Apple's next 9.7" iPad to be 'significantly lighter and slimmer' - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by simtub 

So many rumours this week...

I'd rather they kept the size and added a bigger battery to be honest. 20hour battery life would do me just fine. I'm looking to get a new iPad this year as I'm still rocking Generation 1.

But if the iPad mini goes retina then that's a sure fire buy.

Well, I've never had any complaint about the battery life of my Gen3 iPad. Sure 20 hours would be "better" on paper but if the battery life of the current iPad is sufficient for 99% of the people who use it, then why increase the weight? Is it really all that inconvenient to plug in an iPad to charge overnight if you're using it the whole day? If you only use it for a few hours a day then it could probably last you a 4-5 days before needing to be charged (similar to my wife's usage on her iPad 2). I don't want a heavier iPad because I wouldn't benefit from the additional battery life, as I suspect the vast majority of people wouldn't either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung 

Yes the iPhone 5 is outselling the Galaxy S III but lets compare the numbers for a bit. lets compare the sells of the iPhone 4 to the Galaxy S (and it varients) then lets compare the sells of the iPhone 4s and the Galaxy S II. You will see the as both phones increase in the amount of units sold...The gap is getting smaller.

would you like to post those numbers or a link?

What i'd like to see, it sales of all models by year.

Originally Posted by GrangerFX 
He needs to add the Mac Pro in Q4.

If we're left waiting until Q4, he may as well leave it off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nonimus 

Hey, where's the Mac Pro they were promising?

It's exactly where Apple says it is.

Oh wait, Apple never said anything.  Oh wait, Apple never said anything about their next lighter and slimmer iPad.

Oh wait, it's all second-hand rumors from folks gossiping in the restroom.  Right.

So who at Apple did you say promised the Mac Pro??

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oflife 

Apple's policy of simply faster thinner may not prove profitable forever. They need to innovate, as Microsoft have done so well with the Surface tablets. Else, the iPad value prop is going to fade. Exhibit A: Sales of iPhone 5 - VS - Galaxy S3.

Nobody *needs* to innovate. It's a choice. As for the Surface, what exactly is the innovation? If non-Apple tablets catch on (which they are starting to, despite denials here), it's not necessarily because iPad's value prop is fading but could be because other tablets are improving in their value prop. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkVader 


Yeah, Apple's unhealthy obsession with thin needs to go away. I'm sorry, I'd like a longer battery life and an easily removable battery MUCH more than I'd like a thinner device.
 

Then buy a thicker tablet. Apple doesn't have an obsession with thinness. When iPad3 came out with Retina Display, it was thicker out of necessity and Apple did't hesitate. Their preference (not need) for a thinner design where possible has to do with adherence to a specific design ethos. If you don't like it, just shop elsewhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkVader 

Actually, now that I think about it, Apple's PowerBook G3 series was the PERFECT form factor. Pop-out battery, media bay that could hold a second battery, lift the keyboard for hard drive access, ports on the BACK, not the side, and covered. Make it a fast core i7, put in a retina display, full complement of modern ports (2 thunderbolt, 2 firewire, 3-4 USB, HDMI, ethernet, expresscard 54) and a bigger trackpad (but keep the real button, it was better), and you'd have the perfect portable Mac. Sure, it's thick, but it's comfortably curved, no sharp edge at the front like today's machines.

Curves are no good because, when you are using a MacBook, one of you needs to have a sharp edge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung 

Yes the iPhone 5 is outselling the Galaxy S III but lets compare the numbers for a bit. lets compare the sells of the iPhone 4 to the Galaxy S (and it varients) then lets compare the sells of the iPhone 4s and the Galaxy S II. You will see the as both phones increase in the amount of units sold...The gap is getting smaller.

Indeed. Regardless of which company or phone one prefers, facing reality is important. Today, reality is that Samsung has marketed the heck of Galaxy S and their efforts are paying off. Furthermore, choice is good. There are many people who do prefer the Galaxy (or other Androids) and not necessarily because of price. There is nothing wrong with that, particularly since Apple continues to do well. Denial is futile. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrangerFX 

He needs to add the Mac Pro in Q4.

The new Mac Pro is ready but Apple is struggling with production yield. They haven't been able to mass produce the first one yet.

Originally Posted by sflocal 

So who at Apple did you say promised the Mac Pro??

Tim Cook, who specifically said there would be an update this year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by iVlad 

Is this serious. WTF? Yes and next year computers will be more powerful and faster.

You will never make it as an analyst, as you forgot thinner. : ) 

Quote:

Originally Posted by CentralParkMac 

Agreed. I expect we'll see an improved mini with retina display and a drop in the price of the existing mini. No more, no less.

Were they to shift (as has been speculated) to IGZO there'd be an upping of battery life without a change in that spec so "retina" wouldn't come at either a weight or battery life penalty.

(Come to think on it hasn't Apple been reported to have injected money into Sharp? They're the ones with the IGZO panels)

Quote:

Originally Posted by nonimus 

Hey, where's the Mac Pro they were promising?

Jeeze, it was promised "next year" in 2012, and we are only 2 1/2 weeks into 2013...

Quote:

Originally Posted by SockRolid 

 

And why are both front and back of the iPhone 5 chamfered while iPod touch is only chamfered on the front?  Because of the glass panels in the back of the iPhone 5.  Far easier to simply inset them flush, the way the front screen is inset. So it makes sense to put the same chamfering on the back.

What glass panels in the back of the iPhone 5?  It is metal all around except the front display panel.  And yes, I have one in front of me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrangerFX 

He needs to add the Mac Pro in Q4.

One comment mentioned that the new Xeon chips are not due until Q3...

I don't see Apple go to a 2x a year schedule on the iPad.  The 4th gen iPad was an anomaly to get an iPad out there with Lightning connectors.   A one year schedule allows Apple to improve yields and margins and get their money's worth out of the previous years design.  And it provides predictability to the market which keeps the customer buying, instead of waiting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 


No, the iPad 4 was released to get the A6X out there -- the iPad 3 is underpowered for a retina display of that size.

NO, the iPad 4 was released to get an iPad out there with Lightning connectors.  It would look awfully stupid to not have an iPad with Lightning connectors when your top of the line iPhone you are selling like crazy has it.  They needed a top of the line iPad to complement it for all the new iPhone users buying iPads.  

They also took the opportunity to upgrade the processor and fix various other limiting features that they could easily do.  But the major reason was the connector -- bet on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbag 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 


No, the iPad 4 was released to get the A6X out there -- the iPad 3 is underpowered for a retina display of that size.

NO, the iPad 4 was released to get an iPad out there with Lightning connectors.  It would look awfully stupid to not have an iPad with Lightning connectors when your top of the line iPhone you are selling like crazy has it.  They needed a top of the line iPad to complement it for all the new iPhone users buying iPads.  

 

They also took the opportunity to upgrade the processor and fix various other limiting features that they could easily do.  But the major reason was the connector -- bet on it.

Totally disagree... Apple could have re-released the iPad 3 with an inexpensive minor change of the Lightening connector and case back -- if that's all they wanted to do.  Rather, the iPad 3 runs hot and slow for certain CPU/GPU intensive apps. The A6X solves this problem and maintains a performance advantage over the competition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

Totally disagree... Apple could have re-released the iPad 3 with an inexpensive minor change of the Lightening connector and case back -- if that's all they wanted to do.  Rather, the iPad 3 runs hot and slow for certain CPU/GPU intensive apps. The A6X solves this problem and maintains a performance advantage over the competition.

If they had not put the Lightning connector on the iPhone 5, the 4th Gen iPad would not have been released.  Sorry, but the Lightning connector was the motivator.  Now, they took the opportunity to "fix" or enhance other things that would not require a complete rework of the device, like the A6X.  But the purpose was the Lightning connector.  This is more than obvious, it is the only answer that makes sense.  

There was no huge outcry against the 3rd Gen iPad that forced Apple to update it.  They took the opportunity since they had to have a Lightning equipped iPad.  What apple could have done to get there is immaterial.  The fact is, that the reason they did anything in the first place was the lack of a Lightning connector on the iPad line and needing one to match the iPhone 5 for new buyers of the iPhone 5 to be able to buy an iPad that did not force the old connector on them.

Originally Posted by chadbag 
If they had not put the Lightning connector on the iPhone 5, the 4th Gen iPad would not have been released.  Sorry, but the Lightning connector was the motivator.

Thanks for confirming something you don't know at all, and which just doesn't sound right on the face of it.

Enlighten us. Why.

And your reasons for them leaving the Dock Connector on the iPad 2 and the iPod classic are?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

 

Thanks for confirming something you don't know at all, and which just doesn't sound right on the face of it.

 

Enlighten us. Why.

 

 

 

And your reasons for them leaving the Dock Connector on the iPad 2 and the iPod classic are?

You are more than welcome!  And it does sound right on the face of it.   More than right.  Based on Apple's history and known MO, and plain rational thinking, it is the only logical answer.

There was no huge outcry for a new iPad.  Most people are not pushing the iPad CPU/GPU that hard at the moment anyway.  Even though I am a tech-head and iOS developer and gadget freak, I know I don't push my iPad 3 up against any walls.    They could easily have waited for their normal schedule of upgrades to come out with a new faster and more powerful retina iPad.  But it would look mighty stupid to have an iPhone with Lightning but no iPad companion for it.  And make all the new iPhone buyers who also want an iPad (non mini) buy an incompatible plug model of the iPad to go along with their brand new iPhone.   That is why.  And to make it compelling and look like a reasonable update, and because they can, they put the A6 (in A6X guise) into it and updated the camera.

Are you really this dense or do you just play it on the forums?  The iPad 2 is an existing product.  Putting Lightning on that makes no sense.  They have the large format iPad covered with Lightning with the iPad 4th gen.  iPad 2 is old technology that is being milked for all its worth at the low end (which is a perfect strategy).  And iPod Classic?  Really?  Is this a serious question?

If you look at Apple's MO, they update the product line (iOS line) once a year.  iPhone once a year.  iPad once a year (I bet we don't see an iPad mini until Fall and a large format iPad in the Spring, unless they want to align the mini with the large, which might get us a mini in the Spring, but then again not for a year).  This is smart and it pays off for Apple:  it is a lot easier to manage once a year transitions.  It is less confusing for the customer and the customer does not put of purchases wondering if a new better device is coming out (at least until they expect such a device, then they might postpone it a short while to hit the next cycle), and it allows them to realize better margins (and hence better average margins over the lifetime of a given product).  Apple is famous for keeping high margins.  Part of how they do this is to not update products all the time, but to ride the margin curve to realize a larger overall average margin.  Products are more expensive to manufacture when they first come out, and less expensive after they  have been in production for a few or many months.  Apple uses that to their advantage to make more money off a given R&D expenditure by making the product line last longer and not always being at the beginning, more expensive end of a product line, which is when it is new.    There is a reason Apple makes 3/4 or more of all profits in the mobile industry.  They work the product cycle like masters.  Those companies that come out with new phones every 6 months are always on the expensive end and never get to take advantage of the cheap end of the cycle.

Anyway, the Lightning update make the most sense on why there was a 6month update on the full size iPad when the iPhone 5 came out and I don't expect that we will see that again iOS devices.  It will be approx a year between updates of a given product.   That can vary a small amount, of course, (one year Oct, next year in Sept for example) and there can be one-off changes to the cycle (like with iPad 4 and Lightning, or when the iPhone went from Spring to Fall).  But in general I expect Apple to keep on the same MO they had been since the iPhone and iPad came out with about yearly updates to each device.  It makes the most sense from an engineering standpoint, a resource expenditure standpoint, a profit and margin standpoint, and an inventory control standpoint.

Originally Posted by chadbag 

Most people are not pushing the iPad CPU/GPU that hard at the moment anyway.

I believe Dick Applebaum's argument to be, at the very least, partially valid (and probably entirely so). I remember myself early benchmarks that intimated the same thing. So can (or have you, and I've missed it) you explain why you are ignoring his points? 

Why.

Nope. Try again. There was no "guise". There is no "make it look". A6X is an A6 with far better graphics. It's no different than variances within a single family of Intel chips, for example.

Really? That's funny. So why did it "make sense" to put Lightning on the "existing product" that was the iPad 3? Because according to you, the iPad 4 is just a gussied up iPad 3, pushed out with (and for the sole purpose of) a new connector.

Why didn't Apple update their entire computer line simultaneously when they started shipping Thunderbolt? They must have looked "really stupid" making available a laptop with the new port when you couldn't buy a desktop with the same. You can say this about any feature, you know; 802.11n, Bluetooth 4.0…

Yes, as it is not the "old product" and has no "coverage" otherwise. Every modern model of iPod received Lightning except for it. Why, if Lighting was the "only reason" for the update?

Thing about Apple is: they like to keep people guessing. I'd've said the exact same until the most recent event (in fact, I absolutely did ). Now, what with that having been a 6 month update (and a proper, full update, despite what some pretend), I don't think we can say they're still on the one-per-year cycle anymore. At least until we have more than one data point with which to play.

I'm in total agreement! I think the one-per-year strategy, in the face of their competitors churning out all the crap they possibly can every three months, is the best strategy. But again, they could very well be changing that. We can't know yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by admactanium 

Well, I've never had any complaint about the battery life of my Gen3 iPad. Sure 20 hours would be "better" on paper but if the battery life of the current iPad is sufficient for 99% of the people who use it, then why increase the weight? 

10 hours is a good round number.  It's the flight time from where I live (Maryland) to Hawaii.  10 hours can also get me pretty much anywhere in Europe...all the way to Moscow.

If I need to fly further I can bring an external battery. 12000mAh is $80 on Amazon.  If I want a battery that can charge my MBA or iPad I can get a 150Wh battery for $170.

If there's a layover then there's an outlet I can use.

Don't really care much about the date. Does anyone remember the samseg haptics rumour that spread before the iPad 3 announcement last year? Wonder where that went.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg 

Just offer a Retina iPad Mini and I'll be happy.  Until then, my Nook Color works fine as a reader.

Oh I have a Nook to, the tablet version second gen, still use it everyday. I know it's only plastic but the look and feel still puts a smile on my face, favorite 7' Android tablet. The device it's self was pretty cheap but with all the books I have bought over the last two years it's works out to be around 2,200 bucks. Do you think it's possible to sell it like that? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkVader 


Yeah, Apple's unhealthy obsession with thin needs to go away. I'm sorry, I'd like a longer battery life and an easily removable battery MUCH more than I'd like a thinner device.

And that's even more important when it comes to computers. I'd be VERY happy with a high-res display 15" laptop that's half an inch thicker than the current MBP, if it gives me a more powerful graphics chip, 4 RAM slots, an easily swappable larger battery, and maybe a swappable media bay.

Actually, now that I think about it, Apple's PowerBook G3 series was the PERFECT form factor. Pop-out battery, media bay that could hold a second battery, lift the keyboard for hard drive access, ports on the BACK, not the side, and covered. Make it a fast core i7, put in a retina display, full complement of modern ports (2 thunderbolt, 2 firewire, 3-4 USB, HDMI, ethernet, expresscard 54) and a bigger trackpad (but keep the real button, it was better), and you'd have the perfect portable Mac. Sure, it's thick, but it's comfortably curved, no sharp edge at the front like today's machines.

The Lambart Powerbook and 2400c werebmy favorite laptops of all time, I had two batteries, zip drive, Mitsubishi Magnetic and an extra HDD that all fit into the DVD rom slot. When Apple released the Titanium I skipped it and just bought a G4 500mhz upgrade card instead. I kept that thing going for almost 4 years before I finally bought the 12" Aluminium model, also a favorite.

And right on time for a March revision, the inevitable case leak.

http://************/2013/01/28/is-this-the-back-of-apples-redesigned-fifth-generation-ipad/

I know some people will be mad at this quick of an update, but Apple really has no choice. The Mini is beating its bigger sibling into a coma.

Edit: For some reason the link won't post. It's on the Macsurfer page.

Originally Posted by Frank777 

Edit: For some reason the link won't post. It's on the Macsurfer page.

The page doesn't seem to exist, itself.