Oh, I know the difference. Being an Apple site and discussion of iPhone OS, I used java as short for JS, as I have seen on here and other Applecentric sites.
Yes, but in the scenario posed- auto refreshing in Safari, temporarily turning off JS would be the best solution.
Yeah, because this is an Apple-centric site, I use C to mean Objective-C, or C++, or C##, or CoBOL... It's up to the reader to figure out what the hell I'm talking about!
Yeah, because this is an Apple-centric site, I use C to mean Objective-C, or C++, or C##, or CoBOL... It's up to the reader to figure out what the hell I'm talking about!
.
I'm sure most understood what I said, especially considering how I explained how to turn off Javascript.
So now that we know the A4 chip and ram are the same as the IPAD will the battery life be as good as the IPAD?????
If you factor in that the iPhone has a smaller battery life but also a smaller screen, I expect the battery life to be the same. It's a good performance boost but not dramatic.
Of course the unknown in all of this is how well both devices will perform under limited multitasking.
If you factor in that the iPhone has a smaller battery life but also a smaller screen, I expect the battery life to be the same. It's a good performance boost but not dramatic.
Of course the unknown in all of this is how well both devices will perform under limited multitasking.
It's 16.4% larger and the circuitry seems to be more efficiently designed. I hope and and expect it to be considerably longer for making it so much thinner than the current model. I would not be surprised that it's not running at 1GHz. More battery duration is required over adding the fastest CPU.
Speaking of tabbed browsing, solipsism, have you tried Atomic Browser?
Fast as all get out, caches multiple pages, instant switching between tabs with no page refresh, auto full screen mode, other great features. Right now I am playing a video at nytimes.com, have googlenews, thenewyorker, and three or four other sites open and can jump back and forth between tabs without losing my place while I type this.
Just needs to keep imported bookmarks as default set, rather than as a subset, and it would be perfect.
Still the best buck I have ever spent on iTunes, or anywhere for that matter.
If you try it I guaranty you will be wanting that iPad back toots sweet.
Atomic Browser is awesome. I have so many tabs open it's pathetic - lol. If Safari doesn't do the job, use something else - a lesson learned when I used to use PC's.
If the iPhone 4G does indeed have a 960x640 display, it's going to have the same Safari refreshing problems as the iPad. The iPhone 3GS can have 6+ tabs open in Safari with no page refreshing -- try two or pages with the iPad and the damn thing will refresh like crazy going from page to page.
iPhone 3GS -- 480x320, 256MB
iPhone 4G -- 960x640, 256MB
iPad -- 1024x768, 256MB
There are just two many pixels to deal with for 256MB to be enough for the iPad and the iPhone 4G in Safari. 512MB would probably be the sweet spot.
No, this is not a lack of RAM on the ipad's part. The Atomic web browser proves this. I currently have 14 tabs open in Atomic and can switch between them without any refreshes occurring at all. There is plenty of RAM available. On jailbroken 3GSs you can run 20 apps in the background with no problem in running out of RAM.
Atomic web browser is a great browser for the iPad by the way. Best 99 cents I have spent so far on iPhone or iPad.
No, this is not a lack of RAM on the ipad's part. The Atomic web browser proves this. I currently have 14 tabs open in Atomic and can switch between them without any refreshes occurring at all. There is plenty of RAM available. On jailbroken 3GSs you can run 20 apps in the background with no problem in running out of RAM.
Atomic web browser is a great browser for the iPad by the way. Best 99 cents I have spent so far on iPhone or iPad.
I don't own an iPad (yet), but I've read that Atomic crashes a whole lot. Might have something to do with the fact that it doesn't flush pages out of memory like Safari, thus leading to crashes, don't you think?
Anyway, I'm really disappointed at this news. If the iPhone gets an A4 with 256 MB RAM, it will be pretty much obsolete out of the box compared to recent and upcoming android offerings: the A4 is last year's technology (Cortex A8, yawn) and 256 MB RAM just doesn't cut it anymore. If there's anything that truly annoys me about my 3GS it's Safaris constant stupid page-flushing and reloading - I want to have eight tabs open, and I mean OPEN, damn it!
Oh well, still going to upgrade... I have invested way too much money into Apps to be able to justify a switch to Android. That won't stop me from obnoxiously proclaiming my disappointment on a web forum, though
As an owner of a creaky old iPhone 3G, the lack of RAM is a daily issue for me. Not just Safari forgetting tabs, but also after having run a few apps it can quickly becoming impossible to open anything at all until the phone is rebooted.
256mb sounds pretty small to me, and with the addition of some early footsteps into multi-tasking with OS4, surely memory will run out even quicker?
Really, People, sarcastic remarks about the internals? We all suspected but this is confirmation. That shouldn't be issue.
For the current iPhone 256MB is enough for backgrounding. For the iPad, I show very little extra RAM, which is sore spot for my needs. Based on the rumoured display resolution the iPhone HD should be between the 3GS and iPad in RAM usage. More would be better but I think this iPhone will have sufficient RAM. It was also quite expected with the iPad only having 256MB.
It doesn't need more at all. All it needs it better memory management. The iPhone and iPad's only problem relating to RAM is the inability to put it back. With 256, you can achieve 140 mb of free memory. Begin doing tasks or playing games, it's immediately swallowed and doesn't return back above 70 or 80, and sometimes as low as 30 or 50. THIS is the problem, by far. Not the actual amount of RAM. That part is meaningless.
If the iPhone 4G does indeed have a 960x640 display, it's going to have the same Safari refreshing problems as the iPad. The iPhone 3GS can have 6+ tabs open in Safari with no page refreshing -- try two or pages with the iPad and the damn thing will refresh like crazy going from page to page.
iPhone 3GS -- 480x320, 256MB
iPhone 4G -- 960x640, 256MB
iPad -- 1024x768, 256MB
There are just two many pixels to deal with for 256MB to be enough for the iPad and the iPhone 4G in Safari. 512MB would probably be the sweet spot.
you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
The only current solution I can see to this is pastebot . It saves any copy/paste items. I use it to transfer docs and pix between my iPhone and Mac. Its been a pretty good tool for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
.The reason I returned it was the inability to open up multiple pages in Safari without having the pages refresh, even when switching between the pages within Safari. I can open up 8 on the 3GS and not have it refresh even when going to other apps.
Atomic is absolutely amazing. It blows Safari out of the water. You have the ability to set your browser as Desktop Safari so you don't use the mobile versions of websites, especially MobileMe. Here are just some of the features it has:
the A4 is last year's technology (Cortex A8, yawn)
You do realize that Cortex-A8 is the most modern design that's gonna be available in consumer smartphones(!) in 2010? Cortex-A9 smartphones won't be out until 2011. And Snapdragon (ARMv7) won't go above 1.2GHz (if at all) in smartphones this year, and since an A4@1GHz is faster than Snapdragon@1GHz, 1.2GHz will most likely be just as fast as the A4 and not faster.
You do realize that Cortex-A8 is the most modern design that's gonna be available in consumer smartphones(!) in 2010? Cortex-A9 smartphones won't be out until 2011. And Snapdragon (ARMv7) won't go above 1.2GHz (if at all) in smartphones this year, and since an A4@1GHz is faster than Snapdragon@1GHz, 1.2GHz will most likely be just as fast as the A4 and not faster.
Seriously? I thought the A9 would become widely available this year, not in 2011. Isn't the Tegra 2 based on the A9?
Seriously? I thought the A9 would become widely available this year, not in 2011. Isn't the Tegra 2 based on the A9?
Yes, Tegra 2 has two Cortex-A9 cores. But AFAIK it won't be available in smartphones in 2010, just slates and maybe smartbooks (H2/2010).
And even if it would be (December or maybe November in Europe), Tegra 2 would be the only one and in only one or two smartphones. So even in a best case scenario, not exactly "widely" available. And in either case the iPhone would have the fastest or on par with SoC for nearly half a year, that's a long time in the smartphone industry.
It was a similar situation with the 3GS, almost half a year the fastest SoC, very few faster or as fast smartphones in Q3 (mainly in Europe) and then wide availability of faster one's in Q4 (aka this quarter).
I don't own an iPad (yet), but I've read that Atomic crashes a whole lot. Might have something to do with the fact that it doesn't flush pages out of memory like Safari, thus leading to crashes, don't you think?
Anyway, I'm really disappointed at this news. If the iPhone gets an A4 with 256 MB RAM, it will be pretty much obsolete out of the box compared to recent and upcoming android offerings: the A4 is last year's technology (Cortex A8, yawn) and 256 MB RAM just doesn't cut it anymore. If there's anything that truly annoys me about my 3GS it's Safaris constant stupid page-flushing and reloading - I want to have eight tabs open, and I mean OPEN, damn it!
Oh well, still going to upgrade... I have invested way too much money into Apps to be able to justify a switch to Android. That won't stop me from obnoxiously proclaiming my disappointment on a web forum, though
#1 you don't even own an iPad yet. As a developer I can tell you even a pretty resource intensive game only uses 16-32mb RAM, and most of that is video (the iPad shares RAM for video).
#2. You HEARD that atomic crashes a lot and therefore it MUST be running out of RAM. It isn't RAM issues, it is just buggy. But even with the bugs, it is worth it.
Yes it does crash more than safari, but to assume this is because of running out of ram is just absurd. I now have 18 tabs open. No problems. Yet I went to a site with no other tabs open at all and atomic crashed. It seems to crash more often with the ad blocker running. But I have seen no evidence that it is RAM that is causing these crashes. If it were ram, why is it that it will crash with 4 tabs open, then I will re-open these SAME sites, and add 4 more without a crash. So it wasn't RAM that caused the first crash. Atomic has been buggy, and prone to crashing, but the latest version is much better than it used to be. I am the first to admit it is pretty darn buggy though.
#3. You conveniently ignore the fact that jail broken iPhones have no problems running 20 apps at a time without running out of RAM. Websites are quite small, generally WAY less than 2MB each.
You can use http://analyze.websiteoptimization.c...vices/analyze/ to check the size of any website you want. Nytimes.com comes in at 411KB by the way. Things like flash are what use the most RAM on desktops, and obviously that is not much of an issue on the iPad .
You can try Atomic for yourself on your iPhone. The app is a universal app, so when you get an iPad you will already own it. I think you will be quite pleased with it.
It was a similar situation with the 3GS, almost half a year the fastest SoC, very few faster or as fast smartphones in Q3 (mainly in Europe) and then wide availability of faster one's in Q4 (aka this quarter).
Fair enough. I'm not sure the situation is THAT similar, though, since the Cortex A8 was really brand new when they put it in the 3GS last year, and even if it's still fast this summer, it won't really be king of the hill anymore. The phones that came out in Q4 2009/Q1 2010, i. e. the Droid and the Nexus one, mostly featured higher clocked Cortex A8-based processors. The difference to the 3GS was negligible. However, the difference between the A4 and the multi-core Cortex A9 will most likely be vast. At least that's what I'm fearing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shank2001
#1 you don't even own an iPad yet. As a developer I can tell you even a pretty resource intensive game only uses 16-32mb RAM, and most of that is video (the iPad shares RAM for video).
#2. You HEARD that atomic crashes a lot and therefore it MUST be running out of RAM. It isn't RAM issues, it is just buggy. But even with the bugs, it is worth it.
Yes it does crash more than safari, but to assume this is because of running out of ram is just absurd. I now have 18 tabs open. No problems. Yet I went to a site with no other tabs open at all and atomic crashed. It seems to crash more often with the ad blocker running. But I have seen no evidence that it is RAM that is causing these crashes. If it were ram, why is it that it will crash with 4 tabs open, then I will re-open these SAME sites, and add 4 more without a crash. So it wasn't RAM that caused the first crash. Atomic has been buggy, and prone to crashing, but the latest version is much better than it used to be. I am the first to admit it is pretty darn buggy though.
#3. You conveniently ignore the fact that jail broken iPhones have no problems running 20 apps at a time without running out of RAM. Websites are quite small, generally WAY less than 2MB each.
You can use http://analyze.websiteoptimization.c...vices/analyze/ to check the size of any website you want. Nytimes.com comes in at 411KB by the way. Things like flash are what use the most RAM on desktops, and obviously that is not much of an issue on the iPad .
You can try Atomic for yourself on your iPhone. The app is a universal app, so when you get an iPad you will already own it. I think you will be quite pleased with it.
Hey, you're preaching to the choir, I will definitely check out Atomic once I get my iPad I just read in several forums that it's still rather crash-prone. I will also try iCab, which is supposed to be a bit more stable. BTW, if you don't think it's the lack of RAM that makes Safari flush out pages, what's the reason then? I'm genuinely curious, since this annoys me to no end.
Man, something just isn't right with mobile Safari when third-party browsers are actually more appealing.
iFixit got an extremely close look at the A4 soon after the iPad launched in April, when they, along with Chipworks, X-rayed and dismantled the chip based on the ARM architecture.
No, they didn't... they dismantled and cross-sectioned the iPhone's processor, not the iPad's A4.
This is widely mis-reported, but is plain as day to anyone who reads the actual article from iFixit.
How would dismantling the 3GS tell them what is in the iPad?
Is Chipworks lying?
"What we found was an APL0398 chip, presumably the next-generation processor from the APL0298 that we found in the iPhone 3GS."
Comments
Oh, I know the difference. Being an Apple site and discussion of iPhone OS, I used java as short for JS, as I have seen on here and other Applecentric sites.
Yes, but in the scenario posed- auto refreshing in Safari, temporarily turning off JS would be the best solution.
Yeah, because this is an Apple-centric site, I use C to mean Objective-C, or C++, or C##, or CoBOL... It's up to the reader to figure out what the hell I'm talking about!
.
Yeah, because this is an Apple-centric site, I use C to mean Objective-C, or C++, or C##, or CoBOL... It's up to the reader to figure out what the hell I'm talking about!
.
I'm sure most understood what I said, especially considering how I explained how to turn off Javascript.
So now that we know the A4 chip and ram are the same as the IPAD will the battery life be as good as the IPAD?????
If you factor in that the iPhone has a smaller battery life but also a smaller screen, I expect the battery life to be the same. It's a good performance boost but not dramatic.
Of course the unknown in all of this is how well both devices will perform under limited multitasking.
If you factor in that the iPhone has a smaller battery life but also a smaller screen, I expect the battery life to be the same. It's a good performance boost but not dramatic.
Of course the unknown in all of this is how well both devices will perform under limited multitasking.
It's 16.4% larger and the circuitry seems to be more efficiently designed. I hope and and expect it to be considerably longer for making it so much thinner than the current model. I would not be surprised that it's not running at 1GHz. More battery duration is required over adding the fastest CPU.
Speaking of tabbed browsing, solipsism, have you tried Atomic Browser?
Fast as all get out, caches multiple pages, instant switching between tabs with no page refresh, auto full screen mode, other great features. Right now I am playing a video at nytimes.com, have googlenews, thenewyorker, and three or four other sites open and can jump back and forth between tabs without losing my place while I type this.
Just needs to keep imported bookmarks as default set, rather than as a subset, and it would be perfect.
Still the best buck I have ever spent on iTunes, or anywhere for that matter.
If you try it I guaranty you will be wanting that iPad back toots sweet.
Atomic Browser is awesome. I have so many tabs open it's pathetic - lol. If Safari doesn't do the job, use something else - a lesson learned when I used to use PC's.
I won't lie and say my iPad wasn't ever used in the bathroom.
TMI, dude.
If the iPhone 4G does indeed have a 960x640 display, it's going to have the same Safari refreshing problems as the iPad. The iPhone 3GS can have 6+ tabs open in Safari with no page refreshing -- try two or pages with the iPad and the damn thing will refresh like crazy going from page to page.
iPhone 3GS -- 480x320, 256MB
iPhone 4G -- 960x640, 256MB
iPad -- 1024x768, 256MB
There are just two many pixels to deal with for 256MB to be enough for the iPad and the iPhone 4G in Safari. 512MB would probably be the sweet spot.
No, this is not a lack of RAM on the ipad's part. The Atomic web browser proves this. I currently have 14 tabs open in Atomic and can switch between them without any refreshes occurring at all. There is plenty of RAM available. On jailbroken 3GSs you can run 20 apps in the background with no problem in running out of RAM.
Atomic web browser is a great browser for the iPad by the way. Best 99 cents I have spent so far on iPhone or iPad.
No, this is not a lack of RAM on the ipad's part. The Atomic web browser proves this. I currently have 14 tabs open in Atomic and can switch between them without any refreshes occurring at all. There is plenty of RAM available. On jailbroken 3GSs you can run 20 apps in the background with no problem in running out of RAM.
Atomic web browser is a great browser for the iPad by the way. Best 99 cents I have spent so far on iPhone or iPad.
I don't own an iPad (yet), but I've read that Atomic crashes a whole lot. Might have something to do with the fact that it doesn't flush pages out of memory like Safari, thus leading to crashes, don't you think?
Anyway, I'm really disappointed at this news. If the iPhone gets an A4 with 256 MB RAM, it will be pretty much obsolete out of the box compared to recent and upcoming android offerings: the A4 is last year's technology (Cortex A8, yawn) and 256 MB RAM just doesn't cut it anymore. If there's anything that truly annoys me about my 3GS it's Safaris constant stupid page-flushing and reloading - I want to have eight tabs open, and I mean OPEN, damn it!
Oh well, still going to upgrade... I have invested way too much money into Apps to be able to justify a switch to Android. That won't stop me from obnoxiously proclaiming my disappointment on a web forum, though
256mb sounds pretty small to me, and with the addition of some early footsteps into multi-tasking with OS4, surely memory will run out even quicker?
Really, People, sarcastic remarks about the internals? We all suspected but this is confirmation. That shouldn't be issue.
For the current iPhone 256MB is enough for backgrounding. For the iPad, I show very little extra RAM, which is sore spot for my needs. Based on the rumoured display resolution the iPhone HD should be between the 3GS and iPad in RAM usage. More would be better but I think this iPhone will have sufficient RAM. It was also quite expected with the iPad only having 256MB.
It doesn't need more at all. All it needs it better memory management. The iPhone and iPad's only problem relating to RAM is the inability to put it back. With 256, you can achieve 140 mb of free memory. Begin doing tasks or playing games, it's immediately swallowed and doesn't return back above 70 or 80, and sometimes as low as 30 or 50. THIS is the problem, by far. Not the actual amount of RAM. That part is meaningless.
If the iPhone 4G does indeed have a 960x640 display, it's going to have the same Safari refreshing problems as the iPad. The iPhone 3GS can have 6+ tabs open in Safari with no page refreshing -- try two or pages with the iPad and the damn thing will refresh like crazy going from page to page.
iPhone 3GS -- 480x320, 256MB
iPhone 4G -- 960x640, 256MB
iPad -- 1024x768, 256MB
There are just two many pixels to deal with for 256MB to be enough for the iPad and the iPhone 4G in Safari. 512MB would probably be the sweet spot.
you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
.The reason I returned it was the inability to open up multiple pages in Safari without having the pages refresh, even when switching between the pages within Safari. I can open up 8 on the 3GS and not have it refresh even when going to other apps.
the A4 is last year's technology (Cortex A8, yawn)
You do realize that Cortex-A8 is the most modern design that's gonna be available in consumer smartphones(!) in 2010? Cortex-A9 smartphones won't be out until 2011. And Snapdragon (ARMv7) won't go above 1.2GHz (if at all) in smartphones this year, and since an A4@1GHz is faster than Snapdragon@1GHz, 1.2GHz will most likely be just as fast as the A4 and not faster.
Hopefully it's just a bug in the iPad causing that in Safari.
You do realize that Cortex-A8 is the most modern design that's gonna be available in consumer smartphones(!) in 2010? Cortex-A9 smartphones won't be out until 2011. And Snapdragon (ARMv7) won't go above 1.2GHz (if at all) in smartphones this year, and since an A4@1GHz is faster than Snapdragon@1GHz, 1.2GHz will most likely be just as fast as the A4 and not faster.
Seriously? I thought the A9 would become widely available this year, not in 2011. Isn't the Tegra 2 based on the A9?
Seriously? I thought the A9 would become widely available this year, not in 2011. Isn't the Tegra 2 based on the A9?
Yes, Tegra 2 has two Cortex-A9 cores. But AFAIK it won't be available in smartphones in 2010, just slates and maybe smartbooks (H2/2010).
And even if it would be (December or maybe November in Europe), Tegra 2 would be the only one and in only one or two smartphones. So even in a best case scenario, not exactly "widely" available. And in either case the iPhone would have the fastest or on par with SoC for nearly half a year, that's a long time in the smartphone industry.
It was a similar situation with the 3GS, almost half a year the fastest SoC, very few faster or as fast smartphones in Q3 (mainly in Europe) and then wide availability of faster one's in Q4 (aka this quarter).
I don't own an iPad (yet), but I've read that Atomic crashes a whole lot. Might have something to do with the fact that it doesn't flush pages out of memory like Safari, thus leading to crashes, don't you think?
Anyway, I'm really disappointed at this news. If the iPhone gets an A4 with 256 MB RAM, it will be pretty much obsolete out of the box compared to recent and upcoming android offerings: the A4 is last year's technology (Cortex A8, yawn) and 256 MB RAM just doesn't cut it anymore. If there's anything that truly annoys me about my 3GS it's Safaris constant stupid page-flushing and reloading - I want to have eight tabs open, and I mean OPEN, damn it!
Oh well, still going to upgrade... I have invested way too much money into Apps to be able to justify a switch to Android. That won't stop me from obnoxiously proclaiming my disappointment on a web forum, though
#1 you don't even own an iPad yet. As a developer I can tell you even a pretty resource intensive game only uses 16-32mb RAM, and most of that is video (the iPad shares RAM for video).
#2. You HEARD that atomic crashes a lot and therefore it MUST be running out of RAM. It isn't RAM issues, it is just buggy. But even with the bugs, it is worth it.
Yes it does crash more than safari, but to assume this is because of running out of ram is just absurd. I now have 18 tabs open. No problems. Yet I went to a site with no other tabs open at all and atomic crashed. It seems to crash more often with the ad blocker running. But I have seen no evidence that it is RAM that is causing these crashes. If it were ram, why is it that it will crash with 4 tabs open, then I will re-open these SAME sites, and add 4 more without a crash. So it wasn't RAM that caused the first crash. Atomic has been buggy, and prone to crashing, but the latest version is much better than it used to be. I am the first to admit it is pretty darn buggy though.
#3. You conveniently ignore the fact that jail broken iPhones have no problems running 20 apps at a time without running out of RAM. Websites are quite small, generally WAY less than 2MB each.
You can use http://analyze.websiteoptimization.c...vices/analyze/ to check the size of any website you want. Nytimes.com comes in at 411KB by the way. Things like flash are what use the most RAM on desktops, and obviously that is not much of an issue on the iPad
You can try Atomic for yourself on your iPhone. The app is a universal app, so when you get an iPad you will already own it. I think you will be quite pleased with it.
It was a similar situation with the 3GS, almost half a year the fastest SoC, very few faster or as fast smartphones in Q3 (mainly in Europe) and then wide availability of faster one's in Q4 (aka this quarter).
Fair enough. I'm not sure the situation is THAT similar, though, since the Cortex A8 was really brand new when they put it in the 3GS last year, and even if it's still fast this summer, it won't really be king of the hill anymore. The phones that came out in Q4 2009/Q1 2010, i. e. the Droid and the Nexus one, mostly featured higher clocked Cortex A8-based processors. The difference to the 3GS was negligible. However, the difference between the A4 and the multi-core Cortex A9 will most likely be vast. At least that's what I'm fearing.
#1 you don't even own an iPad yet. As a developer I can tell you even a pretty resource intensive game only uses 16-32mb RAM, and most of that is video (the iPad shares RAM for video).
#2. You HEARD that atomic crashes a lot and therefore it MUST be running out of RAM. It isn't RAM issues, it is just buggy. But even with the bugs, it is worth it.
Yes it does crash more than safari, but to assume this is because of running out of ram is just absurd. I now have 18 tabs open. No problems. Yet I went to a site with no other tabs open at all and atomic crashed. It seems to crash more often with the ad blocker running. But I have seen no evidence that it is RAM that is causing these crashes. If it were ram, why is it that it will crash with 4 tabs open, then I will re-open these SAME sites, and add 4 more without a crash. So it wasn't RAM that caused the first crash. Atomic has been buggy, and prone to crashing, but the latest version is much better than it used to be. I am the first to admit it is pretty darn buggy though.
#3. You conveniently ignore the fact that jail broken iPhones have no problems running 20 apps at a time without running out of RAM. Websites are quite small, generally WAY less than 2MB each.
You can use http://analyze.websiteoptimization.c...vices/analyze/ to check the size of any website you want. Nytimes.com comes in at 411KB by the way. Things like flash are what use the most RAM on desktops, and obviously that is not much of an issue on the iPad
You can try Atomic for yourself on your iPhone. The app is a universal app, so when you get an iPad you will already own it. I think you will be quite pleased with it.
Hey, you're preaching to the choir, I will definitely check out Atomic once I get my iPad
Man, something just isn't right with mobile Safari when third-party browsers are actually more appealing.
iFixit got an extremely close look at the A4 soon after the iPad launched in April, when they, along with Chipworks, X-rayed and dismantled the chip based on the ARM architecture.
No, they didn't... they dismantled and cross-sectioned the iPhone's processor, not the iPad's A4.
This is widely mis-reported, but is plain as day to anyone who reads the actual article from iFixit.
How would dismantling the 3GS tell them what is in the iPad?
Is Chipworks lying?
I didn't say anyone was lying, just that many (including AppleInsider) were misreporting.
See here: AppleInsider vs. iFixit