Originally Posted by chronster
no I'm serious. Given where other tablets are, I thought Apple would raise the bar that high, but it's all good because the ipad 3 is still a great tablet. I guess I just revealed how highly I actually think of Apple.
Anyone claiming to be disappointed with the new iPad is crazy. It's like the iPhone 4S. Virtually everything is improved except the case. It's a great improvement - especially considering that the price doesn't change.
Originally Posted by island hermit
I don't think he was complaining about the iPad's battery life.
To me he was saying that LTE sucks the death out of batteries.
Please explain how the new iPad is 10 hours on 3G and 9 hours on LTE if LTE sucks the life out of batteries.
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb
When the 2012 iPad gets replaced by a newer one in 2013, what are they going to call the 2012 model? They can't refer to it as "the new iPad" anymore.
Do you routinely call your laptop a MacBook Pro 7.1? Or an iMac 5.2? No. You call it an MacBook Pro or an iPad. If you need to distinguish, you specify the date (early 2011 or late 2006) or the CPU (core2 duo 2.33). Same thing on the iPad. This one will be referred to as the iPad and if you need to distinguish it, it will be the 2012 model (or early 2012 if they were to release another one later this year - which doesn't seem likely).
Originally Posted by Relic
Yep memory is still at 512mb. Confirmed again by the Apple guys in the lobby. I think we should wait for confirmation though I can't believe Apple would only put 512mb in here. Then again I was surprised to here 512mb for the iPad 2.
Then why did Apple say it had more RAM than other devices that are known to have 512 MB?
I can't see any way that it's 512. Could be 768 or 1024 MB, but it's not 512.
Originally Posted by dfiler
Not wrong at all. Resolution is routinely expressed in one or two dimensions. To be non-ambiguous though, either way requires more than just numeric characters.
Ironically, other people here were arguing that "resolution" can only refer to density per area. That just goes to show that language can be imprecise and that it is pointless to try and deny that words are used in multiple ways.
Resolution is almost always expressed in pixels (dots, lines, etc) per inch. Apple reported it as 264 pixels per inch. That's a linear measurement. If Apple had reported it as 69,696 pixels per square inch, then you could consider it an area measurement.
In the few cases where resolution is used to describe area, it is specifically spelled out to make it clear (640x480, for example). Other than that, it's a linear measurement, expressed in pixels per inch.