or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple expects 4G LTE iPad to boost mobile video watching, Reuters says
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple expects 4G LTE iPad to boost mobile video watching, Reuters says

post #1 of 59
Thread Starter 
Yet another report states that Apple's third-generation iPad will offer high-speed 4G LTE connectivity, as the company looks to offer high quality video to users on the go.

Citing a source familiar with Apple's next iPad, Reuters was the latest to report on Tuesday that the third-generation tablet will be capable of operating on 4G long-term evolution networks from carriers AT&T and Verizon. The 4G-capable iPad will offer speeds up to 10 times faster than the current 3G models.

The report by authors Poornima Gupta and Sinead Carew suggests Apple's primary intention in offering 4G LTE is to "tempt more U.S. customers to pay extra to watch high-quality video on the go." It also said that the addition of 4G could "go a long way toward banishing the sometimes shaky video quality of older devices."

While the report focused on video playback, it did not offer any indication that Apple plans to modify or expand its own offerings on iTunes. One recent separate report from last week indicated that Apple is "pushing ahead" with plans to release a streaming TV service, but that is not expected to become available until later this year.

Apple's interest in online video is also believed to be tied to the company's rumored plans to build a full-fledged television set. Numerous reports have indicated that Apple is at work on such a device, including one in January that said famed Apple designer Jonathan Ive has a 50-inch prototype set in his California design studio.




The quality of video on the go could be a greater factor with the next-generation iPad, as it is expected to feature a high-resolution Retina Display. A pair of recent rumors have even suggested that Apple will name its next tablet the "iPad HD," for high-definition.

The third-generation iPad is expected to have a screen resolution of 2,048-by-1,536 pixels, which would be a pixel density double that of the current iPad 2. It's also a resolution greater than a 1080p high-definition television set.

Beyond the iPad, video is also expected to play a part in this week's media briefing in the form of an updated Apple TV. Recent stock-outs of the current model, released in late 2010, strongly suggest that Apple plans to update the product with a new model this week.

Apple's media event will be held Wednesday, March 7 at 10 a.m. at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in San Francisco, Calif. AppleInsider will have full, live coverage.

[ View article on AppleInsider ]
post #2 of 59
N~o. Re~ally. Faster load times will let people watch more content in a smaller amount of time?

Why do these people get paid, again? I don't even want to get hired by them; I'd rather not feel constantly sick about how I earn my money.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 59
Apple and Reuters may think people will watch HD movies over LTE.

The prices for data that AT&T, Verizon etc. charge will however kill that idea.

HD screen means more data!
post #4 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The report by authors Poornima Gupta and Sinead Carew suggests Apple's primary intention in offering 4G LTE is to "tempt more U.S. customers to pay extra to watch high-quality video on the go."

I have very little use for video while on the go unless it is a short news clip which I don't expect to pay for. Paid video content I would rather watch at home in the comfort of my living room.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #5 of 59
Video Shmideo...
I want 4g just so I can do basic tasks. In my Philadelphia suburb AT&T is so awful, and saturated... doing simple tasks are painstakingly slow. Actually, everyone is bailing to Android
post #6 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyzlmt View Post

In my Philadelphia suburb AT&T is so awful, and saturated... doing simple tasks are painstakingly slow. Actually, everyone is bailing to Android

How does it make any sense to move to a different operating system when the network is the problem?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #7 of 59
I'm sincerely curious as to how people might use their iPad HD(3)'s LTE capability. The only thing that really would benefit would be the streaming video, but with the data prices and limits as it is, I wouldn't watch any movies on it when it's not on wifi. Does LTE economically make sense on iPad?
post #8 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

How does it make any sense to move to a different operating system when the network is the problem?

Good point LOL. He/she should've said everyone is bailing to Verizon.
post #9 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuniverse View Post

Does LTE economically make sense on iPad?

For businesses, sure. For car trips, sure.

I'm so freaking sick of Verizon's ads, though. And AT&T's too, I guess.

"With these new 4G LTE tablets from Verizon"

"And with AT&T 4G LTE"

SHUT UP YOU IDIOTS. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO ACTUALLY PITCH A SERVICE. I want to line my fingertips up vertically along their faces and just rip the skin outward. It INFURIATES me the way those commercials are written.

I can't tell if it's the pretentiousness, the lack of actual information, the lack of POINT, or all of the above.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #10 of 59
I'm pretty sure the current 7Mbps (I think) for the iPad 2 is already enough to stream HD video.

I'm hoping for 21Mbps HSPA+
post #11 of 59
Portable video will become three times more compelling when it's in 3D.

There is the left-eye stream, the right-eye stream, and the fused 3D composite that happens inside your brain as a sort of perceptual detonation.

"Compelling" might not be the right word. Maybe "magnetic" or "gravitational" would be better. Or "irresistible."

But the new screen will be a good warm-up for the advent of deep video. Actually a necessary predecessor, because edge sharpness will fall off, but that will be compensated for by depth.
post #12 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therbo View Post

I'm pretty sure the current 7Mbps (I think) for the iPad 2 is already enough to stream HD video.

I'm hoping for 21Mbps HSPA+

The problem with looking at theoretical limits of a technology is that it involves devoting more spectrum than realistically possible to hit that limit. It is easier for 100 LTE devices to be using 15Mbps of data at the same tower than HSPA+ because it's more spectrally efficient.

However, I think the comment about HD video is rather silly, because the only reliable source for that content is iTunes, and it would only take two high quality 720p movies would blow through a 5GB cap which costs $50. At that kind of pricing, who would even bother?
post #13 of 59
This is going to be interesting considering I can barely listen to internet radio without AT&T throttling my connection let alone watch video.
post #14 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

For businesses, sure. For car trips, sure.

I'm so freaking sick of Verizon's ads, though. And AT&T's too, I guess.

"With these new 4G LTE tablets from Verizon"

"And with AT&T 4G LTE"

SHUT UP YOU IDIOTS. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO ACTUALLY PITCH A SERVICE. I want to line my fingertips up vertically along their faces and just rip the skin outward. It INFURIATES me the way those commercials are written.

I can't tell if it's the pretentiousness, the lack of actual information, the lack of POINT, or all of the above.

Makes me glad I don't have TV. Thanks.
post #15 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The third-generation iPad is expected to have a screen resolution of 2,048-by-1,536 pixels, which would be a pixel density double that of the current iPad 2.

You mean four times the density (twice the resolution in each direction).
post #16 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post

it would only take two high quality 720p movies would blow through a 5GB cap which costs $50. At that kind of pricing, who would even bother?

Or a single iTunes HD movie and a single iTunes SD movie.

And when Apple brings 1080p content to the iTunes store, you won't be able to even download half of one movie onto your iPad designed for super high-def stuff without wasting your $50.

And that's what makes me want to tear down Congress and get some people up there who can't be bought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NormM View Post

You mean four times the density (twice the resolution in each direction).

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #17 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post

The problem with looking at theoretical limits of a technology is that it involves devoting more spectrum than realistically possible to hit that limit. It is easier for 100 LTE devices to be using 15Mbps of data at the same tower than HSPA+ because it's more spectrally efficient.

However, I think the comment about HD video is rather silly, because the only reliable source for that content is iTunes, and it would only take two high quality 720p movies would blow through a 5GB cap which costs $50. At that kind of pricing, who would even bother?

And this totally realistic observation illustrates why the theatrical-movie model is going to be marginalized to the living room, and the quick-visual-fix model, like on YouTube, is where we're headed. Five minutes is the new half-hour or even hour. But this won't be obvious until the medium is compelling. The new screen might do it for little art movies, but I think it's going to take 3D to make it really obvious.

My last post on this subject. It had to be said.
post #18 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

How does it make any sense to move to a different operating system when the network is the problem?

Because people are dumb
post #19 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Portable video will become three times more compelling when it's in 3D.

There is the left-eye stream, the right-eye stream, and the fused 3D composite that happens inside your brain as a sort of perceptual detonation.

"Compelling" might not be the right word. Maybe "magnetic" or "gravitational" would be better. Or "irresistible."

But the new screen will be a good warm-up for the advent of deep video. Actually a necessary predecessor, because edge sharpness will fall off, but that will be compensated for by depth.

I can't tell if you are being serious here, but if you are, you're totally dreaming here.

3D TV's are already on the wane, the number of movies coming out in 3D similarly so. The industry has been pushing 3D TV sets and 3D movies for years now with almost no uptake at all. No one wants it, just as no one wanted it in the early 70's and no one wanted it in the late 50's. 3D is the ultimate boondoggle.
post #20 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

And this totally realistic observation illustrates why the theatrical-movie model is going to be marginalized to the living room, and the quick-visual-fix model, like on YouTube, is where we're headed. Five minutes is the new half-hour or even hour. But this won't be obvious until the medium is compelling. The new screen might do it for little art movies, but I think it's going to take 3D to make it really obvious.

My last post on this subject. It had to be said.

Whew! Thank god somebody said it! I know we were all looking around wondering to ourselves 'when will somebody say what we've all been thinking when we close our eyes at night?'

You've done us all a service good sir.
post #21 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyzlmt View Post

Video Shmideo...
I want 4g just so I can do basic tasks. In my Philadelphia suburb AT&T is so awful, and saturated... doing simple tasks are painstakingly slow. Actually, everyone is bailing to Android

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

How does it make any sense to move to a different operating system when the network is the problem?

If it sounds like a troll, and walks like a troll, it's probably an android fanboy.
post #22 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post

The problem with looking at theoretical limits of a technology is that it involves devoting more spectrum than realistically possible to hit that limit. It is easier for 100 LTE devices to be using 15Mbps of data at the same tower than HSPA+ because it's more spectrally efficient.

However, I think the comment about HD video is rather silly, because the only reliable source for that content is iTunes, and it would only take two high quality 720p movies would blow through a 5GB cap which costs $50. At that kind of pricing, who would even bother?

I've stated in other threads that I suspect that Apple has a codec and hardware chip that will allow delivery of video streams with 10-20% of the bandwidth currently used. This would affect every transmission means -- cable, WiFi and cell radio..
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #23 of 59
Pretty clear : the iPad HD will be the Apple TV. New generations never watch the "normal" TV. iPad HD is their preferred choice.
post #24 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I've stated in other threads that I suspect that Apple has a codec and hardware chip that will allow delivery of video streams with 10-20% of the bandwidth currently used. This would affect every transmission means -- cable, WiFi and cell radio..

10-20% of MPEG-2? That might be possible.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #25 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I can't tell if you are being serious here, but if you are, you're totally dreaming here.

3D TV's are already on the wane, the number of movies coming out in 3D similarly so. The industry has been pushing 3D TV sets and 3D movies for years now with almost no uptake at all. No one wants it, just as no one wanted it in the early 70's and no one wanted it in the late 50's. 3D is the ultimate boondoggle.

Two words: form factor. Changes everthing. When you hold a little depthy screen in your hands, you will want to crawl inside. Totally different from watching some framed theater on your wall.

You in particular might not get until you loosen up that right hemisphere of yours, but many others will. Actually, watching 3D will help, because it activates both hemispheres in a very specific way.

Edit: I really should take your point more seriously, because your bias toward reason/logic is so often useful in this forum. That is the valuable left brain working.

What's most interesting about 3D when it's used seriously—not for cheap thrills in terrible movies—is that new neuronal circuits are being stimulated by the enforced separation of the two eye-views, especially when moving picture is involved. That is why the depth effect and the textural solidity of things is so striking when the 3D is done well. Scorcese's Hugo provides many good examples. The best thing in that movie for me was the clothes, believe it or not. They went out of their way to recreate the feel of 1920s weaves and fabrics, and the 3D allows your mind to vicariously feel them. That's because both left and right visual channels are separately engaged, and the brain is fusing the two views like mad and feasting on the sensual stimulation, so long denied by flat, 2D media for all our lives. So 3D is a true neurological shift, and far from being a passing gimmicky fad. Like with stereo sound in the 50s, only far more powerful because it's light and vision.
post #26 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I have very little use for video while on the go unless it is a short news clip which I don't expect to pay for. Paid video content I would rather watch at home in the comfort of my living room.

I watch a lot of paid content on the go. But I do it over wifi and honestly I don't think that Apple is thinking of video and LTE together.

Video and this alleged 'retina' screen, sure.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #27 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

10-20% of MPEG-2? That might be possible.

Apple could start an advance push of HEVC!

Holy FRICK would that be amazing.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #28 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

Apple's desires and the carriers are diametrically opposed. Apple would love for people to use the iPad to constantly be connected and watch videos and other data uses. While the carriers want you to pay a lot for data and use as little as possible. Most people would choose the $30 for 3GB option with $10 per GB over that. That is great for the carriers and not so great for the consumer. Even with moderate use you could easily spend $100 a month for data.

The pieces won't be in place for a few years, but one possibility for Apple is to act as an MVNO for data. Dish has some spectrum they are sitting on and Clearwire also has a ton of spectrum. Apple have a number of possibilities for buying data as an LTE MVNO. They would have to be competitive with carrier data pricing, but I think Apple wouldn't mind low margins for data plans to sell more iPads. Similar to iTunes pricing with low margins to sell more hardware. Apple could also really shake things up by not requiring any contracts and simply selling data a la carte from the iTunes store. For example 1GB for $7 3GB for $20 5GB for $30 10GB for $50

I don't think Apple would ever want to become a full fledged carrier with the low margins and headaches that would go along with that. But I can see them partnering with some companies to build out a data only model for iPads, iPod touches, possibly Mac computers, and even people with iPhones who could choose to completely bypass the carrier completely. After all there are good alternatives to carrier text messaging and also VoIP calling already in place now. If you had a fast, steady, and reliable LTE data connection why would you need a traditional phone contract or carrier at all?

Typical carrier plans for the iPhone range between around $80 to $130 or more depending on options. And for $80 you really don't get too many voice, texts, or data except on Sprint. iMessage, google Voice, Whatsapp and several more options could easily replace traditional texts. Google Voice, or many VoIP apps like SessionTalk or even magicjack could replace phone calls. Imagine if Apple offered 10GB of LTE data with no expiration date for $50 or even $100. If you watched your usage and limited streaming videos, you could make 10GB last several months. No more monthly bills of $100 to use your iPhone. Now that really would be revolutionary and would turn the whole industry upside down.

Some very creative ideas here! What if Apple, as an MVNO, were to offer streamed content that included a charge/discount depending on the means of transmission -- a streamed movie to your AppleTV via cable cost $7, to your iPad via WiFi $8 -- via cell $10.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #29 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I have very little use for video while on the go unless it is a short news clip which I don't expect to pay for. Paid video content I would rather watch at home in the comfort of my living room.

I second this.
post #30 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

How does it make any sense to move to a different operating system when the network is the problem?

I assume because Apple offers no LTE devices.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #31 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

(shortened)

I can't tell if it's the pretentiousness, the lack of actual information, the lack of POINT, or all of the above.

seems a little pot calling kettle black, I considered the 'if you don't have an iPhone, well you don't have an iPhone" some of the most obnoxious pretentious ads ever created, even though I agreed with the points.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #32 of 59
If Apple doesn't have Retina Display and LTE people are going to be killing themselves or maybe even burning Tim Cook at the stake.
post #33 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

I assume because Apple offers no LTE devices.

There's no 4G in Philadelphia

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #34 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

There's no 4G in Philadelphia…

??
Yes there is. Verizon has LTE, TMobile has HSPA+ 42, Sprint has WiMax, and ATT has HSPA+ and I believe Philly is next up for LTE from them.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #35 of 59
I'm still just getting the 64GB wifi-only.
I've been an iPad user since day 1, and can count the times I missed wireless capabilities on one hand, if that.
If I need something urgently out of wifi range, I can always do it on my iPhone.
That said, I'm glad to have pioneers out there racking up more charges to AT&T/Verizon and working out the bugs.
My thanks!
post #36 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by realwarder View Post

Apple and Reuters may think people will watch HD movies over LTE.

The prices for data that AT&T, Verizon etc. charge will however kill that idea.

HD screen means more data!

Well, to be accurate, HD content (if you choose it) means more data.
The screen itself doesn't.
post #37 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

Yes there is. ATT has HSPA+

That's not 4G. That's 3G. That's not going to solve any bandwidth problems.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #38 of 59
I agree with the post above saying that the tablet and other mobile devices are becoming the video watching hardware of choice and that TV is losing ground.

I've got absolutely NO data to back that up, but my gut feeling trumps all data.

Mobile: the consumption of whatever I want, whenever I want it.
TV: what I want to watch with others I know or live with
Movie Theaters: where I go to watch big spectacles with people who are annoying to me.
post #39 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

That's not 4G. That's 3G. That's not going to solve any bandwidth problems.

That might be a matter of opinion however on the devices where it registers which type of connection it has such as Edge, 3G, 4G, 4G LTE, when connected with HSPA+ identifies itself as 4G and it actually is much faster than 3G in my experience.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #40 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The report by authors Poornima Gupta and Sinead Carew suggests Apple's primary intention in offering 4G LTE is to "tempt more U.S. customers to pay extra to watch high-quality video on the go." It also said that the addition of 4G could "go a long way toward banishing the sometimes shaky video quality of older devices." [ View article on AppleInsider ]

I doubt this is what Apple is thinking.
I suspect this is what AT&T and Verizon are telling these analysts.

There is an old expression: "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
AT&T and Verizon have one thing to sell...BANDWIDTH. All they have is dumb pipes.
All they can think about is how can we get people to stuff those pipes...VIDEO!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Apple expects 4G LTE iPad to boost mobile video watching, Reuters says
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple expects 4G LTE iPad to boost mobile video watching, Reuters says