or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple's iPad 2 suppliers to ramp up in Q1 2011 - rumor
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's iPad 2 suppliers to ramp up in Q1 2011 - rumor - Page 2

post #41 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galbi View Post

Apple is going to have to throw a HUGE kitchen sink because the Android camp is going full steam ahead in the enterprise world. Samsung is leading the charge as of right now. I have a buddy who works for them and he says Samsung is in negotiations with quite a lot of enterprise companies and even universities about it. Of course he refuses to name who they are. Understandable.

IMHO your Buddy is doing an excellent FUD job on you
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #42 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I actually think Steve was just being an a$$ or a business owner in trying to discredit what has the potential of being very stiff competition. What people don't realize is that we actually see entirely different usage patterns between iPad and this lusted for device size. Much in the same way that Touch is used completely differently than an iPad.

I'm hoping Steve is just playing with their minds while new hardware is in the oven. He certainly has done such things before.

Possible but providing an 5" iPod touch seems easier and useful than a downsized 7" iPad.

That gives it a much more portable form factor than a 7" tablet. Lower pixel density than the current touch but oh well. Pushing it to 1024x768 seems iffy but would give it resolution compatibility with the iPad and higher pixel density.

Compare the 5" streak with the 7" galaxy tab. Which would you rather have in a pocket? Especially with the touch's profile vs the rather thick streak?

Still seems very iffy that Apple would do this but I could see the attraction of a 5" touch over the current touch.
post #43 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Who's this "we"?

Steve decides -- we agree!

The iPad was designed with space for at least 1 camera

BTW, you can take a picture with a camera with out holding it up with your hands -- tripod, stand, mounting, etc.


How do you conjugate the verb dork?

.

In my opinion it's hard enough finding a decent angle to facetime with on my iphone. I think it would be incredibly difficult to position my ipad for facetime with the apple case and other cases I've seen. I'd rather have an external camera that I could connect to my ipad to facetime.
post #44 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeye in Fla View Post

But when the MacBook Airs came out: hot damn they look cool. I still haven't used one since I don't have an Apple store close to me.
Brian

I thought the same thing, but saw them in Best Buy last weekend. Very cool--I'm torn between which size to get. I like the smaller one a LOT, but want more storage and the 11" ones are limited to 128GB with 2 hrs. less battery.
post #45 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

That was a decision made a year ago -- for whatever reasons.

This is now!

We, and Apple, have ~= 9 months of experience under our belts.


Haven't you ever heard: "new and improved"; "we waited until we could do it right"; "we listened to our users and...".

Things change -- we adapt or die!

.



How can they solve the "up the nose" camera view? How about the impracticality of holding up a big device to take pictures?

Those are the reasons why Apple left the cameras off. Their true genius is what they leave out of a device to make it work perfectly.

If a camera or three would have "improved" the iPad, they would have been included. Everybody predicted them, except a few wise folks who foresaw the impractical aspects of including cameras. Those folks were pooh-poohed until the iPad was released without any cameras at all.

When the iPad was released without any cameras, the wisdom of leaving off the cameras was seen as a wise design decision by a great consensus of posters.

I think that the consensus was correct. I think that Apple left off the cameras in order to make the iPad a better product.
post #46 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckeye in Fla View Post

hat rear camera has many uses for inventory, archiving, bar code scanning, identification comparisons (security), and who knows what some programmer will come up with. My bet is that it won't be long until the credit card readers for the iPhone and iPod touch start appearing for the iPad also.

I don't think the iPad is a very good form factor for the uses you imply here. I certainly wouldn't want to be using it to perform inventory... not when the iPhone can duplicate the feat and not stress my arms after spending a day scanning barcodes.

Thompson
post #47 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-G View Post

How can they solve the "up the nose" camera view?

SImple. People that want to use the iPad for FaceTime will simply get the Apple iPad case, which allows it to be stood up in front of you. Apple will sell more cases and your counterpart on the conference will see less nose hair.

Thompson
post #48 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

In my opinion it's hard enough finding a decent angle to facetime with on my iphone.

That's because you can't just stand it up on its edge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

I think it would be incredibly difficult to position my ipad for facetime with the apple case and other cases I've seen.

Why not just stand it up on its edge so it is perpendicular to the table and facing you just like an Apple monitor would be? If the field of view is wide enough, you wouldn't have to hunker down to the level of the camera in order to be near center. Given that this is pretty much the only purpose for a front camera, it would be a simple matter to design the optics for near field and wide angle use. I think that Apple could easily instrument this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen View Post

I'd rather have an external camera that I could connect to my ipad to facetime.

I wouldn't want to tote around an extra camera for the purpose.

Thompson
post #49 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-G View Post

How can they solve the "up the nose" camera view? How about the impracticality of holding up a big device to take pictures?

Those are the reasons why Apple left the cameras off. Their true genius is what they leave out of a device to make it work perfectly.

If a camera or three would have "improved" the iPad, they would have been included. Everybody predicted them, except a few wise folks who foresaw the impractical aspects of including cameras. Those folks were pooh-poohed until the iPad was released without any cameras at all.

When the iPad was released without any cameras, the wisdom of leaving off the cameras was seen as a wise design decision by a great consensus of posters.

I think that the consensus was correct. I think that Apple left off the cameras in order to make the iPad a better product.

The camera up the nose is easily solved -- the Apple case, for instance.

We have iPads and they are seldom, if ever used with the display 90 degrees to the face -- what would be the point. as we don't have eyes in our nostrils>

Seldom, are the iPads used flat on a table, Rather they are tilted slightly by the case with the head tilted correspondingly.

BTW, you can take a picture with a camera without holding it up with your hands -- tripod, stand, mounting, etc.


As to the need for a camera -- that's another issue. One of Apple's strengths is eliminating unnecessary "features" that only add cost, confusion and complexity -- and provide little benefit.

It may well true that Apple made the correct decision not to include cameras because the target audience did not need them.


But, things change:
-- iPads are being used in business - an audience not originally expected or targeted
-- the large screen turns out to be much better at things (retouching, editig pictures and video) than smaller phones with a camera
-- the next version of the iPad will, likely, have more powerful hardware and software, that, along with a large screen, could exploit cameras.


Think of an insurance adjuster, going on location with an iPad with a rear-facing camera. He could snap a few images, annotate them and prepare an estimate on the spot.

Think of a Realtor listing agent going on site and creating a visual tour with a single device -- the iPad.

Think of an interior designer who photographs a wall, removes objects, changes colors, adds window coverings, etc. with an iPad -- then showing the client what the room will look like.

Think of the asst. coach at a soccer match capturing short highlight videos to illustrate a good or bad technique -- then showing the team.

Think of the doctor or nurse taking photographs of, say, a skin lesion on the back -- then showing the patient how to care for it.

An artist who captures a scene, then uses it as a guide (in a background layer) to create a drawing or painting.

The list goes on...


Certainly, all of the above things can be done with a separate camera or a camera connected to an iPad.

Which would be better for these uses: separate iPad and cameras or integrated iPad and cameras?


Then, the big question:

Part of the magic of the iPad is that the OS, the app, and the device itself doesn't get between you and what you are doing -- why should the camera?


.... then there's the whole "entertainment for the kids" bit. PhotoBooth is such a natural I can taste it. In fact that's the first thing my 14-year-old granddaughter asked when I handed her an iPad: "Can I use PhotoBooth?"

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #50 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

SImple. People that want to use the iPad for FaceTime will simply get the Apple iPad case, which allows it to be stood up in front of you. Apple will sell more cases and your counterpart on the conference will see less nose hair.

Thompson

I have an Apple Ipad case. Standing my ipad case upright vertically is very unstable. I can't adjust it up or down like I can with my monitor on my macbook when I use it for facetime to get an appropriate angle. Almost any attempt at adjustment while standing vertically just causes it to fall over. Most of the cases I've seen offer adjustment horizontally up and down but not vertically.

With the iphone I can usually hold the device in my hand and position it. It's light enough so I can have a long conversation comfortably. I know they have cool stands and stuff that you can purchase for the ipad but I wouldn't want to lug a stand around with me everywhere. I wouldn't mind occasionally bringing a small external camera with me if I knew I was going to facetime. I'd like to get my kids ipads eventually and I would love to have the capability of having them facetime with their grandparents. I just don't know how elegant it is to have the camera on the ipad itself.
post #51 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgl323 View Post

I'm still wondering which device should be my next purchase. The Macbook Air or the iPad 2?.?

The Air is wonderful, while the iP2 is an unknown. Not only that, but you can get the Air right now, and it is a much more capable machine.
post #52 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

I just can't see them adding a rear camera on the iPad2. It seems so out of place. Sure, it'll be easy to do it, and maybe makes sense for FaceTime, to have dual cameras... But very odd to have an additional rear camera on a big tablet.
I hope reduced weight is the primary goal here.

A lot of people think that a front-facing camera is also a bad idea. It would show a view up the nose. Not the image Apple wants for FaceTime.
post #53 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

I just can't see them adding a rear camera on the iPad2. It seems so out of place. Sure, it'll be easy to do it, and maybe makes sense for FaceTime, to have dual cameras... But very odd to have an additional rear camera on a big tablet.
I hope reduced weight is the primary goal here.

Have you seen how small the camera hardware is inside an iPhone? Adding 2 cameras to the iPad won't add any user noticeable weight.
post #54 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Interesting question!

I would guess it will be iOS 5 -- and be used on the iPhone a few months later.

I

.


I doubt very much that iOS will stay fragmented for that long. 4.2 was gonna be the one that tied everything together. It will be unified long before 5.0
post #55 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Who's this "we"?

Steve decides -- we abides!

The iPad was designed with space for at least 1 camera

BTW, you can take a picture with a camera without holding it up with your hands -- tripod, stand, mounting, etc.


How do you conjugate the verb dork?

.



The iPad has no tripod mount. I'm not sure why you brought that up. It seems to prove the point you argue against.
post #56 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-G View Post

I doubt very much that iOS will stay fragmented for that long. 4.2 was gonna be the one that tied everything together. It will be unified long before 5.0

iDevice running iOS, its unclear if the new AppleTV will be inline with the rest of the iOS-based systems.

I dont see why it would need to be unless they decide to offer an AppleTV App Store and want to offer universal apps that will allow users to purchase once and have them interconnect to all iDevices on an account, like with the current setup. If that does happen, then I think we could see iOS in the AppleTV also getting updated alongside the rest of these devices.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #57 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottgoodwin View Post

I thought the same thing, but saw them in Best Buy last weekend. Very cool--I'm torn between which size to get. I like the smaller one a LOT, but want more storage and the 11" ones are limited to 128GB with 2 hrs. less battery.



The smaller one is very special.

The bigger one has alternatives, like the MBP or the other competitor's ultraportables. I think you'd notice the deficiencies more with the bigger one. Every time it is slow, you would wish that you would have bought a MBP. But with the 11 incher, that is par for the course, to be expected, and there is nothing anywhere that is better at that size.

If you want portability (and that is the one and only reason to consider the Air), then get it. Don't compromise and get less portability. If you do that, you'll have neither ultraportability nor great performance.

Get the 11 with the RAM and the bigger drive. You will love it to death.
post #58 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

That's because you can't just stand it up on its edge.



Why not just stand it up on its edge so it is perpendicular to the table and facing you just like an Apple monitor would be? If the field of view is wide enough, you wouldn't have to hunker down to the level of the camera in order to be near center. Given that this is pretty much the only purpose for a front camera, it would be a simple matter to design the optics for near field and wide angle use. I think that Apple could easily instrument this.



I wouldn't want to tote around an extra camera for the purpose.

Thompson

Maybe. I understand your point. I personally find the apple ipad case difficult to position perpendicular to a table facing me in any position other than landscape. Maybe that would be acceptable? I'd really have to try it out I guess. If they put a camera on the next ipad I'll find out.
post #59 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Think of an insurance adjuster, going on location with an iPad with a rear-facing camera. He could snap a few images, annotate them and prepare an estimate on the spot.

Think of a Realtor listing agent going on site and creating a visual tour with a single device -- the iPad.

Think of an interior designer who photographs a wall, removes objects, changes colors, adds window coverings, etc. with an iPad -- then showing the client what the room will look like.

Think of the asst. coach at a soccer match capturing short highlight videos to illustrate a good or bad technique -- then showing the team.

Think of the doctor or nurse taking photographs of, say, a skin lesion on the back -- then showing the patient how to care for it.

An artist who captures a scene, then uses it as a guide (in a background layer) to create a drawing or painting.

The list goes on...


Certainly, all of the above things can be done with a separate camera or a camera connected to an iPad.


.


Each of these photo tasks would work better with a 7 inch widescreen, IMO. Apple designed the iPad correctly, for the vast majority of consumers.

These sorts of specialized things would work best with a different device, and would not work well with an iPad. If any of that was viable, Apple would have included a rear-facing camera. They don't issue half-baked products.
post #60 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Makes complete sense. Most of the so called "serious" competition for the iPad is due out Q1 2011, just as they are getting released Apple will announce the iPad 2 making them obsolete overnight and pushing them out of the news..... very smart!

Exactly. Even if Apple could have prepared iPad Version 2 for a late-fall debut, this way the competition will be preparing for an assault on the current iPad but by the time their plans are finalized, Apple will unleash a significantly upgraded iPad. It will be quite a few months before the competition can respond to that product and by the time they do, Apple will be close to bringing out iPad Version 3.

This is more or less what happened with the media player space and we all know how that turned out.
post #61 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-G View Post

The iPad has no tripod mount. I'm not sure why you brought that up. It seems to prove the point you argue against.

The iP4 had no tripod mount either -- but, I have one on order:

http://theglif.com/


You seem to be the kind of person that looks for reasons (excuses) that something can't be done.


Thankfully, there are people that look for a way to something rather than make excuses..

These 2 guys wanted a tripod mount for an iPhone 4. They thought there was a market for it. They did their research and setout to raise funding to satisfy the need -- they wanted to raise $10,000. When the funding period ended they had raised $137,417.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...stand/comments


I will promise you this: If I buy an iPad with a camera that warrants a tripod mount and none is forthcoming -- I will build it myself and call it the:

TriPad™ iPad tripod mount.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #62 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-G View Post

The iPad has no tripod mount. I'm not sure why you brought that up. It seems to prove the point you argue against.

Pointing out that the iPad has no tripod mount is akin to pointing out that it has no built-in handle or screen cover. Of course it has no tripod mount. But there's no reason that a third party could not build some sort of tripod mount for the iPadI would not be surprised to see variations crop up once a camera-enabled iPad is introduced.
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #63 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-G View Post

Each of these photo tasks would work better with a 7 inch widescreen, IMO. Apple designed the iPad correctly, for the vast majority of consumers.

These sorts of specialized things would work best with a different device, and would not work well with an iPad. If any of that was viable, Apple would have included a rear-facing camera. They don't issue half-baked products.

I guess that history has proven you right because the only major products that Apple currently sells are the fully-baked products below:

-- the 1977 Apple ][
-- the 1984 128K Macintosh
-- the 2001 original iPod
-- the 2007 iPhone (gen 1)

Obviously there has been no need for any improvements or follow-on products.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #64 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

Exactly. Even if Apple could have prepared iPad Version 2 for a late-fall debut, this way the competition will be preparing for an assault on the current iPad but by the time their plans are finalized, Apple will unleash a significantly upgraded iPad. It will be quite a few months before the competition can respond to that product and by the time they do, Apple will be close to bringing out iPad Version 3.

This is more or less what happened with the media player space and we all know how that turned out.

Agreed. "iPod" has pretty much become a generic shorthand for "portable music player", the way "Xerox" has become the generic shorthand for "photocopier" or "making photo copies". We're nearly 10 years into the iPod's entry into the world, and it has virtually no peers.

That would be pretty awesome if "iPad" became a generic shorthand for "tablet computing device".

I think the key to Apple's success is that they basically don't look at the competition. They design stuff that they think is coolthat they would want to use themselves. HP, Samsung, RIM, et al, are trying to design the "iPad killer", which is really a counterproductive approach, as it serves only to draw more attention to the iPad as the tablet archetypethe product that pundits and consumers will compare everything else to.

When I see those promo videos featuring Jonny Ive, Tim Cook, Phil Schiller and others talking about the iPad, the new MBA, etc., I know that it's carefully scripted marketing, but I also have a strong sense that they actually believe what they're saying. As my boss told me the other day, "If you speak passionately about your work, then people will be drawn to it."
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #65 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I guess that history has proven you right because the only major products that Apple currently sells are the fully-baked products below:

-- the 1977 Apple ][
-- the 1984 128K Macintosh
-- the 2001 original iPod
-- the 2007 iPhone (gen 1)

Obviously there has been no need for any improvements or follow-on products.

Hey, don't diss the 128K Mac. It got me through Jr. High and High School!
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #66 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

Exactly. Even if Apple could have prepared iPad Version 2 for a late-fall debut, this way the competition will be preparing for an assault on the current iPad but by the time their plans are finalized, Apple will unleash a significantly upgraded iPad. It will be quite a few months before the competition can respond to that product and by the time they do, Apple will be close to bringing out iPad Version 3.

This is more or less what happened with the media player space and we all know how that turned out.

Exactly!

There is a very sophisticated process going on here, akin to a war.

Apple has a strategy and has positioned itself with supplies, manufacturers, and internal R&D (iOS, chip design, battery design, case design, etc..


The competition has no strategy only tactics -- get something out there, soon!


I suspect:

-- that Apple has several prototype iPads in the wings (potentially, including a 7-incher).
-- If the need arises, Apple can gear up and demo, whatever, within a month
-- they could ramp up production, to, say, 1.2 million units per month in 90 days

... and go from there... if the need arises.

That should be sufficient for Apple to maintain their competitive lead.


Reportedly, the Samsung Galaxy Tab is the biggest competitor to the iPad.

Somewhere, Samsung was reported as saying that they planned to build 100,000 Galaxy Tabs per month through the next 12 months.

Now, Samsung has access to parts and production facilities (Samsung makes most of the expensive, specialty parts in the Tab) -- yet they plan to make less in a year than the number of iPads made in a month,

Why?


Some claim the Rim PlayBook is to be a major competitor -- early next year. Who will manufacture the Dual-core A9 ARM * chip and the 1 GB of RAM chips (and whatever GPU chip). And in what quantity.

Does Rim have the parts, manufacturing and distribution facilities, lined up, to deliver even 100,000 per month? If they can't -- can Rim make any profit on the PlayBook (or even recover R&D costs)?

* ARM Holdings has very intricate licensing as to who can modify their designs and who can build the chips.


The $499 iPad costs Apple $264 in parts.

Lets say, the $499 PlayBook costs the same.

If you assume that the remaining $235 is all profit (for Rim), and assume they can deliver 100,000 PlayBooks per month...

Rim would make a gross profit of $282 Million (US) on the PlayBook in its first year.

Now, for a little reality:
-- Assume the Dual-Core A9 costs twice as much as the A4 in those quantities
-- Assume the 1GB RAM cost at least 4 times as much as the 256 MB RAM in the iPad
-- Assume a high-end (unannounced) GPU that costs more than the iPad GPU
-- Assume all other comparable parts will be more expensive at those quantities

So, the PlayBook costs, likely, will be a lot higher than the iPad's $265-- and the profit per unit in the $100-$200 range.

Now, does anyone believe that Rim will sell even 1 million PlayBooks in 12 months?

To whom?

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #67 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

The iP4 had no tripod mount either -- but, I have one on order:

http://theglif.com/


You seem to be the kind of person that looks for reasons (excuses) that something can't be done.


Thankfully, there are people that look for a way to something rather than make excuses..

These 2 guys wanted a tripod mount for an iPhone 4. They thought there was a market for it. They did their research and setout to raise funding to satisfy the need -- they wanted to raise $10,000. When the funding period ended they had raised $137,417.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...stand/comments


I will promise you this: If I buy an iPad with a camera that warrants a tripod mount and none is forthcoming -- I will build it myself and call it the:

TriPad iPad tripod mount.

.



Carrying all that just to take photos with an iPad seems like a kludge to me. Whatever floats your boat. I like simplicity and elegance.
post #68 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I guess that history has proven you right because the only major products that Apple currently sells are the fully-baked products below:

-- the 1977 Apple ][
-- the 1984 128K Macintosh
-- the 2001 original iPod
-- the 2007 iPhone (gen 1)

Obviously there has been no need for any improvements or follow-on products.

One could distinguish between newly enabled technologies and technologies that were perfectoy possible, but decided against. If one were to do that, some might maintain that a camera or three on the iPad fits the latter category.
post #69 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


Does Rim have the parts, manufacturing and distribution facilities, lined up, to deliver even 100,000 per month?

.



Why wouldn't a company as competent as RIM have their manufacturing lined up? I have no opinion on the number you quote, but whatever it is, I'd be surprised if RIM had not properly planned things out.

Why do you believe that to be the case for this particular product?
post #70 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post

Hey, don't diss the 128K Mac. It got me through Jr. High and High School!

Hey, if you lived anywhere around Silicon Valley -- I, likely, sold it to you [your parents].
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #71 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill-G View Post

Why wouldn't a company as competent as RIM have their manufacturing lined up? I have no opinion on the number you quote, but whatever it is, I'd be surprised if RIM had not properly planned things out.

Why do you believe that to be the case for this particular product?

Do a search for:

availability A9 dual-core ARM

and see what's available-- and who produces it -- and in what quantity -- and to what other companies do they supply parts and production facilities.


If we knew the designation of the high-end GPU we could search for that too.

All we do know (according to Rim) its not the GPU found on the only Dual-core A9 found above.


You do understand that the need for a Dual-core A9, 1GB RAM and High-end GPU is largely necessary to support the HD Video, unlimited multitasking, Flash, and AIR (Flash) GUI on the PlayBook.

The other tablets have fewer and much more available parts (at much lower costs).


I believe that Rim has spec'd itself into a corner -- I don't believe they will be able to deliver enough product to make a profit (even if the demand were there).

OTOH, Apple could release an iPad 2 in quantity, using off the shelf parts -- and beat the important benefits of the PlayBook. And do it at lower price and higher profit!


Then there is the story about the woman who was married 3 times. but is still a virgin.

Her 1st husband tripped over her bridal-train while leaving the alter, hit his head on a pew, and was killed instantly.

Her 2nd husband was an octogenarian who died of a heart attack while getting undressed for the wedding night.

Her 3rd husband is a Rim PlayBook salesman -- every night he stands at the foot of the bed and tells her how good it's going to be -- when she finally gets it!

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #72 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Hey, if you lived anywhere around Silicon Valley -- I, likely, sold it to you [your parents].

In gratitude, Sir, I doff my hat!
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #73 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic View Post

In gratitude, Sir, I doff my hat!

Computer Plus 1978 - 1989

Sunnyvale -- Fremont and Mary

San Jose -- Hamilton and Meridian
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #74 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

I just can't see them adding a rear camera on the iPad2. It seems so out of place. Sure, it'll be easy to do it, and maybe makes sense for FaceTime, to have dual cameras... But very odd to have an additional rear camera on a big tablet.
I hope reduced weight is the primary goal here.

Would you like reduced weight or reduced "user" time? I'm pretty sure we'll have the camera's... even though I have no use for them.
post #75 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Do a search for:

availability A9 dual-core ARM

and see what's available-- and who produces it -- and in what quantity -- and to what other companies do they supply parts and production facilities.


If we knew the designation of the high-end GPU we could search for that too.

All we do know (according to Rim) its not the GPU found on the only Dual-core A9 found above.


You do understand that the need for a Dual-core A9, 1GB RAM and High-end GPU is largely necessary to support the HD Video, unlimited multitasking, Flash, and AIR (Flash) GUI on the PlayBook.

The other tablets have fewer and much more available parts (at much lower costs).


I believe that Rim has spec'd itself into a corner -- I don't believe they will be able to deliver enough product to make a profit (even if the demand were there).

OTOH, Apple could release an iPad 2 in quantity, using off the shelf parts -- and beat the important benefits of the PlayBook. And do it at lower price and higher profit!


Then there is the story about the woman who was married 3 times. but is still a virgin.

Her 1st husband tripped over her bridal-train while leaving the alter, hit his head on a pew, and was killed instantly.

Her 2nd husband was an octogenarian who died of a heart attack while getting undressed for the wedding night.

Her 3rd husband is a Rim PlayBook salesman -- every night he stands at the foot of the bed and tells her how good it's going to be -- when she finally gets it!

.


From what my IT guy told me is that RIM has the patent on instant e-mail notification. Please let me know if that's not entirely true.,, Thanks!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple's iPad 2 suppliers to ramp up in Q1 2011 - rumor