or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple launches new high-capacity 128GB Retina display iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple launches new high-capacity 128GB Retina display iPad - Page 6

post #201 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

Like most people, I don't really care about "the Classic."  I see it as the device choice of insufferable snobs for the most part.  

 

I think the last part of your statement about how long it would take for 128GB to move to the iPhone and iPod is likely incorrect however.  The fact that they can do this storage upgrade "mid-stream" as it were, without a redesign of the device, indicates to me that its a simple chip swap and that the two parts are of identical size.  

 

If they can simply swap out the chips for a larger capacity chip of the exact same size, then it could literally happen overnight.  The fact that this move would do a great deal to improve their gross margins, (exactly the problem in their last financial report), means also that they might be very motivated to do so. 

I'm not sure how my wanting to have access to my complete music library whilst travelling in places with little or no Wifi, or without having to pay hefty roaming charges for the privilege, makes me an insufferable snob.

I agree with you that it won't take long before the iPod Touch and the iPhone get the same capacity bump, and I'm guessing the iPad Mini will too. This announcement has delayed my upgrade from iPod Touch to iPad Mini and made the planned replacement of my almost full 120GB Classic to a 160GB model more compelling.

post #202 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

Good to see that Apple has finally seen fit to offer more capacity for those who simply must carry a bunch of HD movies, insane numbers of photos, more apps than they'll likely ever even use, or entire music collections with them almost everywhere.

Crazy that a 128gb Wifi+Cellular version will end up near US 1000.00 after sales tax, making a MacBook Air a seemingly much better/smarter purchase.
Yet... Apple's still chagring an additional US 100.00 for + 16gb, +32gb and + 64gb - What?

 

Well, yes. Apple is wanting people to make that comparison with Microsoft Surface Pro. Other than screen res, it's mostly a poorer spec than any decent Ultrabook including the MBA. And it has a floppy keyboard, meaning you must deploy a kickstand to use it, so they’ve invented a laptop you can’t use on your lap.

 

Others are tying this launch with the Surface Pro launch as if they are competing products. I don’t think so. What Apple really ought to do is set up a product compare page that puts the iPad side by side with the MBA. Anyone comparing the Surface with iPad would immediately see that and be directed to the rather obvious question: why am I buying this, not a notebook that’s thinner and lighter, and has a proper keyboard?

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #203 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

This is basic economics. You have so many items to sell within a range and you divvy up your product to maximize sales. The low-end end brings in less profit than desired but you make it up at the high-end. The end result is the product has an overall desired effect so long as the high-end isn't too far away from or too close to the low end to get too many going to the top tier or too few.

 

No one is disputing any of that. What many of us ARE saying is that the spread is too wide and puts too much of the profit burden on those who want higher capacity.

 

The bottom line is that a $300 hit for a few GB of flash is not a good value proposition for the consumer. I'm sure Apple is perfectly happy with the arrangement and I'm sure they've carefully calculated the best way to maximize their sales and profits. None of that matters to ME as the buyer though. I'm not purchasing a range of products, I'm buying ONE device, and if I want one with lots of storage from Apple, I have to subsidize everyone who bought a low-capacity version. While that might be fine for Apple, it sucks out loud for anyone buying anything other than the most basic entry-level model.

post #204 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephenbw View Post

I'm not sure how my wanting to have access to my complete music library whilst travelling in places with little or no Wifi, or without having to pay hefty roaming charges for the privilege, makes me an insufferable snob.

Outside of an event DJ or similar professional requirements, I question the need to have one's entire music library on hand when on the go. Maybe you want them all, but I don't see it as necessary and have long ago abandoned the concept. On my iPhone, I have 11GB set aside for music, and that gives 125 hours without a single repeat. On every sync, smart playlists change out tracks that have been played with less played tracks, so it feels bottomless without having to spend more on mobile storage or carry an extra device. For the more favorite tracks, I have them in smart playlists with higher priority sync rotation so they stay longer.
post #205 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

I have to subsidize everyone who bought a low-capacity version.

But you're not. You need to consider that there might be any viable market if all they sold is a high capacity model. How many people would buy the iPad if it was only at 128GB? Remember that that economies of scale will bring down the cost of all of those components until a certain threshold is met and then the cost of manufacture ring the device can nearly infinitely reduced so long as you can reuse the same the assembly over again. How much is your 128GB iPad if there are no 64GB, 32GB or 16GB models in the mix? I bet that Retina display costs a lot more than the cost of NAND people are complaining about. Bottom line: You can't have it both ways.

"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 #206 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

If you mean ASP then I agree.  $499 probably gets them the margins they want but not the ASPs.  Moving the base iPad to 32GB has a negative effect on ASPs because 16GB is simply too small for today where games and textbooks weigh in at 2GB+ a shot.   32GB is reasonable enough that a lot of folks won't spring for a $599 64GB model.

$499 is the best value followed by $699.  I bought the $599 one (actually the $729 verizon one).

1) Yes, I mean ASP.

2) I keep buying the high-end model and I never utilize its high capacity. I'll probably buy the 128GB model next time by telling myself "Now that I am replacing my MBP with an iMac I will need to put more data on my iPad." But that's not completely true as I'm not getting rid of my MBP.

"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 #207 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

 

No one is disputing any of that. What many of us ARE saying is that the spread is too wide and puts too much of the profit burden on those who want higher capacity.

 

The bottom line is that a $300 hit for a few GB of flash is not a good value proposition for the consumer. I'm sure Apple is perfectly happy with the arrangement and I'm sure they've carefully calculated the best way to maximize their sales and profits. None of that matters to ME as the buyer though. I'm not purchasing a range of products, I'm buying ONE device, and if I want one with lots of storage from Apple, I have to subsidize everyone who bought a low-capacity version. While that might be fine for Apple, it sucks out loud for anyone buying anything other than the most basic entry-level model.

 

So don't.  What some folks count as a negative (that all models have the same CPU/GPU) I count as a huge positive.  16GB is a bit tight if you game because the apps are large but from a media perspective it's not a limitation since I can get an external drive to share among my ipads and iphones.

 

I really don't want 4 copies of Brave, Tangled, Cars 2, Kung Fu Panda, etc on my iOS and Android devices nor do I want them sitting on the device we didn't bring.

 

The seagate wireless plus 1TB with USB 3 support, 10 hour battery for $199 looks to be awesome.  

 

http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Wireless-Built-In-Streaming-STCK1000100/dp/B00AQRUW4Q

 

/shrug

 

I feel this is the same sort of thing when folks complain about iOS devices not having removable batteries.  I carry one external battery pack as reserve power for all my various iOS and Android devices since it charges anything with USB.

post #208 of 240
Nexus 10 is $100 for doubling to 32GB from 16GB. Kindle Fire HD 8.9" is $70 for doubling to 32GB from 16GB. Apple sure are awful for giving buyers the option to double their capacity to 128GB from 64GB for $100.

"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 #209 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Nexus 10 is $100 for doubling to 32GB from 16GB. Kindle Fire HD 8.9" is $70 for doubling to 32GB from 16GB. Apple sure are awful for giving buyers the option to double their capacity to 128GB from 64GB for $100.

Indeed. I cannot understand all the whining on this. People want to put a 64GB SD Card in it. Apple creates an even better solution; adding 64GB 9for a mere $100 but that might be too much for some) and it doesn't even have the bothersome SD Card slot. No dirt, nothing to break, nothing to lose.

People might be forgetting this latches can easily break


Oh, and this, in case you missed it yesterday
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2013/01/29Apple-Increases-iPad-with-Retina-Display-to-128GB.html
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
post #210 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

[...] You need to consider that there might be any viable market if all they sold is a high capacity model. How many people would buy the iPad if it was only at 128GB?

 

I didn't say eliminate the lower capacity models. I said reduce the spread and/or even out the profit margin. Why would you or anyone oppose that approach?

post #211 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

I didn't say eliminate the lower capacity models. I said reduce the spread and/or even out the profit margin. Why would you or anyone oppose that approach?

Why don't you tell us why Apple would oppose that approach? What spread between capacity changes do you envision?

"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 #212 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Why don't you tell us why Apple would oppose that approach?

 

I can't imagine why they would, unless buyers of higher capacity models really are subsidizing the base model so that Apple can advertise a lower "starting at..." price. If that's actually what's happening, and we have no way of knowing whether it is or isn't, it's just your "might be" explanation for the huge price spread from bottom to top capacity, one COULD argue that it puts Apple in the same category as the car companies that offer a base model at a very attractive price but then make you pay through the nose if you want "luxuries" like upholstery on the seats. Apologists call it an "option" and argue that you don't HAVE to pay it. Consumers call it "deceptive" because the base model is only just barely adequate for the least demanding user and the price of getting it to the point a typical user would actually want is much higher than the value of the upgrade.

 

If that's NOT what Apple is doing, then $100 per upgrade is gouging (with the exception of the final step from 64 to 128, which is at least within the realm of reason).

 

Either way, it *SEEMS* like a middle finger in the air to anyone looking for anything above the base model.

 

 

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

[...] What spread between capacity changes do you envision?

 

Proportional to the increase at no more than double what alternatives like SD cards cost on the street (which I seem to recall being the breaking point for consumer tolerance).

 

16-32: As little as $25 if they're feeling generous, as much as $40 if they're not.

32-64: $50-$75

64-128: $100-$150

 

 

post #213 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

I can't imagine why they would…

And yet you stated "I didn't say eliminate the lower capacity models. I said reduce the spread and/or even out the profit margin. Why would you or anyone oppose that approach?" Or did you mean the customer getting to decide how much a vendor's products should cost. In that case I want Apple to give me anything I want. Why would you or anyone oppose that approach?
Quote:
Apologists call it an "option" and argue that you don't HAVE to pay it. Consumers call it "deceptive" because the base model is only just barely adequate for the least demanding user and the price of getting it to the point a typical user would actually want is much higher than the value of the upgrade.

You and few other entitled people call it deceptive. The average person understands commerce in a free market.
Quote:
Proportional to the increase at no more than double what alternatives like SD cards cost on the street (which I seem to recall being the breaking point for consumer tolerance).

16-32: As little as $25 if they're feeling generous, as much as $40 if they're not.
32-64: $50-$75
64-128: $100-$150

Fine, lets examine this scenario to make you ideal "fair and balanced" from your stated PoV:
  • $624 — 16GB
  • $649 — 32GB
  • $699 — 64GB
  • $799 — 128GB

Based on your well thought out criteria you now have 1) a starting price that is $125 more than it is currently which loses a great man potential customers that help bring the cost of the high-end models down by economies of scale, and 2) have the difference between the 16 and 64GB so close to get that the 16 and 32GB models probably won't sell well at all thus making them stock they can't easily move unless they drop the price even more which then goes against your stated ideal..

Oh, you meant that it should all scale but still starting at $499 for the 16GB model which means that that the ASP and profit margin is well below what want and, again, they will have to lower the price on the lower-end models but the upsell to doubling the capacity is so inexpensive which, again, goes against your stated ideal.

PS: An SD card is not the same as on-board NAND and I can't believe that you'd even use that as a measure of what the price difference should be.

PPS: Care to explain why you're fine with Google, Amazon and everyone else isn't following what you think is a great idea?

"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 #214 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

PS: An SD card is not the same as on-board NAND and I can't believe that you'd even use that as a measure of what the price difference should be.

 

Not true. A decent Class 10 SD card is, in my experience, superior to the on-board flash storage used in handheld devices.

post #215 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Fine, lets examine this scenario to make you ideal "fair and balanced" from your stated PoV: [...]

 

I don't know how you're coming up with the starting price going up by $125, but it's probably no less valid than my imaginary numbers and it's a purely hypothetical argument anyway so why not.

 

I don't think it would play out quite the way you describe, but there doesn't seem to be much point debating it any further because we seem firmly entrenched in opposing positions on a fundamental issue: that Apple should expect to realize +40% gross margins. I think that's excessive and unrealistic in the medium-term, but it's hard to argue when they sell every unit they make.

 

The REASON I oppose it is that when people vote with their wallets by refusing to buy things that they perceive as too expensive, Apple doesn't lower the price, they discontinue the item. Now everyone who thought the 17" MacBook Pro was a good idea but overpriced is screwed.

post #216 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

Not true. A decent Class 10 SD card is, in my experience, superior to the on-board flash storage used in handheld devices.

1) You know that Class 10 refers to 10MB/s, right? Well here is the 2 year old iPhone 4S from AnandTech's testing…




2) What method did you use to test the differences between on-board NAND and SD NAND performance?

"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 #217 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

I don't know how you're coming up with the starting price going up by $125, but it's probably no less valid than my imaginary numbers and it's a purely hypothetical argument anyway so why not.

I don't think it would play out quite the way you describe, but there doesn't seem to be much point debating it any further because we seem firmly entrenched in opposing positions on a fundamental issue: that Apple should expect to realize +40% gross margins. I think that's excessive and unrealistic in the medium-term, but it's hard to argue when they sell every unit they make.

The REASON I oppose it is that when people vote with their wallets by refusing to buy things that they perceive as too expensive, Apple doesn't lower the price, they discontinue the item. Now everyone who thought the 17" MacBook Pro was a good idea but overpriced is screwed.

I started with the premise that Apple is a for-profit company in a free market which means they get to decide what price points they want to offer based on the markets they serve. I think considered the appeal of their products and how even months later they can't keep their product in stock.

That means they can take a 40% gross profit margin on HW and their customers are fine with it. They are lower than what people originally imagined, with the iPhone the carrier eats an extra $100 to get keep an iPhone user, and heir competitors in the tablet market can't make a comparable product for the same price.

Because of all these factors I started with the high price instead of the low price. Partly because it's a way for Apple to maintain the initial profit margin but also to show you how your comments are biased and false because you've assumed that $499 is some magical price that affords them the same profit and profit margin for the entire tablet category when they base their goals on the entire category.

You also haven't addressed why it's fine for Amazon to charge $70 and for Google charges $100 for 16GB when you except Apple to sell you a 32GB iPad for $25 more than the 16GB model.

"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 #218 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post

 When you unit fails, it's gone bye-bye for at least two weeks. With SD, I'm running again in 5 minutes.

1) How is SD faster than the on-board NAND Apple uses?

2) When have you ever had on-board NAND fail in an Apple device?

3) Are you then using the SD card to also boot the OS in the scenario? 1confused.gif

"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 #219 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

1) You know that Class 10 refers to 10MB/s, right? Well here is the 2 year old iPhone 4S from AnandTech's testing…

Just a side note, the class number is supposed to be a minimum sustained figure, it doesn't necessarily give the actual or maximum performance. It's mainly important because some uses, such as cameras, can't tolerate being shorted bandwidth.
post #220 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Just a side note, the class number is supposed to be a minimum sustained figure, it doesn't necessarily give the actual or maximum performance. It's mainly important because some uses, such as cameras, can't tolerate being shorted bandwidth.

But in this case doesn't that mean the same thing as since it's all about the best sustainable speeds?

"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 #221 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post

 When you unit fails, it's gone bye-bye for at least two weeks. With SD, I'm running again in 5 minutes.

 

I'm sorry, when the hell does that happen? I've owned 3 generations of Macbook Air, every iPhone since the original, 3 generations of the iPad, the iPad mini, and God knows how many other devices from other companies with NAND and not ONCE had I had anything fail. Yes, I'm sure it happens one in a million times, but do you really want to use that insanely niche situation as an argument, as if people are struggling with this issue everyday? The downsides of an external slot, which have to do with added complexity and management of storage between the internal device and SD, not to mention syncing issues, etc far outweigh this insanely rare scenario you speak of. I can't believe people are still going on about external storage now, it was fine in 2007, but now, after the consumer market has shown that it doesn't give 2 shits about an SD slot on mobile devices, when Apple has sold hundreds of millions of devices without them and dominated their respective markets, and when pretty much every flagship device by every company lacks such a slot? Come on.

 

Also, how the **** will SD help you if your internal NAND dies?  Did you think that through that you made that asinine argument? How will your device boot? 

 

Same old story of tech geeks wanting Apple to go down a path that benefits only a few while making things more complex for the vast majority. That's always been against Apple modus operandi, and always will be. You can foam at the mouth at removal of the optical drive, nono-removable batteries, etc. Its all the same. The 'what if' scenarios don't outweigh the other overall benefits. 

post #222 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

But in this case doesn't that mean the same thing as since it's all about the best sustainable speeds?

Minimum sustained speed.
post #223 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


1) You know that Class 10 refers to 10MB/s, right? Well here is the 2 year old iPhone 4S from AnandTech's testing…


2) What method did you use to test the differences between on-board NAND and SD NAND performance?

 

The Samsung class 10 16GB was measured at 16.3MB/s jpeg and 16.9MB/s raw in a D800.  Most Class 10s appear to be in the 12-15MB/s range.

 

The best SD cards clock in 38MB/s range.

 

I bought this one for $80 off Amazon:

 

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Extreme-Pro-SDHC-SDSDXP1-032G/dp/B004JJQN8G

 

Methodology is in here:

 

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/camera_wb_multi_page.asp?cid=6007-12451

 

These are the max sustained rates.  

 

As noted a Class 10 card is supposed to do at least 10 MB/s but can and do go faster.  Note that the times here include processing time and are only relevant for the D800.  Given that the CF cards run faster the times for the SD cards is probably pretty close to what they can do and speed isn't being limited by the camera.

 

This may not strictly be true given that the Canon reportedly screwed up their SD card slot design or firmware or both and have slow SD card speeds in the 5D Mk III but very good CF speeds.

post #224 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Minimum sustained speed.

So speeds aren't sustainable at 8MB/s since the minimum is 10MB's? See what I'm getting it. The Class of the SD is in relation to the device it's designed for. You use Class 10 when the device requires a minimum of 10MB/s but a Class 10 SD card is sustainable at lower speeds than 10MB/s if the device it's used in is slower.

"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 #225 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

The Samsung class 10 16GB was measured at 16.3MB/s jpeg and 16.9MB/s raw in a D800.  Most Class 10s appear to be in the 12-15MB/s range.

The best SD cards clock in 38MB/s range.

Are these speeds the maximum sustainable or simply the maximum possible? AnandTech only tested the maximum sustainable.

While I'm sure Class 10 cards can do better than 10MB/s I have a hard believing they are over 20MB/s.

"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 #226 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


Outside of an event DJ or similar professional requirements, I question the need to have one's entire music library on hand when on the go. Maybe you want them all, but I don't see it as necessary and have long ago abandoned the concept. On my iPhone, I have 11GB set aside for music, and that gives 125 hours without a single repeat. On every sync, smart playlists change out tracks that have been played with less played tracks, so it feels bottomless without having to spend more on mobile storage or carry an extra device. For the more favorite tracks, I have them in smart playlists with higher priority sync rotation so they stay longer.

It isn't actually necessary to have any music when on the go, but it is desirable. For you a choice from 125 hours is sufficient, for me it isn't, and I don't understand why anyone would question what I feel is sufficient for me. I have no need of an iPhone; you obviously do, but I don't question that.
I go on a number of holidays each year, sometimes for three or four weeks at a time and I really don't see the point in leaving most of my music at home for up to 3 months every year. 

post #227 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxMacCary View Post


Because I expect iPad 5 [let's just call it that, OK?]

You wanna start a war with TS on Apple Naming?

BTW, I wonder when they will announce iPhone 5?

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #228 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxMacCary View Post


Now of course, I'll lay out the $750 for an iPad 4 32GB & the picosecond I do that, Apple will send out the invites for a March event ....
Yeeeccchhh ....

You're ridiculously mistaken.

Apple will wait until your retractation delay has ended!

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #229 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipm View Post

 

Well, yes. Apple is wanting people to make that comparison with Microsoft Surface Pro. Other than screen res, it's mostly a poorer spec than any decent Ultrabook including the MBA. And it has a floppy keyboard, meaning you must deploy a kickstand to use it, so they’ve invented a laptop you can’t use on your lap.

 

Others are tying this launch with the Surface Pro launch as if they are competing products. I don’t think so. What Apple really ought to do is set up a product compare page that puts the iPad side by side with the MBA. Anyone comparing the Surface with iPad would immediately see that and be directed to the rather obvious question: why am I buying this, not a notebook that’s thinner and lighter, and has a proper keyboard?


My MBA, and one of my girl friends who just got one [because it's cute and light and much better quality than the HP she bought without asking me my opinion, foolish one!] both want to confirm this.

Also, she got the smallest capacity MBA. She's gonna regret that.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #230 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



Based on your well thought out criteria you now have 1) a starting price that is $125 more than it is currently which loses a great man potential customers that help bring the cost of the high-end models down by economies of scale, and 2) have the difference between the 16 and 64GB so close to get that the 16 and 32GB models probably won't sell well at all thus making them stock they can't easily move unless they drop the price even more which then goes against your stated ideal..
 

Let the man be... he just wants cheezburger.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #231 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephenbw View Post

I go on a number of holidays each year, sometimes for three or four weeks at a time and I really don't see the point in leaving most of my music at home for up to 3 months every year. 


You... you... _rich man_!

You must be a lawyer, or maybe a surgeon.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #232 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

The REASON I oppose it is that when people vote with their wallets by refusing to buy things that they perceive as too expensive, Apple doesn't lower the price, they discontinue the item. Now everyone who thought the 17" MacBook Pro was a good idea but overpriced is screwed.

I don't see how this could ever be a valid point.

 

Case A: User really wants item and pays whatever the company asks for it

Case B: User actually doesn't really want the item and doesn't pay. User doesn't get to complain that he did not get the item for less

 

No other case possible.

 

Also, User can buy outdated old model from hipster (I remember reading a thread here that only hipsters buy the 17'' anyway). If hipster did not sell it already to get a Surface Pro rMBP.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #233 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephenbw View Post

I go on a number of holidays each year, sometimes for three or four weeks at a time and I really don't see the point in leaving most of my music at home for up to 3 months every year. 

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post


You... you... _rich man_!

You must be a lawyer, or maybe a surgeon.

Ha ha! I wish I was, alas the truth is far more prosaic. I was made redundant, took early retirement and live off a small pension. The advantage is that I can look for bargain holidays and take them whenever I want. 4 weeks on Crete for £575 last May 1cool.gif

post #234 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCProfessor View Post

  
1) I visually can't tell a difference between my iPad 1 gen and iPad 4... and I know I can't tell the difference between a breathe of a SD10 and NAND format.

2) Funny NASA said that exact same thing about the Challenger. Between my iPad 1, iPad 4, and daughter's iPhone 5, none. But if it does fail, I know I won't be getting the data off before sunrise.

3) Nope, but I can use my trusty SD card on my 5 year old Dell laptop to access what the other OS was supposed to access.

It's customer like you that keep the other vendors racing to the bottom. If you can't see the difference between 132 and 264 PPI and the performance differences between the 1st and 4th gen iPad then I envy you but that isn't the case with most people that choose Apple's products. They can tell they are made better and work better than the competition. I still hear how Windows is just like Mac OS X, but better, at which point I'm given a bizarre example.

"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 #235 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Are these speeds the maximum sustainable or simply the maximum possible? AnandTech only tested the maximum sustainable.

While I'm sure Class 10 cards can do better than 10MB/s I have a hard believing they are over 20MB/s.

These are sustained speeds. The methodology is provided and one test is the number of continuous burst shots in a 30 sec period.

The cards that do 38 MB/s are Class 10 UHS-1 cards and rated at 45 MB/s.

Actually looking at my card I have the cheaper Extreme which is also rated at 45MB/s and is also a class 10 uhs1 card.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007M54E1M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&keywords=San%20disk%20extreme%20class%2010&qid=1359602029&s=electronics&sr=1-1

If you look in the comments you can see someone getting close to the rated speed on their mbpr using the black magic speed test.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R317X2ALSY4Q4Z/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B0070WU51U&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=

They have cards rated at 95MB/s now.

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Extreme-Class-Memory-SDSDXPA-032G-X46/dp/B005LFT3QG/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1359603330&sr=1-1&keywords=sandisk+extreme+pro

This guy is complaining he's only seeing 85MB/s sustained reads

http://www.amazon.com/review/R24SS99PGT1Q6V/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B005LFT3MA&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=
post #236 of 240

I am betting that when the iPad 5 comes out, (whenever), it will keep the four model that there are currently, (64GB-128GB) but drop them in price $100.  That way, the 32GB is now at the $499.00 price point and the 128GB is at the same price point as the 64GB is today.  In this senario, the 16GB* replaces the iPad 2 at the low end of the spectrum for full sized iPads.

 

The other possibility is the same as above, but the 16GB version is the iPad 4.

 

* Edit: I was rereading my post and noticed that I had put 64 in place of 16.


Edited by Kendog52404 - 2/1/13 at 11:30pm
post #237 of 240
I would love a 512GB but then again the cost would escalate.......just dreaming..........*slap slap*
post #238 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephenbw View Post

It isn't actually necessary to have any music when on the go, but it is desirable. For you a choice from 125 hours is sufficient, for me it isn't, and I don't understand why anyone would question what I feel is sufficient for me. I have no need of an iPhone; you obviously do, but I don't question that.

I don't need an iPhone. I have one because I like it. I'm not pining for one that holds twenty times as much because it doesn't hold my terabytes of media. My iPhone is also three years old. I don't feel a compulsion to get a new one just because.

Quote:
I go on a number of holidays each year, sometimes for three or four weeks at a time and I really don't see the point in leaving most of my music at home for up to 3 months every year.

Let me put it this way: Do you bring everything you own on your trips? You have to leave something behind no matter what, in this case, you'd be leaving something behind that you wouldn't be able to take advantage of having it anyway. During any given trip, how much of the music are you actually going to listen to? For a four week trip, are you actually going to listen to more than 200 hours of audio? And is listening to the same track twice in three weeks really so awful that you desire to take 400 hours of audio, the extra 200 hours of it you're clearly not going to listen to? With the method I described, the tracks on your audio player would be changed out when you get back home to sync, so the next vacation you would be listening to all new audio. So it's not as if the remainder of your library always sits abandoned. It just strikes me as odd that someone would think it's worth replacing a fully functional iPod to carry along 1280 hours of audio instead of "just" 960 hours of audio (160GB at approx. 256kbps). 960 hours is eight and a half weeks of continuous playback without repeats, for every waking hour. Sure, it's your money, but the justification strikes me as insanity when a simple smart playlist simulates the same thing and you'd probably never notice the difference.
Edited by JeffDM - 2/2/13 at 5:06am
post #239 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

So speeds aren't sustainable at 8MB/s since the minimum is 10MB's? See what I'm getting it. The Class of the SD is in relation to the device it's designed for. You use Class 10 when the device requires a minimum of 10MB/s but a Class 10 SD card is sustainable at lower speeds than 10MB/s if the device it's used in is slower.

You're thinking about it too hard. OK, let's try different words. For class 10, 10MB/s is a guaranteed sustained speed. Generally a card is faster than its class rating, but the card can sustain at least that write speed even in adverse writing circumstances. The class rating isn't an indication of peak speed, and it might even take a sustained speed higher than that. It's a way for a user and device to make sure the card is fast enough for the device's needs and make sure it doesn't mess up a recording because the card choked doing a bit of housekeeping along the way.
Edited by JeffDM - 2/2/13 at 5:32am
post #240 of 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


I don't need an iPhone. I have one because I like it. I'm not pining for one that holds twenty times as much because it doesn't hold my terabytes of media. My iPhone is also three years old. I don't feel a compulsion to get a new one just because.
Let me put it this way: Do you bring everything you own on your trips? You have to leave something behind no matter what, in this case, you'd be leaving something behind that you wouldn't be able to take advantage of having it anyway. During any given trip, how much of the music are you actually going to listen to? For a four week trip, are you actually going to listen to more than 200 hours of audio? And is listening to the same track twice in three weeks really so awful that you desire to take 400 hours of audio, the extra 200 hours of it you're clearly not going to listen to? With the method I described, the tracks on your audio player would be changed out when you get back home to sync, so the next vacation you would be listening to all new audio. So it's not as if the remainder of your library always sits abandoned. It just strikes me as odd that someone would think it's worth replacing a fully functional iPod to carry along 1280 hours of audio instead of "just" 960 hours of audio (160GB at approx. 256kbps). 960 hours is eight and a half weeks of continuous playback without repeats, for every waking hour. Sure, it's your money, but the justification strikes me as insanity when a simple smart playlist simulates the same thing and you'd probably never notice the difference.

I don't bring anything on my trips, but I do take as much as weight restrictions allow and a 160GB iPod is the same weight as a 120GB.

I currently have 1096 hours of music, as much of it, transferred from CD many years ago, is at 128kbps. But it isn't a question of how much of it I actually listen to on holiday, or anywhere else away from home, it's more about having access to exactly what I want to listen to.  We obviously enjoy our music libraries in very different ways; I don't want iTunes or my iPod to dictate what is available to me. If I want to hear a specific Donald Fagen album, then that's what I want to hear, or if I'm in the mood for Kate Bush, Prince, PSB or Frank Ocean, then I want every album of theirs I own available to me, no matter how often I've played them in the past. To be able to do just that for less than 10p per day strikes me as eminently sensible, and a bargain to boot. 1smile.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple launches new high-capacity 128GB Retina display iPad