Reports claim Apple's third-gen tablet to be named 'iPad HD' - Page 2

Perform the following search on Google:

"ipad hd" site:apple.com

Where have you been for the past year?? The iPad 2 hasn't just come out, it was approx 1 year ago, and apple releases it's iOS products once a year. Aside from all the mounting evidence as to what we will see at the announcement, the apple invite has a picture of an iPad on it! Get real.

iPad Kessel-Run-in-Less-Than-12-Parsecs

Quote me.

"About 25,000 results (0.11 seconds)"

THat's the best argument I've seen for it not to be named iPad HD.


However... when you input: "ipad 3" site:apple.com you get About 3,940,000 results (0.50 seconds).

Sounds like you missed out on the major advance in AAPL stock. Bitter?

The iPad HD-S.

Yes I’m over the wall of application icons all branded with “HD” to identify them as iPad specific. Apple needs to reign this in and encourage more developers to release universal apps.

Better to watermark “HD” on the buy button like they do with “+” for universal applications.

How about:

iPad///

or

iPad//c

Name... Shmame!

Call it whatever they want...

Certainly, a retina of this size is significant, and HD is pretty much ubiquitous for high-definition anything. So it understandably could be used in the name.

There have been a lot of rumors discussed about the hardware features: Number of CPU/GPU cores, RAM, etc.

About the only non-hardware rumor has been Siri -- pretty much assumed to be on the next iPad.


I have this nagging feeling that we are all, somehow, missing a bigger picture...

There has been no iOS SDK for the retina display (or anything iPad 3), Why?

The iCloud infrastructure is in place, well-accepted -- yet nothing special for the iPad...

OSX Mountain Lion is available to developers -- including some more iOS-like constructs, but they still don't quite match up...

Apple's OSX iWork, iPlay apps are long in the tooth as are their iOS equivalents...

There seems to be a post-pc environment for specialized "semi-pro" apps from Autodesk, Avid, Adobe...

The absence of a solution for a "mobile file [access] system" grows more critical as iPad apps evolve from stand-alone widgets to sophisticated apps with a need to interact with other apps -- on the iDevice, on the Cloud and on the Desktop...


Maybe it really isn't about the hardware as much as establishing a base-line for developers to interact with Apple's infrastructure.


As a user and shareholder, I hope that Apple exploits the opportunity -- raising the potential uses for the iPad and sends the competition back to the drawing boards...

It ain't just the hardware!

I agree that it doesn't make sense. To call a 4:3 screen "HD" is to bastardize the term. If a TV maker did it, the FTC would rightly call them to the carpet for misleading advertising.

Where do you get that information? Where is HD used in that manner?

They used iMovie HD.

I don't understand the article comparing HD to S in iPhone 4S. Seems like the opposite.

This iPad, with Siri and doubled resolution, is a big step up and they want that noticed with a naming departure.

As for HD being trashy, my take is that most consumers still view something that is "HD" as cutting edge. Maybe not AI people, but regular people.

Actually, I am growing rather keen on the idea of naming the models with the same name used internally:





That way, we could merely look at the serial number or barcode and instantly identify the version and model

HD in today's market is used to refer to resolutions like 720p and 1080p.
And there's already an upper-limit for use of the "HD" term, with terms like "2K" and "4K" starting to replace "HD" in the industry for displays with larger numbers of pixels.

In fact, the rumored iPad 'retina' display resolution of 2,048x1,536 (150% the pixels of 1080p HD) falls neatly into the "2K" display category.
So, yes, I think it's reasonable to say "HD" severely under-states the rumored iPad 3 resolution.

ohhh so just like how the iphone goes 3g>3gs and 4>4s, this will go 2>2 HD and then 3>3HD.

Therefore, this one will have a retina display but for marketing reasons the next one wont.

genius

iPad 2 HD sounds about right. Apple tends to save major version upgrades for products that look physically different. I think it's also part of their planned upgrade cycles for customers. Apple knows most people who bought an iPad 2 aren't going to rush out and buy an iPad 2012 model. So they keep the design and name similar to communicate that the new model has 'nice to have' features but isn't such a huge generational leap that you should have buyers remorse over your previous generation model. The new display will be beautiful but I still think it's a 'nice to have' feature not a 'must have' feature for most people.

That's like saying the iPhone 3GS was speedier than the iPhone 3 but the iPhone 4 wasn't speedier than the iPhone 3GS because it didn't contain an 'S' at the end of the name. Once you go Retina Display it will become the standard display in a year when the iPad 2 stops being sold.

Just call the darn thing iPad and be done with it. Apple's computers and iPods don't have numbers in their naming convention. I say stop with the numbers for iPhone and iPad too.

IMO, a retina display on the new iPad would be a total game changer. Like night and day. Much more so than an incremental increase in CPU speed. And much more apparent to average consumers.

iPad HDS, and then IPad 3D...

It's really not that difficult to imagine this... I don't see what the big deal is here.... And when the article talks about apple's "usual naming scheme" , they obviously have no idea what they are writing about... Did they think the iPhone 3G stood for 3rd gen iPhone.?? Where do they get the people that write these articles..???

rc69 may be a curmudgeon (judging by previous posts) but I gotta believe this post was meant to be witty (sarcasm). As such,
Its funny.

On the subject of naming - I am happy with iPad 2, iPad 3 or iPad HD. Any one will do just fine. iPad RD would have been the clever name, but really, what's in a name? Not every company seems to get it but Apple does - naming a product is just marketing and so HD is the one. It will appeal to the masses, it says 'new and improved', focussing attention on the screen and not building up expectations of a radically different looking iPad.

There is no way they will name it iPad HD and continue selling iPad 2, because it is not clear from the name, to non-Apple fanatics, which is better.

Person 1: Got me an iPad HD.
Person 2: Well, I got me an iPad 2.

Person 3 won't know who to sidle up to.

Although the name could be HD, this article is really bad.... Its full of statements that are simply false in their logic, like you point out here....

What's the difference? The HD has an amazing screen. Really? (sidles up)
Its not complicated.

I disagree, the 2 year cycle of the iPhone market which is tied to the 2 year contract should not be confused with the iPad market. This upgrade is major. People will buy a lot of them including iPad 2 owners....

If indeed it does cost significantly more to manufacture, then I can see Apple naming the newest iPad the HD and raising the base price, while retaining the iPad 2 at its current price. That way it won't seem like the iPad just got more expensive, only that a more pro model has been added to the line up. Sales of the iPad 2 don't seem to have slowed so it could very easily continue to do well without a discount, and the iPad HD could still seem a good value even at a hundred dollars more. After all, you can't get that kind of a resolution right now in the priciest of Apple's MacBooks!

HD doesn't refer to 16:9 aspect ratio. HD can come in many different aspect ratios. Having extra vertical resolution doesn't disqualify a display from being HD.

If they name it iPad 2 HD I'll eat my iPad 1.

Which is why 'HD' makes sense. It really doesn't matter where in the sequence of iPads it comes or what previous naming conventions point to. 'HD' says one thing only - 'screen'. The rest is really secondary, even Siri.

Can you point to any 4:3 displays advertised as HD? And to any of the "Many different aspect ratios" currently being sold as "HD"?

Ugh. Doubtful. I hope not.

Ugh.

1) Modern HD is defined by 720p of horizontal lines and leaves the number of vertical lines open as the width varies. After 1080p became a reality and with HD already taken 1080p became known as FHD for Full High Definition. This follows the same pattern as 720p.

2) Can you point to any displays that advertised Retina Display before the iPhone 4 came out? Of course not, but that doesn't mean Apple wasn't allowed to use the term for marketing purposes.

3) There are at least 3 video standards that use "HD" in their name and are 1440x1080 resolution. The Panasonic DVCPRO HD 1080, HDV 1080i/1080, and
Sony HDCAM (1080).

PS: Note that Full Aperture Native 2K has a resolution of 2048 × 1556 for an aspect ratio of 1.32:1. The rumoured iPad will be 2048x1536 with a 1.33: asepect ratio. Both are generically listed as 4:3 aspect ratio because they are that close.

Please explain to me how Apple can 'stop with numbers' when its selling 3 generations of iPhones at once? They don't use numbers for their other products because they dont sell them concurrently- they get replaced, ie. laptops, iMacs, laptops, etc. Just a small detail you seem to have missed.

It will be clear from the price. Obviously the pricier model will be the better one. Also, the website and Apple stores will make that clear.

The problem is that there is no previously defined 2k resolution that is near 1536 scan lines. 2048x1080 is the closest. So if one is going to be a stickler for specific dimensions, then it's still out.

In reality, "HD" doesn't always mean one of two resolutions, except in the TV market. Heck, people were mentioning HD meaning iPad version of software.

Full Aperture Native 2K

Huh, that escaped my notice.

You seem to have it backwards. Apple is free to coin a new term. But Apple is not welcome to use a well-known term in an incorrect manner.

Doing so would be akin to calling an SD TV a Retina Display.

Or maybe in the AppleSpeak world, any term can have any meaning. If so, I call the current iPad display a Widescreen display.

Or, presumably, they just take a glance at the screen. If this is all true, then that's all that needs to happen.

HD would be used incorrectly because they used it on a 4:3 display even though it contain every 720p and 1080p resolutions? It is protected by Marketing Nomenclature Act of 1888?

Correct.