Originally Posted by AppleSauce007
I believe it.
64 bit OS, Desktop class architecture?
Mapping advancements, 3D sensors, Social analytics engine?
Yep. I believe it all.
A whole new class of computing is coming.
Probably THE great scary/cool thing about the digital world is that a whole new class of computing is always coming....
...it's both incremental (e.g., the iterations of OS X) and lumpy when the accumulation of increments allows a disruptive new device class to come into being...
...but it's been constant since the first digital devices and the speed of change is increasing itself.
Originally Posted by iPilya
I am not sure I am sold on the larger size. I was very bullish on all previous iterations... but I am trying to get my head around the use cases and who the target users are. The only scenario I can see for average users is if they combine this with notebook capabilities that can morph back and forth into a tablet. For the pro market, I see it for targeted or selective markets.
It will be interesting to see what Apple has up their sleeves if this is truly a path they are taking.
Here's my shot at a business and long-term corp strategy case for such a device:
First, sales to consumers will be gravy if they take off, but the basic rationale would, I feel, come from elsewhere.
I can see many pro niche uses, e.g.: Photographers (studio and especially in the field) would find it a blessing. Directors would kill to see instant 4K playback on scene. There have to be lots of medical uses. Architects, engineers, and many (many) others. Not enough for iPad Air like sales, but with a full Apple profit margin as a pro-quality device and a decent money-maker.
And send the message even more clearly: if you're serious about tablet computing, there's iPad and then there's everything else. As they're doing with the new Mac Pro, the rMBP and the top configs of the iMac.
So an iPad Pro would be to the iPad Air what the 15" rMBP is to the MBA. Except much lighter, more portable and considerably cheaper. Depending on the screen and graphics processing cost, maybe starting somewhere between $799 and $999 (and since aimed at pros, also in considerably higher cost variants).
Tablets are already counted as computers in a growing number of major sales reports.
Apple, meanwhile, already quit worrying about cannibalizing Mac sales just by the act of bringing out the iPad. And they're not looking back because the sales multiples have made it a strong net growth driver, rather than hurting the company. Tablet computing is enough for most people most of the time.
And it follows that a pro tab will be enough for many (and eventually most) pros most of the time as well.
So just as pros tend to use rMBP's, pro tab users (and more non-pros because they'll be able to afford a wonderful gadget) enough ppl will queue up for it to make a tidy sum indeed. And keep sending out the warm fuzzies to the pro community that Tim's been strongly encouraging within the company.
Or it could be just prototypes that never see the light of a keynote. Or just a rumor. Anyway, that's my best argument.
Originally Posted by Eriamjh
A 4K screen would be FOUR 1080p panels or (3840x2160) or about 8Megapixels. According to Wikipedia, 2K is 2048×1080 which is less than the 2048X1536 of the current iPads.
Neither, by definition, are 4x3 aspect ratio screens. Would Apple make a 16x9 iPad if it was 12.9" across? I doubt it. But would they do 4x the current iPad or 4096x3072? Hmmmmm...
I'm no expert on this, but I dabble a lot, so take with a grain of salt, but I think I'm somewhere close to accurate on the below:
Note that the "2K" spec you cite is simply a wider 1080p variant. With a horizontal res of 2048 px vs 1920 for "regular 1080p HD."
There are proposed or adopted standards in the works for "4K" (and discussions about "8K" which has been demo'ed in Japan). The standards are (as usual) not going to be the same everywhere, but the informal or new umbrella spec is going to be called 2160p rather than 4K. (I'm not quite sure how "UHD" is attached to or separate from 2160p).
Ergo, Apple can have any horizontal resolution they want in a screen with 2160 vertical pixels in panorama mode and be living in "4K" territory. Because it's really 2160p territory.
And while they want to tip their hat to pros (as shown with the new MP), I doubt that's worth giving devs another res to write for. And if you've held up 16x9 and other tabs in portrait mode you know that's ungainly, which is why MS focuses on their magnetic keyboards, i.e, it's a crap tab form factor.
So the right res for an IPP is an interesting question.
Unless my math is faulty, standard 1080p HD is 16x9. The iPad's 4:3 in different numbers is 16:12. Would Apple do 3240x2160 as their first tablet version of the 2160p spec (and a wider version for Macs)? Both would be 2160p compliant right out of the box for one thing.
Or it could go, well, otherwise...
Originally Posted by Timbit
I don't see the point of having a higher definition screen on the iPhone. I can't see pixels, so why go high def and force battery life to suffer?
Screen's just too small for where the world's going and the tall factor will get ungainly in a 4.5+" iPhone unless they really chop the top and bottom frames (and maybe incorporate the touch ID and home button into the screen somehow).
Can't see the home button leaving, though, so given the sales volume of the iPhone, a whole new res and ratio to write for upcoming iPhones does seem a real possibility. With a minimum dimension of 1080 pixels. Whatever the width ratio.