will be a blockbuster hit this Christmas season, but I believe there is a lot of pent up demand for version 2, much like those waiting for the potential Verizon iPhone.

Just my humble opinion.
post #34 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

Why should that matter?

Users often want to scroll through the loaded content. They should not be punished by choppy frame-rates, and un-responsive user interfaces.

Like I said, users care about outcomes, not inputs.

C.

My guess is that it's trying to also render Flash elements that are in the page. While mobile Flash isn't too bad, it still has to be refined to not be a resource hog on mobile devices.

What's odd is that most of the other video reviews/previews I've seen of the Tab show very smooth scrolling in the browser.

If a single video showing a hiccup in the browser is the only thing you have against it (seeing as you didn't complain about the previous 5 minute of content), I would hardly call it worth of damning the Galaxy Tab. The rest of the video shows the device to be extremely quick.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #35 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

My guess is that it's trying to also render Flash elements that are in the page. While mobile Flash isn't too bad, it still has to be refined to not be a resource hog on mobile devices.

What's odd is that most of the other video reviews/previews I've seen of the Tab show very smooth scrolling in the browser.

If a single video showing a hiccup in the browser is the only thing you have against it (seeing as you didn't complain about the previous 5 minute of content), I would hardly call it worth of damning the Galaxy Tab. The rest of the video shows the device to be extremely quick.

The Engadget review was the most positive review I have seen.

The Tech Radar review says...
Quote:
Despite the 1Ghz processor, there are some significant performance issues here and in many cases they hamper the usability and performance of the Tab to treacherous levels.
The problems are most evident when browsing the web. Scrolling down your average website is quite juddery. The smoothness of the iPad is nowhere to be seen, and our fingers had often swiped and left the screen before the device responded and began to scroll.


Read more: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-...#ixzz14EXySsc5

C.
post #36 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Going from the A8 to the A9 is not the only way to improve performance. A higher clocked A4 on a newer fab process would improve performance. A better GPU would improve performance. Faster access to flash would improve performance. To throw down a dual core CPU as some arbitrary "feature" that the new iPad "must" have is narrow-minded.

As a consumer, I'm focused on outputs. It's Apple's job to figure out the best combination of inputs to achieve those outputs. As a tech geek, I'm certainly intrigued by those inputs and will be interested to see how Apple does it. But I don't see the use of specific hardware components as a reason for me to buy or not buy an iPad.

I didn't say dual core even if Wizard did. The A9 has lower power consumption and better top end. I would be significantly surprised if the next rev of the A4 was not A9 based. Dual core A9 makes sense given the multitasking nature of iOS 4 as does the additional RAM.

An A8 on a smaller process makes far less sense than a single core A9 coupled with the A4 changes. The A9 claims 250mW/core vs 525mW/core on the A8 at the same process level (45nm). The A9 also scales better with speed than the A8 did.

Faster access to flash and a better GPU will not affect running multiple apps as much as more RAM and going dual-core (or hyperthreading). Better GPU is also highly desired and expected. That's almost a gimme in the same sense as going with an A9.
post #37 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage View Post

The Engadget review was the most positive review I have seen.

The Tech Radar review says...


C.

Maybe it's because it's a fairly new device and most tech sites haven't gotten their hands on a review unit yet?

Slashgear seems to give it a generally welcomed review:

Quote:
Perhaps most telling, with both the iPad and the Galaxy Tab on the table, we found ourselves reaching for the Samsung for quickly checking email and browsing. That might change once iOS 4.2 is released for the iPad early reports are certainly glowing but for now the Apple behemoth has some serious competition.

What's interesting is that I'm reading the opposite of you. Most of the hands-on videos on YouTube have a generally positive review. Tech Radar seems to have the only generally negative review of the Tab...

Of the sites who have done reviews of the Tab, the one general thing I've taken away is that there aren't enough "tablet apps" to give it a full identity. Which is understandable, since it's really the first Android tablet out. Now that developers have a piece of hardware to develop for, I expect that they will start making more specific apps.
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
\Apple has always had competition. It's just been in its blind spot.
Reply
post #38 of 67
Too many variables involved in making a prediction of this nature such as :

1.Does Verizon Get the IPHONE or Verizon, Sprint &Tmobile in the upcoming Year
2.Does Cloud streaming come to life in 2011
3. Can Apple meet the demand and obtain the parts necessary.

These are just a few. basically this prediction boils down to speculation.because there are too many unknowns.
post #39 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianBob View Post

Maybe it's because it's a fairly new device and most tech sites haven't gotten their hands on a review unit yet?

This review is a shop-bought unit. It's quite positive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=db0K47E31Ks&feature=related


But check out the web-browser at the 13 minute mark.

C.
post #40 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atanner View Post

All this talk about faster and more ram is nice, but what I want before I buy an iPad is for it to REPLACE my laptop, not tether to it. For that to happen, I need it to be an independent device. It needs iLife. It needs to be able to back up to my Time Capsule like my lappy does. It needs to be able to sync directly to my iPhone (Perhaps through the cloud in NC). Until then, no iPad for me. My 11 inch Macbook Air should be here tomorrow. And although Mac nerds will shun it because of it's slower processor and only 2 gb of ram, it more than meets my needs. In fact, it more than meets the needs of the majority of computer users out there. And yes, my computer earns me my living too. Just not building websites or rendering video.

I don't think this is happening anytime soon simply because of business models.

Do you really think that Apple prefers folks to replace their $999+ MB/MBP/MBA with $499+ iPads? Even with the same margins they make half the profit.

This is why no $499 netbook but a $999 MBA and why the iPad is a slave device because there is no real technical reason it needs to dock to a computer to work.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple forecast to sell 100M iPhones, 48M iPads in 2011