Apple's 'iPad 3' rumored to have Siri, dual-core A5X chip, 1080p camera - Page 2

[QUOTE=Sandyf;2052023]
There is a reason for each and everyone of those movements on a large format camera. IPad can't realistically replace a large format camera.

Hmmm. One should note that the glass screen on the iPad 2 sticks out above the bezel by... ready for this? About 1mm.

So, if one were to simply mount the screen flush to the case, you could end up with an iPad 3 that would be exactly the same thickness as the existing iPad 2.

Just a thought.

The media does.

The local/national news show on the regional cable carrier, they were using pictures taken on the iPad, with the video output sent to the broadcast input so that whatever they were looking at on the iPad was visible to everyone watching.

The iPhone/iPad as far as I know lack a useful flash for indoor pictures (A LED flash is only good for about 5 feet, and is nowhere near as bright as a conventional flash.) Likewise there is no zoom lens, mountable lenses or tripod mounts, which means that it's certainly not a replacement for prosumer cameras and camcorders. It never will. However out of the box the iPhone 4S replaces:
- A 350$ point and shoot 8MP camera (minus zoom lens and high powered flash)or Camcorder (minus zoom)
- A separate 150$ 3G HSDPA WiFi/MiFi type device (worth 20$, but it's the price markup between the iPad and iPad with 3G)
- A separate 100$ Cell phone
- A 150$ GPS
- A 200$ iPod touch
And if you want to break down what the iPod touch breaks down to...
-- 10$ for 8GB of storage (yes you can by 8GB SD cards for 10$, not saying that's comparable)
-- A solid state audio recorder
-- A mp3/mp4/aac music player
-- A video player
-- A web browser
-- A Personal Data Organizer (contacts, calendar, notepad, etc)
Plus the ability to run applications on it.

And I listed the above because at some point I packed all that stuff around more or less, plus a laptop. The iPhone can not replace a camcorder, and neither will the iPad mainly because of the storage capacity. Just dumping the separate cameras alone saves 1800$ in potential losses or breakage. It can however replace most sub-300$ point and shoot cameras because the average person doesn't do anything interesting with their pictures. You still can not buy a decent camera that has both WiFi and GPS on it, while the iPhone has this, and I expect it of the iPad.

So I reasonably expect to hear Sony, Canon, Nikon, etc to complain about selling less point-and-shoot cameras and blame it on Apple. It will also be their own fault for not offering ways of using their cameras with the iPhone and iPad.

The stories I hear from my wife about guests and their iPads at SeaWorld... I wouldn't have believed they are used that much either until I saw someone taking a picture of the whales with one the other day.

Anyway, I've been leaning towards buying an iPad more and more lately. I think I need to put one of my laptops up on eBay so I can afford one at launch!

And then my wife will steal it to use SketchBook Pro constantly

What would be be great is for a quality digital camera that could use the iPad 3's HiDPI display as the view finder instead of the one built in.

Anandtech got to test a reference design of the new Qualcomm chip based on A15 architecture. The performance doubles that of current A9 designs in some tests, so it would not be surprising if Apple skips the quad core A9 and goes straight to the dual core A15 (or even quad core). It probably won't be in this iPad, but the next one will be a screamer.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5559/q...225-benchmarks

IPad 3 needs the following to be acceptable or compelling from the upgrade point of view:

1. A significantly faster processor!
2. Retina display!
3. Significantly more RAM! This is mandatory for a machine supporting a high resolution display.
4. And of course a faster GPU!

Note that items 1 & 4 would likely happen simply due to a process shrink though in both cases I'd like to see the cores improved. Like wise 2 & 3 go together, but iPad needs more of a RAM increase than is simply required by retina. Tight memory impacts the current iPads more than anything else.

More flash storage would be nice if it ended up in the mix. The need here though is highly variable. The items above though are almost universally needed.

It already is selling like hot cakes. The difference is how strongly will it draw upgraders? Frankly a faster processor alone won't do much to improve the unit over current machines.

Somewhat better on Apples part would be a cop out. The iPad 3 with retina, an enhanced processor including more RAM would not be a cop out though.

The most impressive tablet ever to enter the market and it bores you?

He's entitled to his opinion but it's a wonder how a consumer device that has already broken so many molds and records and is set to break even more with 2048x1536 resolution on a display under 10" that needs to get more than 10 hours of usage is boring from a technological standpoint.

H264, 1080p, 29.97 FPS, 1920x1080, 12 minutes = 8.67 GB

Calculator

And the irony is that I think I was the one that got him banned. Considering the massive different in the style of posting, I can understand the mistaking the name, but not the post itself.

Really? What's it got that impressed you?

Kidding TS. It's got an Apple name on it which automatically makes it the most impressive tablet ever to hit the market....

and it won't be boring.

Ha! Yeah, right.

Not that I don't want H.265 to get freaking finalized already, it's just laughable that anyone would think 12 minutes of 1080p is over eight and a half gigs.

I see that camera as a waste of money! Honestly there are only a few people using it and in most cases the usage is odd. Worst is the idea that it costs Apple nothing to install the camera. I'd rather see the cost of the camera applied to something worthwhile.


Yeah but is it really worthwhile to keep the monkeys supplied with bananas? Feed them once and they will keep coming back for another and another. Better to go cold turkey and make these users fend for themselves.

Doing more with less is a hallmark of good engineering. Especially in software. Apple has worked very hard to optimize iOS, and will continue to work very hard at it. The end result is high performance and responsiveness in iOS and the devices it runs on, even with limited RAM and CPU power.

Google wouldn't know good engineering if it crawled out of their pants. They're been bred to push out incomplete and unstable public betas, then release successive bug-fixes just to bring it up to 1.0 quality. It comes from their server-side web-based origins. It's baked into their culture, part of their DNA. And it means that they will never be able to fully optimize Android.

On one hand, they can't optimize Android for any one hardware implementation because they wouldn't want to favor any one manufacturer's device. (Of course, it's not too late for Google to favor Motorola Mobility's devices.) On the other hand, Samsung is the clear leader among Android hardware partners, so it's likely that they will "do an Amazon" and fork Android. Then they'll be able to optimize their closed, proprietary fork of Android for their own hardware.

Ironic, isn't it? That a hardware company like Samsung is destined to do a better job of optimizing Android than a software company like Google. If Samsung works very hard, they too could achieve high performance with dual-core processors. Yet another way in which Samsung could follow Apple's lead.

Two things:
1. I use the ipad camera to snap photos while i take notes during a presentation. I like to get at least one picture of the speaker.
2. Using the ipad screen as a viewfinder is really impressive. Imagine the new high-resolution screen and a much better camera. I'll find uses for it.

I have found that taking pictures with the iPad is actually easier and better than the iPhone.

The reason is the on-screen software button, which one's hands often go through convulsions to access on the iPhone, whereas on the iPad it's easy to reach and right under your finger (when holding the iPad in landscape mode). It's arguably nicer to have the gigantic viewfinder also. In fact digital cameras used to be sold partially on the size of the screen on the back so it makes little sense that we now decry the iPad for the same reason we praised the previous cameras.

I don't have any evidence, but I kind of think that the only reason people *wouldn't* like the iPad as a camera is the fear of ridicule while using it.

can't wait.

I think that is using the wrong profile. Accoring to AnandTech's testing of the 4S it's 180MB/s so just over 2GB for 12 minutes.

• http://www.anandtech.com/show/4971/a...att-verizon/14

LOL at your sig...well, I'm honoured to have made it into any sig, no matter the reason.

I know two things for sure.

(1) The iPad 3 is going to be pretty awesome. These features listed in the article are the same as I made in my predictions some days ago in another thread.

(2) No matter what new features the iPad 3 has, somebody somewhere is going to be a whiner and whine about something. People have been whining and crying about a retina display for years now. Of course, now that the iPad will finally get a retina display, I suppose that people must choose something else to whine about. Like I said in the other thread, I'd even take a mono-core Apple tablet (one core!) over a piece of shit quad core Android tablet.

Are people totally clueless or are some people just not too bright? Don't you all remember how the new Android tablets were going to blow away the iPad? Many had been released with specs higher than the iPad 1/2, yet they all sucked!

Of course people want the best possible tech in their tablet, but going by numbers alone is for retarded people and numbskulls. A good example is the RAM. Almost every Android tablet competing with the iPad 2 had double the amount of RAM compared to the iPad 2. But yet the iPad2 blew them all out of the water!

So if you are a clueless spechead and a potential Fandroid, then you really need to be looking into an Android tablet soon. You can boast about the specs which are listed on paper, but your tablet will still look and run like complete garbage! Nobody on this forum recommends people to buy Android as much as I do. I should be getting a commission from Google for all of my recommendations.

Forgetting the typo, this puts FOUR times as many pixels on the screen...

If the look of the iPad 3 is largely unchanged from the iPad 2, I hope people in this forum don't scream and cry like they did about the iPhone 4S looking like the iPhone 4.

Fully understand the feeling but don't forget those tablet manufacturers just mix and match these chips quickly and roll them into market. Once they released the product and sold , they don't even bother to update the customer with the update & fixes. Given this type of attitude, So how much effort will they put to optimize a quadcore cpu to with the OS..after all the cpu is not theirs, the os is not theirs. But mainly markets better with some improvement in performance.

for apple it is tightly integrated , the SOC is custom tailored for ios and ios is written to run very efficiently on the hardware. There are months of effort to squeeze the performance out from this integration before the product is released.

Ugh you aren't wrong. The article is also not wrong.

For example there is a good likely hood that Apple will add more cores to the GPU, especially if retina is real. Apple will likely address performance but where it is needed most.

Now the problem is Apple will want to be able to sell iPad 3 based upon CPU performance also. The thing here is that they will likely be able to double the performance of the Cortex A9 cores so who will argue with that. A15 isn't needed and frankly would be a step backwards. The thing is if you double the performance of those cores all apps are impacted, if you go quad core only a select few apps will be impacted. All apps can benefit from a bit of parallel processing but not all of them can leverage 4 or more processors. More cores are sometimes better but not always, you can't dismiss out of hand that 4 cores might be better for some uses.

So from what I've been seeing in the literature it should be easy for Apple to push Cortex A9 to greater than 1.6 GHz with an aggressive process shrink. This will allow them to advertise 2X faster without embarrassment. Frankly that is all they need because the only thing they will compete against is iPad2. Being able to say 2X faster is compelling because on average people are happy with iPad 2 performance.

What were planning to use the other two cores for? "Stuff?" Impressing your friends with specs?

That's just too high. I have a full 1080p movie (2 hrs.) at just that big. If that is the case, you'll never be able to fit in a full movie in Blu-Ray (50 Gb.) (Oh yes, I know Blu-Ray is 24 fps but still..).

So the original poster was correct about being a quarter of the storage available on a 16 GB iPad, which leads to the question of : Do you think there will be a 16 GB iPad 3? Probably not.

The iPhone 4S still starts at 16GB and I think that's a lot more useful as a camera. But ignoring the camera HW completely I think 16GB will happen again because this year's major spec bump is the display.

The answer to your questions are:
1. Yes, iPads are commonly used as cameras.
2. Yes, it is awkward.

No, I don't use my iPad as a camera, but it's more common than you think.

Resolution is a measure in two dimensions. You're switching up the number of pixels and resolution. It's double the resolution which means quadruple the number of pixels. Dimensions v. area.

12 minute for a clip is a bit long for average usage however several clips taken on an outing could easily add up to 12 min. Once back home you could off load them but 16 GB storage is a little on the small side these days.

There are so many uses for a good high speed port, either USB or TB, that I'm really frustrated that iPad3 is apparently ignoring this again. I know many can't grasp how such a port would enable the iPad in ways no other tech can, but there is just an endless supple of concepts where an iPad with a high speed port would just rock.

The interesting thing here is no leaks about the dock connector and the rumored updates there. A year or more ago they patented a revised dock connector, it would be nice to see that implemented in iPad3. Im not a big fan of the dock connector though, nor Apples control over what hardware uses it. Thus the interest in a standard port.

I don't think that it's that awkward. If the iPad 3 has the same quality camera that the iPhone 4S has, then most people will take better pictures with the iPad than with the iPhone. Why? Because of the huge hi-res display of course. I don't walk around outside with an iPad in my back pocket. But if I happened to be somewhere and I happened to have an iPad in close proximity, then I wouldn't mind using it to take pictures with.

I can think of a million things that are more awkward than taking pictures with an iPad, so on the list of awkward things, taking pictures with your iPad is pretty damn low on that list, IMO.

I'm hoping the next software upgrade fixes the problem of apps crashing. It happens to me all the time, especially in Safari and Skyfire. Happens on both my iPhone 4S and iPad 2.

The iPad 3 will also have a purple monkey dishwasher.

This is the problem I have. This is a bunch of "details" pieced together from questionable sources--no really--what is the source of these rumors? These parts could be from rejected prototypes or engineering studies. Sounds to me like Apple.pro stapled a bunch of rumors together, read between the lines, and guessed at the final the specs. Every time these rumors get re-reported, we get one step further removed from the sources, people sneak in their own interpretations, and you end up with a questionable report that's part rumor, part speculation, and part wish list.

Anand posted an article about how TB could not possibly happen on an iDevice because it doesn't have an Intel processor. But all other connected devices don't either. I get that the NAND flash is only about 20MB/s but that will increase and there are option for direct video streaming and fast charging over TB that USB can't competing with. I think he has a point but I also think he doesn't address the whole issue.

• http://www.anandtech.com/show/5425/w...e-anytime-soon

(Just to be clear no one has said that USB would go away if TB was added. Remember they used to have FW and USB over the same 30-pin connector.)

As for the connector it has been used for about 10 years now. I don't know of any other company that has used the same connector for so long over 3 distinct product categories. Is it getting long in the tooth or was there sufficient future-forward thinking that will let it live on for another 5 or 10 years?

For me a kick ass feature would be the ability to connect directly to a dslr (canon for me) and control the camera directly from the iPad. The same over wifi would be even better. The ability to use the iPad as a screen would be the thing. Opening up the connector to real usb functionality, or at least to add some usb peripherals would be great as well. For instance how about being able to import compact flash cards directly? No one seems to focus on these potential changes to the next iPad, which would be as good as a multicore processor.

from the self-ordained troll patrol -
You remind me of 'Cowboy X' from Sesame Street years ago... riding into town here, weilding your 'troll' branding iron and wildly stamping everyones post.

I think we would be hard pressed to find anyone here you havent branded 'troll'.
So allow me to be the character who tells you that our community here doesnt appreciate it.

Chill dude.