or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumor: Fifth-gen iPad, second-gen iPad mini to debut in March
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Fifth-gen iPad, second-gen iPad mini to debut in March - Page 2

post #41 of 256
I reckon the next update will be to both ipad and ipad mini but not until summer at earliest.
post #42 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

It's not weird if you've got competitors and if you have indications or a sense they could be gaining on you in some way.
Clearly you don't read most of the posts around here. Apple doesn't have to worry about competition, that's why they don't have to compete with Adroid in their marketspace.

Apple only needs to maintain the status quo doing exactly what they have been, courting a smaller pool of the wealthiest customers by charging a premium with a sizeable profit margin, releasing new products only when they are ready.

Apple doesn't need to do anything on anybody else's schedule.
post #43 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

That's what I'm hoping for. After playing with the mini and the regular iPad, the regular one feels like a brick. Shave a couple pounds off that thing and that's what I'll probably get.

Umm... it weighs 1.44 pounds.  So you want a floating iPad? (The mini is .68 for reference)

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #44 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I'm not sure of these rumours at all.

Does it really make sense to bring out a new version of a product when the previous version still has six months left on the warranty? Customers with a defective product that has to be replaced will end up with the next generation of the product for free.

Seems weird to me.

 

Analysts have been demanding Apple to become more like Samsung and the other bottom feeders and release numerous updates and upgrades every three moths or so. So what do non Apple customers do when a cheaper better, faster, version of their new toy comes out six weeks after they bought it? Do they whine and moan about having obsolete equipment like the typical iDevice buyer?

post #45 of 256

I'm in the market for a full sized iPad but after playing with the mini there is no way i'll buy the current full sized one. It's clear that the next iPad will be thinner and lighter. 

 

So at least in my case, the sooner they release a new iPad the better.

post #46 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

 

Completely agree. Apple has been moving away from fixed release cycles for a while now, starting when they decided to pull out of MacWorld Expo's. I think they may try to target specific releases just before the holiday or school seasons, but otherwise, they'll release products when they can - as soon as they can.

 

The other thing about getting away from fixed release cycles is that eliminating predictability will probably lessen the "waiting for the new model" phenomenon. This might happen even if, on average, they release 1 new model a year. If sometimes the next release comes in 6 months but other times it's 18, the calculation of, "should I wait," becomes much more complicated due to unknown factors, so people would tend to buy more on need, rather than thinking, "I can wait 3 months," because the next release might actually be as far as 9 months away. Can you wait that long? Maybe not. Do you need it? If you do, you buy it.

post #47 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

 

The iPad 4 was more of a iPad 3S. The next iPad will probably have the same specs as the last just with a new case design. Later this year it'll probably the speed bump once the new chips (A7X) are ready.

Or this rumor is bunk and you'll get the iPad 5 with A7X and Case redesign in the fall.

 

Sorry, but just a redesign would be a pretty lame upgrade- it'd look awesome, dont get me wrong.  But they would have to bring something else to the table you would think.  Already an HD facetime and 5MP back camera- where to go from there?  

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #48 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

The Retina Mini will be price $100 higher than the current Mini so there won't be any buyer's remorse.

 

The iPad 4 was more of a iPad 3S. The next iPad will probably have the same specs as the last just with a new case design. Later this year it'll probably the speed bump once the new chips (A7X) are ready.

I doubt that, since the Retina iPad is in that price range right now. The 4th generation iPad was more than just a slight upgrade over the 3rd as you suggest.  The A6X is twice as fast as the A5X.  

post #49 of 256
Given the source, I'm very skeptical, but some of the arguments being used against the rumor don't make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I'm not sure of these rumours at all.

Does it really make sense to bring out a new version of a product when the previous version still has six months left on the warranty? Customers with a defective product that has to be replaced will end up with the next generation of the product for free.

Seems weird to me.

Only because you don't understand how Apple's warranty exchange works.

Let's say you have a 3GS that fails and is still covered by AppleCare, so you take it to your Apple Store. They replace it with another 3GS, not a 4, 4S or 5. Unless they are completely out of the version you have (which hasn't seemed to happen so far), you get the one that you bought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by drobforever View Post

I don't like this kind of 6-month cycles at all. Makes customers delay purchases and hurt resale values, which in turns cheapen the brand. Hope it's not happening. 

I don't see how it changes that. In fact, it might actually reduce the waiting.

Right now, there are major jumps from one version to the next (no matter what the iHaters say). When the next version is going to be MUCH better than the earlier version, it might make sense to wait. If you go to 6 month cycles, the change from one version to the next will be smaller, so there's not as much incentive to wait.

In addition, let's say you're convinced that you want to wait for the next version for some reason. WIth the current cycle, you might be waiting as much as 11 months. With a twice-a-year cycle, you wouldn't wait longer than 6 months.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I have no idea of the reasoning here.

The reasoning is obviously that the technology is improving fast enough that it's possible to do mid-year upgrades that would interest some people enough to spur sales.

In addition, it doesn't put them (as much) in the position where a competitor releases a new product 6-9 months after the last iPad/iPhone revision - and Apple appears to have fallen behind simply because of the advance in technology.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #50 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Seems too big to me but if the Galaxy Note seems quite popular in many cultures.
PS: didn't run the numbers for the 3:2 960x640 version but it would be a little smaller. I assume Apple will be deprecating the older aspect ratio.

I know this is just anecdotal evidence, but I was in a room full of 50 or so young low wage earners. One guy had just bought a new Galaxy Note, and was showing it off. Everybody who commented said it was ridiculous and just too big. The guy was wearing gym clothes and had no pocket it would fit into.

I personally don't know why the Galaxy Note is so popular, unless it replaces laptops and tablets for the low-wage owner who can't afford both. The trade-offs as a mobile device are just too significant. If anything a mobile phone should be getting smaller, not larger. If I had to guess, the Note-sized phones are a fad based on economies of scale -- thanks to Apple there was a dearth of 3.5" screens so Samsung and others went with larger cheaper screens. I mean a larger smartphone screen seems great (especially when it costs less than a smaller screen) until you start using it in the field.

As for getting rid of 3:2 ar, I can't imagine why. That's merely a template for respective apps. It does not compromise the experience at all, nor does it make a significant deterrent to developers. A few extra lines of code and extra image resources. The iOS does most of the heavy lifting. The reality is, 3:2 is going to be around for at least another 18 months, and 2 more anual iOS updates. If it's supported that long it shouldn't be a big deal to just keep it around.

I am hoping that Apple continues to offer an iPhone 4/S sized phone, and perhaps slightly smaller (the case, not the screen). A compromised budget version ($250-300 unlocked), and a minimally compromised version compared to the 4" flagship. The reality is, if Apple really wanted to, they could shrink the home button and shrink the top and bottom bezels to make the 4" screen fit in the 4/S case. At some point Apple will most likely change the home button which is starting to get a little long in the tooth anyway. There are likely far better ways to implement it, just like the click wheel eventually went away and seems dated today, and it holds them back in terms of design.
post #51 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

Customers delay purchases now, waiting for the next model. Resale value isn't Apple's concern, and it ought not be. None of these things lead to cheapening the brand as long as they maintain the quality of the brand. What would cheapen the brand is a "cheap" iPhone to sell in "developing markets".

 

I don't think the average consumer delays a purchase, waiting for the next model - unless the window is very short and there is considerable buzz about it in the main stream media already.  It's different for us, we're talking about this on an Apple rumors site, so we see the leaks and see Gene Munster's "take" everyday.  We know more about what's coming than the average person.

 

Your average consumer thinks "I have $500 +, I want an iPad, I'm going to go buy it."

 

I say this because most of my co-workers do this.  My in-laws do this.  My friends do this.  My mom doesn't, because she's learned by now to ask me first. :-)

post #52 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post


I know this is just anecdotal evidence, but I was in a room full of 50 or so young low wage earners. One guy had just bought a new Galaxy Note, and was showing it off. Everybody who commented said it was ridiculous and just too big. The guy was wearing gym clothes and had no pocket it would fit into.

I personally don't know why the Galaxy Note is so popular, unless it replaces laptops and tablets for the low-wage owner who can't afford both. The trade-offs as a mobile device are just too significant. If anything a mobile phone should be getting smaller, not larger. If I had to guess, the Note-sized phones are a fad based on economies of scale -- thanks to Apple there was a dearth of 3.5" screens so Samsung and others went with larger cheaper screens. I mean a larger smartphone screen seems great (especially when it costs less than a smaller screen) until you start using it in the field.

 

 

I have a friend who bought the Note.  His reason was he didn't have much cash but wanted a phone and a tablet - so the Note is close enough to both (for him).  It's dreadful in my opinion; for myself, 4" is the max I need, my iP5 is perfect.  

post #53 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

If they follow their iPad mini pattern a larger iPhone-like* device would have a 4.904" display. That would allow them to use the 264 PPI display panels already utilized in the iPad (4) whilst maintaining the same resolution of the iPhone 5.



* Uses the same iPhone and iPod Touch apps in the same way the iPad and iPad mini use the same apps.

Thanks for making this calculation. I've also been wondering if they could do a more iPad-like aspect ratio on a larger phone. A five-inch phone pad, in other words.

No one would mistake it for a down-market device, or a concession to Samsung. Except here, of course—there would endless howls of derision until this PhonePad came out, sold in the millions, and shut everybody up.
post #54 of 256
I can't believe people aren't questioning this rumor. This guys "checks" at CES tell him we're getting updated iPads in March. What "checks" would these be? The same checks that have told these guys Apple is releasing a cheaper iPhone? Or a big screen TV?
post #55 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

The Retina Mini will be price $100 higher than the current Mini so there won't be any buyer's remorse.

 

It may be priced higher, but that's not why Apple would do it. They don't operate this way.

Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #56 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf View Post

I have a friend who bought the Note.  His reason was he didn't have much cash but wanted a phone and a tablet - so the Note is close enough to both (for him).  It's dreadful in my opinion; for myself, 4" is the max I need, my iP5 is perfect.  
Again anecdotal, but this makes sense to me as a reasonable explanation.

Apple could do worse than creating an iPad nano between the 4" iPhone and the 8" iPad mini. Maybe even that's where the iPod Touch evolves ... Getting bigger with 4G LTE. Apple saves face as it's a tablet, not a phone. Then as the device takes off with folks skirting the phone issue with Skype and Google voice, Apple adds full featured calling to it to placate their cellular partners ...
post #57 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I'm not sure of these rumours at all.

Does it really make sense to bring out a new version of a product when the previous version still has six months left on the warranty? Customers with a defective product that has to be replaced will end up with the next generation of the product for free.

Seems weird to me.

 

 

When you give Apple a iPad that is defective, which is a very low percentage rate (under five percent), it does not give you a "new" iPad most of the time. NOr is it required to.  Instead, it gives you a refurbished one or "new" stock if your model is discontinued and it doesn't have refurbished ones on hand. It then either repairs yours or uses the parts to handle other iPads needing warranty exchanges. 

post #58 of 256

I think Apple will upgrade the iPad line quicker than once a year. March would be an odd time though because it doesn't usually release a new version of iOS until later. 

post #59 of 256

When Apple stopped numbering the iPad it should have been obvious they would upgraded on a more frequent basis. I have little doubt Apple intends to give the iPad the form factor much closer to the mini overall. Likewise obvious observation was the lack of a retina display on the mini. It certainly could happen in March, and Apple can't have everything launching in just the fall, but if it's going to I would be looking for the rumor articles about 'production drawdowns' soon as the clue. 

 

Also for everyone else, Apple doesn't care about 90% of the stuff that's been mentioned (waiting, warranty, resale..etc)

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 #60 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Given the source, I'm very skeptical, but some of the arguments being used against the rumor don't make sense.
Only because you don't understand how Apple's warranty exchange works.

Let's say you have a 3GS that fails and is still covered by AppleCare, so you take it to your Apple Store. They replace it with another 3GS, not a 4, 4S or 5. Unless they are completely out of the version you have (which hasn't seemed to happen so far), you get the one that you bought.
I don't see how it changes that. In fact, it might actually reduce the waiting.

Right now, there are major jumps from one version to the next (no matter what the iHaters say). When the next version is going to be MUCH better than the earlier version, it might make sense to wait. If you go to 6 month cycles, the change from one version to the next will be smaller, so there's not as much incentive to wait.

In addition, let's say you're convinced that you want to wait for the next version for some reason. WIth the current cycle, you might be waiting as much as 11 months. With a twice-a-year cycle, you wouldn't wait longer than 6 months.
The reasoning is obviously that the technology is improving fast enough that it's possible to do mid-year upgrades that would interest some people enough to spur sales.

In addition, it doesn't put them (as much) in the position where a competitor releases a new product 6-9 months after the last iPad/iPhone revision - and Apple appears to have fallen behind simply because of the advance in technology.

I doubt there's really anything solid behind this rumor. But if it does prove correct I personally think it will be because Apple has nothing else in the pipeline ready and they don't want to go 6 months with no product updates.
post #61 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf View Post

 

I don't think the average consumer delays a purchase, waiting for the next model - unless the window is very short and there is considerable buzz about it in the main stream media already.  It's different for us, we're talking about this on an Apple rumors site, so we see the leaks and see Gene Munster's "take" everyday.  We know more about what's coming than the average person.

 

Your average consumer thinks "I have $500 +, I want an iPad, I'm going to go buy it."

 

I say this because most of my co-workers do this.  My in-laws do this.  My friends do this.  My mom doesn't, because she's learned by now to ask me first. :-)

 

The "average consumer" may not do it as far out as people reading this site, but I do know people who don't read sites like this and have either done it, or reluctantly bought at the time they did because they, "had to," knowing that a new model would be out soon. Apple's sales numbers approaching new releases also indicate that this happens, as does the flood of pent up demand following a new release. 

post #62 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

 

If Apple goes to faster release cycles, they get criticized for "obsoleting" products too quickly. If they only release once a year, they get criticized for going too long between updates. I don't see that they need to be slaves to the calendar. If they can release a new product with significant enhancements, they should do so when they are ready to do it.

 

I tend to agree but there is still some significant "downside" to this move IMO.  

 

I don't agree that it will make folks hold off from buying, but Apple's hallmark has always been the integration of software and hardware on their products.  Considering that they have major software packages that often go *years* without any significant update, updating the hardware every 6 months seems weird to me.  

 

Personally, I'm already kind of upset that I have bought three major revisions of the iPad hardware since the Pages Word Processing software has been updated (or even finished), in any significant way.  If it was six iPad revisions, i'd be really quite pissed off, and I tend to be less angsty or angry about this kind of stuff than a lot of folks I know. 

 

It seems to me that a six month upgrade cycle *will* increase the complaints from the customers at least.  

post #63 of 256
Can someone explain how Apple couldn't do a retina mini in October but bam come March they'll have no problem doing it? And same question with the full size iPad getting the mini's form factor.
post #64 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Can someone explain how Apple couldn't do a retina mini in October but bam come March they'll have no problem doing it? And same question with the full size iPad getting the mini's form factor.

Maybe no one has explained it to you, but technology changes over time. What was impossible 6 months ago might be possible today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

When Apple stopped numbering the iPad it should have been obvious they would upgraded on a more frequent basis.

I don't see how that follows. For a rapidly changing product, a numbering system is the only way to keep track of it. That's why you have OS X 10.8.3 and so on. For a product which changes only once a year, you can keep track of it with the year designation (MacBook Pro early 2009, for example). Keeping track of a rapidly changing product without numbers sounds like a recipe for disaster.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #65 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

It seems to me that a six month upgrade cycle *will* increase the complaints from the customers at least.  
I'm sure Apple is getting feedback (or their market research is telling them) that consumers prefer the mini's design and weight. I don't doubt Apple wants to get a new full size iPad out there that's thin and light like the mini as soon as they can. But if they get in the habit of upgrading hardware more frequently these announcements are going to become a big 'meh' to people. I mean did anyone really get excited about the 4th gen iPad? I mean unless the have something really cool on the software side to accompany it who gets excited about internals being updated? 1hmm.gif
post #66 of 256
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post
I don't see how that follows. For a rapidly changing product, a numbering system is the only way to keep track of it. That's why you have OS X 10.8.3 and so on. For a product which changes only once a year, you can keep track of it with the year designation (MacBook Pro early 2009, for example). Keeping track of a rapidly changing product without numbers sounds like a recipe for disaster.

 

The laptops used to be updated exactly as often as the iPad is becoming. Never had any numbers. Works perfectly fine.

 

ALL PRODUCTS can be handled perfectly well without artificial numbering. 

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 #67 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Can someone explain how Apple couldn't do a retina mini in October but bam come March they'll have no problem doing it? And same question with the full size iPad getting the mini's form factor.

 

They could have done a retina mini in October, but the resulting device wouldn't have met their design goals in time to ship it, including price, component yields, battery life, weight, size, etc. The design of the iPad mini was clearly finalized some time before it was released, and the team working on the next rev may have started (probably did start) work even before that. Technology moves fast these days, and they'll have been working on it a lot longer than 4-5 months by March.

post #68 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The laptops used to be updated exactly as often as the iPad is becoming.

Good point.

"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 #69 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by drobforever View Post

I don't like this kind of 6-month cycles at all. Makes customers delay purchases and hurt resale values, which in turns cheapen the brand. Hope it's not happening. 


I agree and disagree. I more disagree. You might end up delaying a full year, passing on current gen. I think we will get used to regular updates. Because stuff might not sell that well for the quarter preceding an annual model. That's 3 months of lost savings.

 

I bet a lot of the updates will not be that big if it is semi-annual.

 

Now, a thinner iPad and a retina mini is a big update.

 

Other updates woudl be faster processors, and maybe little better screens (with same technology). That's probably what it is.

 

P

post #70 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Or this rumor is bunk and you'll get the iPad 5 with A7X and Case redesign in the fall.

 

Sorry, but just a redesign would be a pretty lame upgrade- it'd look awesome, dont get me wrong.  But they would have to bring something else to the table you would think.  Already an HD facetime and 5MP back camera- where to go from there?  

If we get a Spring upgrade all I expect is a case redesign. The new chips for the internals won't be ready till fall.

post #71 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Maybe no one has explained it to you, but technology changes over time. What was impossible 6 months ago might be possible today.
/quote]Doh! I get that. But really a retina mini and thinner and lighter iPad was not possible in October but will be possible in March? When AnandTech reviewed the mini they were skeptical about the 2nd gen being retina. Now we're going to get one 6 months after the first one? And why announce a 4th gen iPad in October if they thought they could do a thinner and lighter one come March? Is the iPad 3 really a slouch compared to the competition? Couldn't they have updated the 3rd gen with lightning connector? Or was the 4th gen all about showing off their semiconductor chops? And the 5th gen will just be a faster version of the 4th (I can't imagine iOS 7 will be ready in March).
post #72 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

When Apple stopped numbering the iPad it should have been obvious they would upgraded on a more frequent basis. 

 

Actually, when Apple stopped numbering the iPad it should have been obvious that there would be an iPad mini.  Why number the iPad at all when you have two lines: iPad, iPad Mini.  Which is why I'm sure the iPad 2 and 3 will be history when the next iPad comes out.

 

"Would you like to buy the current iPad or last gen?"

 

"Would you like to buy the current iPad Mini or last gen?"

 

Much more simple than a numbering system.  If Apple announces "the New iPhone" this summer/fall, then I'll be convinced that another model of iPhone will be released as well.

post #73 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

The reasoning is obviously that the technology is improving fast enough that it's possible to do mid-year upgrades that would interest some people enough to spur sales.

In addition, it doesn't put them (as much) in the position where a competitor releases a new product 6-9 months after the last iPad/iPhone revision - and Apple appears to have fallen behind simply because of the advance in technology.

Sure, over time, but is 6 months enough time for them to make the changes, especially with some rumours being of a retina iPad mini? If Apple can get IGZO and Rogue 6 at capacity then it might happen but let's remember that Apple's scale is so huge that we would likely see other vendors using, or at least demoing, these technologies before Apple. Were there any IGZO products at CES? Apple could go exclusive with Rogue 6 and IGZO for a spell but is that likely?

"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 #74 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by HammerofTruth View Post

I doubt that, since the Retina iPad is in that price range right now. The 4th generation iPad was more than just a slight upgrade over the 3rd as you suggest.  The A6X is twice as fast as the A5X.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

 

It may be priced higher, but that's not why Apple would do it. They don't operate this way.

 

Considering the iPad Mini only cost $70 less than the iPad 2 with the exact same specs. Shouldn't we assume a Retina Mini would cost $70 less than the Retina iPad?

 

As I said I believe Retina will be reserved for a higher end Mini.

 

Expect $429 for a Retina Mini with the current low res Mini continuing on at $329.

post #75 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


If they follow their iPad mini pattern a larger iPhone-like* device would have a 4.904" display. That would allow them to use the 264 PPI display panels already utilized in the iPad (4) whilst maintaining the same resolution of the iPhone 5.



* Uses the same iPhone and iPod Touch apps in the same way the iPad and iPad mini use the same apps.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

 

A 4.904" device with the Ive touch sounds fine to me.

 

 

This obviously isn't an iPhone discussion, but I've postulated that Apple could double the resolution of the iPhone 5, stretch it onto a 5 inch screen and have a "Super Retina" display of sorts. 2272 x 1280 pixels is still less than the Retina iPad (2.9 million versus 3.1 million) so such a device could use an A6X and be very speedy and relatively efficient.

 

How does that sound for a Super iPhone (iPhone X or Pro or whatever they would call it). But I would imagine the price would be $849 or more for the "base" model.

post #76 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

They could have done a retina mini in October, but the resulting device wouldn't have met their design goals in time to ship it, including price, component yields, battery life, weight, size, etc. The design of the iPad mini was clearly finalized some time before it was released, and the team working on the next rev may have started (probably did start) work even before that. Technology moves fast these days, and they'll have been working on it a lot longer than 4-5 months by March.
lets just say I'll believe it when I see it. I'm not sure how I feel about Apple upgrading their refresh cycles. Especially when they're not updating software that frequently. It either becomes 'meh' or pisses people off. I suppose its hard to hold back technology but if I purchased a 4th gen iPad and then 6 months later the 5th gen comes out which is thinner and lighter and has even better battery life I'd be pissed. It's not like this stuff is super cheap. And going to a faster refresh cycle would probably bring down the resale value of existing stuff.
post #77 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Maybe no one has explained it to you, but technology changes over time. What was impossible 6 months ago might be possible today.
I don't see how that follows. For a rapidly changing product, a numbering system is the only way to keep track of it. That's why you have OS X 10.8.3 and so on. For a product which changes only once a year, you can keep track of it with the year designation (MacBook Pro early 2009, for example). Keeping track of a rapidly changing product without numbers sounds like a recipe for disaster.

 

Well, notice that, for Macs, it's something like, 'MacBook Pro [Core i7 2.5 15"] Late 2011', with variations in place of "Late" that could be "Early" or "Mid", with or without the processor info. So, with their "versioning scheme" they can do up to 3 releases per year. With the iDevices, traditionally, they've used "Generations", as with the iPod (Touch). The iPhone models and iPad 2 are really the anomalies in Apple's naming scheme since Jobs' return. But, maybe that's because they planned from early on with both to sell overlapping models, where, unlike with Macs and iPods, they actually had two versions on the market at the same time, so some sort of distinctive model indicator -- e.g. iPhone 4 vs. iPhone 3Gs, iPad 2 vs. iPad (3rd Gen) -- was deemed necessary.

 

It is interesting that iPad (3rd Gen) reverted back to iPad, while the iPad 2 got and retained the version number. Maybe iPad 2 was considered a dead-end project with the real focus of development at that time being the Retina iPad (3rd Gen). Or maybe it was developed alongside the original iPad, but just wasn't ready to go.

post #78 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

The laptops used to be updated exactly as often as the iPad is becoming. Never had any numbers. Works perfectly fine.

 

ALL PRODUCTS can be handled perfectly well without artificial numbering. 

Nailed it. 

 

It allows for more 'minor' updates as necessary.

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 #79 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


I'm all for a quicker iPhone update... but not in the traditional sense. If Apple had three different screen sizes... 3.5, 4, and say 4.5, then update each once a year but at different times.

 

... but the iPad... really?! What is there about the iPad that could make such a significant difference at this time of year? There just doesn't seem to be anything gained imo.

 

 

The reason is simple, people saw the mini design are many are delaying the purchase of the 10" ipad to the new design.  They have to release it.  I think the mini will only see incremental upgrades, like the A6.

 

I expect the IGZO screens and the retina mini to come in fall.  So in a sense they are doing 1 big upgrade on 1 ipad model per year while the other one gets just a few internals upgrade.

 

They absolutly must keep a shorter refresh cycle and above all break the pretictable upgrade patterns to avoid the major dried out of sales ahead of the refresh. They need to find a way to keep sales more constant all year long and dodge the the impossible to meet demand after expected launches.

post #80 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


lets just say I'll believe it when I see it. I'm not sure how I feel about Apple upgrading their refresh cycles. Especially when they're not updating software that frequently. It either becomes 'meh' or pisses people off. I suppose its hard to hold back technology but if I purchased a 4th gen iPad and then 6 months later the 5th gen comes out which is thinner and lighter and has even better battery life I'd be pissed. It's not like this stuff is super cheap. And going to a faster refresh cycle would probably bring down the resale value of existing stuff.

 

As I said earlier, I doubt very much that Apple considers, "the resale value of existing stuff," when deciding if and when they are ready to release a new product, nor should they. It's also a ridiculous expectation that they should artificially delay products so that people who bought the previous version can feel properly smug for a good 9-12 months. It's not like purchasing a product comes with some sort of entitlement that no one will have anything better for at least 12 months. They should release new versions when they have something significantly better to offer. You should buy what you need, when you need it. And by doing more frequent releases, Apple would be giving you the best possible value for your money at any given time.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumor: Fifth-gen iPad, second-gen iPad mini to debut in March