iPad . . already comparatively crippled?

Posted:
in iPad edited January 2014
Just saw on the web yesterday that the iPhone 4 has 512 mb of memory. Compared to the iPad's 256. I wonder how crippled the iPad will be in comparison to the iPhone when running the new OS?



It's disappointing that apple would launch a brand new product with specs shared with an iPhone that's a few years old.



Almost feels like a throwaway. A 600 dollar throwaway.



Shouldn't the iPad be the elite device--spec wise--among Apple's handhelds?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 20
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,195moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Grievous Angel View Post


    Just saw on the web yesterday that the iPhone 4 has 512 mb of memory. Compared to the iPad's 256. I wonder how crippled the iPad will be in comparison to the iPhone when running the new OS?



    It will run most things the same as OS 3. It will just flush background content more frequently so when you revisit a web page, it is more likely to reload it.



    Certain apps will benefit a lot like Brushes as they use lots of RAM so the developer can remove layer amount restrictions or full layer effects restrictions. The iMovie app might not be able to run on the iPad because of this.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Grievous Angel View Post


    Shouldn't the iPad be the elite device--spec wise--among Apple's handhelds?



    In some ways but if they put everything into the first model, they can't sell you a new one next year or the year after. The first one could have had a front-facing camera with face-time, 512MB RAM, a USB port, SD card slot, a gyroscope...



    Obviously, the first model is the hardest to make and then they optimize manufacturing to bring costs down and add features. It works best for them and keeps the market growing. Naturally as consumers we want the best developments right now but from a business point of view it makes more sense for them to hold it back and allow an upgrade path.
  • Reply 2 of 20
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Grievous Angel View Post


    Shouldn't the iPad be the elite device--spec wise--among Apple's handhelds?



    The iPad is the elite device...for a tablet. There is no competition as of yet. The iPhone 4 is an elite device.....among other smart phones like the HTC Evo 4G and Droid X. The two Apple products serve two different markets, so spec requirements will also be different.
  • Reply 3 of 20
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Grievous Angel View Post


    Shouldn't the iPad be the elite device--spec wise-



    You must be new to these parts. Apple has never cared about specs, nor have the people who love the products. Frankly, even though I ordered a new iPhone, I could care less about the resolution or the ram or the processor. My 3GS is plenty fast. As for the iPad, have you used one? There is no consumer electronics device with that much computing power in that size and price range that comes close to the performance of the iPad. Who cares how much ram is in it. It performs like, dare I say, magic. It is fast and powerful and lasts forever on a charge. No one cares how they did it or what is in it. If you care about such things, you should wait on the Android clones, or better yet, pick up a JooJoo.
  • Reply 4 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Grievous Angel View Post


    Just saw on the web yesterday that the iPhone 4 has 512 mb of memory. Compared to the iPad's 256. I wonder how crippled the iPad will be in comparison to the iPhone when running the new OS?



    It's disappointing that apple would launch a brand new product with specs shared with an iPhone that's a few years old.



    Almost feels like a throwaway. A 600 dollar throwaway.



    Shouldn't the iPad be the elite device--spec wise--among Apple's handhelds?



    I do agree. This is Apple, you can never truly "win". It would be nice if iPad had 512MB.



    The only good thing here is if you do buy iPad version 1 I'm sure you'd get a decent resale for it next year. If you buy $499 model I'd say you'll get $350 for it next year. Perhaps more, I dunno.



    I do find people who jump in to defend everything Apple does stupid though. No one can argue having less RAM in the iPad is somehow a good thing. It's not a good thing, Apple are bastards for never quite giving you enough - there's always something they hold back on, and this is one of those cases. It almost seems like a deliberate move given that they know they've a year to play around with before the competition starts banging them (tablets) out.



    I know one thing, if I could click my fingers and make it happen the iPad would have 512.
  • Reply 5 of 20
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    I do agree. This is Apple, you can never truly "win". It would be nice if iPad had 512MB.



    The only good thing here is if you do buy iPad version 1 I'm sure you'd get a decent resale for it next year. If you buy $499 model I'd say you'll get $350 for it next year. Perhaps more, I dunno.



    I do find people who jump in to defend everything Apple does stupid though. No one can argue having less RAM in the iPad is somehow a good thing. It's not a good thing, Apple are bastards for never quite giving you enough - there's always something they hold back on, and this is one of those cases. It almost seems like a deliberate move given that they know they've a year to play around with before the competition starts banging them (tablets) out.



    I know one thing, if I could click my fingers and make it happen the iPad would have 512.



    This is nonsense of the first order. It's not a question of "defending" Apple or saying it's a "good" thing. What would you think if you didn't know how much RAM the iPad had? Could you not remove your beanie-copter for only a second and judge the device on what it can actually do and how it actually performs? What is the point of prattling on about tech specs, as if meeting your arbitrary technical requirements is the only true and useful goal of any Apple product?
  • Reply 6 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    This is nonsense of the first order. It's not a question of "defending" Apple or saying it's a "good" thing. What would you think if you didn't know how much RAM the iPad had?



    I'd think why the fuck do these Safari pages keep refreshing. This is a recurring complaint about the iPad, and it's a RAM issue.
  • Reply 7 of 20
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,195moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    I'd think why the fuck do these Safari pages keep refreshing. This is a recurring complaint about the iPad, and it's a RAM issue.



    Also when it comes to games because the CPU and GPU share the same memory so the higher resolution the screen is, the higher the VRAM requirements - mainly if higher resolution textures are used like in HD games.



    The 512MB number has been confirmed by Apple in case some may be thinking it's still just a rumor:



    http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/17/...-ipad-and-3gs/



    Apple may have realized after shipping the iPad that when people make HD games, it bumps up the memory usage and decided to put 512 in the iPhone which has close to the same resolution.



    Naturally games on their own won't be so much of a problem but the iPad closes background apps when it needs more RAM. A complex game might use 60MB of video memory, especially if it leaks. 40MB is used for the OS, another 20MB for the game and that's half your iPad RAM gone running one app. Those background apps that run similar amounts will start closing down in the background.



    It shouldn't be a huge problem as 256MB is a capable amount but it borders on the lowest they could get away with using. 512MB would have been a more sensible choice. I didn't like the fact they hid the iPad RAM amount until after the orders.



    What's going to be interesting is if developers will sell HD games for the iPhone now that it has a higher resolution screen and more RAM and also if they will still cost more.
  • Reply 8 of 20
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    I'd think why the fuck do these Safari pages keep refreshing. This is a recurring complaint about the iPad, and it's a RAM issue.



    I have never experienced this issue and therefore have no complaints about it, but then I've only been using the iPad every day since it was released so I probably wouldn't know.
  • Reply 9 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    I have never experienced this issue and therefore have no complaints about it, but then I've only been using the iPad every day since it was released so I probably wouldn't know.



    Open 9 different pages in windows on iPad mobile Safari, and tell me if the first one you opened refreshes when you subsequently revisit it. If the iPad can do that then I want to know. Not to mention can I do that when multi-tasking arrives on the iPad.



    Here's the sites I want you to open: Apple, Giz, Engadget, TIPB, MacRumors, Wikipedia = iPod, Google = iPod, TUAW and AI.



    Then revisit the Apple site, if the Apple webpage doesn't reload then I retract my statement - if it does indeed reload, then I rest my case.
  • Reply 10 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Also when it comes to games because the CPU and GPU share the same memory so the higher resolution the screen is, the higher the VRAM requirements - mainly if higher resolution textures are used like in HD games.



    The 512MB number has been confirmed by Apple in case some may be thinking it's still just a rumor:



    http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/17/...-ipad-and-3gs/



    Apple may have realized after shipping the iPad that when people make HD games, it bumps up the memory usage and decided to put 512 in the iPhone which has close to the same resolution.



    Naturally games on their own won't be so much of a problem but the iPad closes background apps when it needs more RAM. A complex game might use 60MB of video memory, especially if it leaks. 40MB is used for the OS, another 20MB for the game and that's half your iPad RAM gone running one app. Those background apps that run similar amounts will start closing down in the background.



    It shouldn't be a huge problem as 256MB is a capable amount but it borders on the lowest they could get away with using. 512MB would have been a more sensible choice. I didn't like the fact they hid the iPad RAM amount until after the orders.



    What's going to be interesting is if developers will sell HD games for the iPhone now that it has a higher resolution screen and more RAM and also if they will still cost more.



    Makes sense.
  • Reply 11 of 20
    suprhbsuprhb Posts: 1member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Open 9 different pages in windows on iPad mobile Safari, and tell me if the first one you opened refreshes when you subsequently revisit it. If the iPad can do that then I want to know. Not to mention can I do that when multi-tasking arrives on the iPad.



    Here's the sites I want you to open: Apple, Giz, Engadget, TIPB, MacRumors, Wikipedia = iPod, Google = iPod, TUAW and AI.



    Then revisit the Apple site, if the Apple webpage doesn't reload then I retract my statement - if it does indeed reload, then I rest my case.



    I experience page reloading. Not a huge deal but still a bit annoying.



    Also, the iPhone 4 has 720p video to deal with and face time. I think that adds to the need for more memory for that particular device.
  • Reply 12 of 20
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Open 9 different pages in windows on iPad mobile Safari, and tell me if the first one you opened refreshes when you subsequently revisit it.



    Of course it does, but that has nothing to do with the iPad and everything to do with Safari. Try a tabbed browser like Atomic Web Browser, which is what I use. Open as many tabs as you like and each page remains static. Same device, same amount of ram, different browser. Do you even have an iPad?
  • Reply 13 of 20
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    Open 9 different pages in windows on iPad mobile Safari, and tell me if the first one you opened refreshes when you subsequently revisit it. If the iPad can do that then I want to know. Not to mention can I do that when multi-tasking arrives on the iPad.



    Here's the sites I want you to open: Apple, Giz, Engadget, TIPB, MacRumors, Wikipedia = iPod, Google = iPod, TUAW and AI.



    Then revisit the Apple site, if the Apple webpage doesn't reload then I retract my statement - if it does indeed reload, then I rest my case.



    So if you go out of your way to look for a minor annoyance, you might find it. You don't need to rest your case since it's such a piddling one.
  • Reply 14 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac Voyer View Post


    Of course it does, but that has nothing to do with the iPad and everything to do with Safari. Try a tabbed browser like Atomic Web Browser, which is what I use. Open as many tabs as you like and each page remains static. Same device, same amount of ram, different browser. Do you even have an iPad?



    I have 2 iPads.
  • Reply 15 of 20
    irelandireland Posts: 17,534member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    So if you go out of your way to look for a minor annoyance, you might find it. You don't need to rest your case since it's such a piddling one.



    Haha, it was a little jab. The point here is it would have been nice to have 512, that's all I'm saying.
  • Reply 16 of 20
    mac voyermac voyer Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    I have 2 iPads.



    Then perhaps you should try a different browser on one of them and maybe come up with a better example of why the iPad needs more ram.
  • Reply 17 of 20
    olternautolternaut Posts: 1,376member
    I tried warning you idiots that you should have waited till AT LEAST the iPad 2.0 debuted before you spent money.



    Oh well.



    My guess is that the 2.0 will first of all be LIGHTER, faster, have a flat unibody design similar to the iphone 4 and would either be cheaper or at least have more memory.

    Ah the price we pay to be early adopters.
  • Reply 18 of 20
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    The price I paid was $499, and no, I don't feel like an idiot.
  • Reply 19 of 20
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,660member
    If you think you shouldn't buy a current model computer because later models will be lighter, faster, cheaper or have more memory then you are arguing for never buying a computer.
  • Reply 20 of 20
    talksense101talksense101 Posts: 1,737member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    If you think you shouldn't buy a current model computer because later models will be lighter, faster, cheaper or have more memory then you are arguing for never buying a computer.



    +1



    The iPad is not crippled, use it within it's capability and enjoy it. If you want more capabilities, wait for the future versions.
Sign In or Register to comment.