IPhone 4 already comes with 512 MB of RAM. I see upgrading iPad to only 512 MB to be a serious error.
A production goal of 5 million per quarter is way off the mark. Even given the modest specs quoted in the article this iPad will sell like hot cakes. This would mean production facilities for at least 3 million a month.
If they don't know for sure about an SD card slot how can they know anything about iPad 2. This makes me wonder if the whole report is fantasy work.
I was expecting far better improvements with respect to processor power (as in watts) than is indicated here. That is if they even have their numbers right. Something is fishy here.
If the power numbers are right that indicates that they did not transition to 32nm. I was really thinking Apple would push hard to make that happen.
Well a few concerns anyway. The biggest disappointment will likely be RAM, the year old iPhone 4 has that much. On the other hand this more than doubles RAMmavailable to apps. The lack of a mention about flash storage sucks too. This may mean no significant upgrade which really sucks at the highway robbery rates Apple gets for flash.
In the end this upgrade won't stop me from buying an iPad 2 but it won't cause me to rush out and get one either. The tiny RAM upgrade is a significant cooler here. I was really hoping iPad 2 could support a whole new range of apps with a big RAM upgrade.
The retina display would have caused an avalanche of upgrades. This one is nice, but I don't think Steve Jobs will make a special appearance to blow our socks off with v2.
This upgrade will be great for fence sitters who don't like to buy the first version of anything. But I'll be waiting patiently for v3.
RAM is also on the rise, the report says. "For making full use of GPU upgrading advantage, iPad 2 needs bigger memory bandwidth. So iPad 2 has 512MB RAM, same as iPhone 4 and twice as much as iPad 1, but running at higher clock 1,066 MHz for getting bigger memory bandwidth (iPhone 4 memory clock is 800 MHz)."
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
...and a higher resolution screen and 5mp camera too. They would have a valid point. Why is Apple suddenly slacking off?
Minimal legwork found this reference to the previous work of Mr. Kuo.
Mini iPad Launching in 2011
It seems funny that since we already have a mini iPad in the iPod Touch they would consider making just a smaller iPad than just refreshing a bigger iPod Touch XL. According to Digitimes a 5-7-inch iPad will be launching in 2011. Digitimes quoted senior analyst Mingchi Kuo who have said the smaller iPad will measure between 5 – 7-inches, and will cost under $400 when it goes on sale early 2011.
It’s a funny idea best left on April 1st and quickly forgotten. Even though we know that way too many people would buy such a “Mini iPad” at that price.
Who would get the smaller iPad compared to the normal size??
Unlike the iPod market (and possibly the iPhone market, due to limited # of carriers), the iPad is not near saturation.
What does this mean?
It means that Apple can tap a huge market without requiring people to "upgrade" their current iPads. Only when the iPad approaches saturation (meaning those who would buy an iPad have already bought one) does Apple need to create huge upgrades with features that drive people to upgrade their product. And often the tipping point of an upgrade is 2 version delta.
Apple has been timing their feature improvement, major features perfectly in the past, so I'm not sure why they wouldn't know what they are doing with the iPad.
I would guess this new feature set will cause some upgrades (maybe not too many), but will drive sales for those who wait for ver2 of a product. So ver3 will cause large ver1 upgrades and a few ver2 upgrades and still drive new sales. Once ver4 is out, the market may be near saturated but by that time they have a user distribution of upgrades.
There is some benefit to having a slight spread in the user-base.
Unlike the iPod market (and possibly the iPhone market, due to limited # of carriers), the iPad is not near saturation.
What does this mean?
It means that Apple can tap a huge market without requiring people to "upgrade" their current iPads. Only when the iPad approaches saturation (meaning those who would buy an iPad have already bought one) does Apple need to create huge upgrades with features that drive people to upgrade their product. And often the tipping point of an upgrade is 2 version delta.
Apple has been timing their feature improvement, major features perfectly in the past, so I'm not sure why they wouldn't know what they are doing with the iPad.
I would guess this new feature set will cause some upgrades (maybe not too many), but will drive sales for those who wait for ver2 of a product. So ver3 will cause large ver1 upgrades and a few ver2 upgrades and still drive new sales. Once ver4 is out, the market may be near saturated but by that time they have a user distribution of upgrades.
There is some benefit to having a slight spread in the user-base.
I totally buy what you are saying. The improvement of tech spec does not really merit an upgrade. Usually upgrades happen when completely new features like 3 axis gyro or facetime make part of the new devices.
I do think that the iPad revolutionized the way we experience the web. It really is better at browsing the web than any other device.
Still, the iPad has not reached its full potential just yet. So much more can be done with it and I am not referring to processors or displays at all but rather this is a huge opportunity to change what we think of in terms of the way we utilize technology
That was from the developers perspective. But it's true that a lot of people don't want to spend more than $399 for a tablet. Of course, before the iPad came out, it was said from a survey that if it were below $699 it would sell well. And then, that latest survey was for Android tablets. People buying those are apparently cheaper. We just have to look at the problem they have selling apps to Android owners as opposed to those buying iOS devices, where it's now estimated that there are about 108 apps per device, many of them paid for.
Not to me. You have to remember that the iPhone isn't expected to go on sale until the end of March at the earliest, so almost all of the 5 million that they are predicting would be made before it even goes on sale. I suspect that 3-4 million would be more than enough for the first couple of weeks after launch. So if this figure is true maybe they are planning to launch in early to mid March.
I can just see myself going to a friends house with my iPad and asking them if they want to watch anything from the list of films I have as opposed to just taking three or four DVDs with me and running out of options.
I'm pretty sure that you can already do this if you have your movies backed up on your home computer and have the Air Video app on your iPad -- just provided that your home internet is up and going and your friend's house/wherever has wi-fi (maybe it works just as well over 3G). I also don't know for sure if Air Video supports video-out to televisions.
For me personally, with remote access to my music and movie collections on my home computer, large amounts of storage on the mobile devices don't matter much at all anymore. All I need is an online connection. But then I do think that if iPads came with around 256gb or more of storage, I'd re-consider and probably make use of it.
IPhone 4 already comes with 512 MB of RAM. I see upgrading iPad to only 512 MB to be a serious error.
A production goal of 5 million per quarter is way off the mark. Even given the modest specs quoted in the article this iPad will sell like hot cakes. This would mean production facilities for at least 3 million a month.
If they don't know for sure about an SD card slot how can they know anything about iPad 2. This makes me wonder if the whole report is fantasy work.
I was expecting far better improvements with respect to processor power (as in watts) than is indicated here. That is if they even have their numbers right. Something is fishy here.
If the power numbers are right that indicates that they did not transition to 32nm. I was really thinking Apple would push hard to make that happen.
Well a few concerns anyway. The biggest disappointment will likely be RAM, the year old iPhone 4 has that much. On the other hand this more than doubles RAMmavailable to apps. The lack of a mention about flash storage sucks too. This may mean no significant upgrade which really sucks at the highway robbery rates Apple gets for flash.
In the end this upgrade won't stop me from buying an iPad 2 but it won't cause me to rush out and get one either. The tiny RAM upgrade is a significant cooler here. I was really hoping iPad 2 could support a whole new range of apps with a big RAM upgrade.
We don't know how close this really is. So far, they've all been guesses. With a number of competing tablets and phones getting 1 Gb of RAM, it might be thought that we need it too, but that may not be as true. Apple's method of multitasking needs much less RAM in the first place. When I double click the button on mine, I find 94 apps in the fast switching bar. But that isn't a problem for the device, as they aren't using RAM. The same case can't be made for Android devices, which have those apps sucking RAM and CPU cycles, even though they're not being used while in the background, and open.
So more RAM will be needed for various editing apps. Adobe isn't sure yet if more than 512 MB would be needed, assuming people really do want those apps for tablets, which is something I'm arguing with them about.
The word that's been out for some time is that the new dual core cpu's will on average, use less power than the current cortex single core 9 at the same speed. But a dual core VR543 will use more power. Apple can't push to make 32 nm happen. They're doing it as fast as it can be done.
Going to a dual-core CPU with a dual-core, desktop-caliber GPU and it's a minimal upgrade? Based on the current specs of the iPad, game developers have created titles that are already console quality. With this bump in processing and graphics power, the other tablets will still miss out when it comes to developers.
What good is a powerful tablet if you have nothing to run on it is what the competition will face. The iPad has grabbed of of the top developers with few of them producing top-tier titles. Once Microsoft brings Office to the iPad, the other tablets are as good as history.
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
Yeah, and then you show them the dozens of apps in the fast switching bar, and they'll shut up.
I have to agree with wizard and DA, something fishy about this report the specs are a little under impressive. The cameras are ho hum especially the 1MP rear camera. Even if it is in line with the IPT it's not in line with Android competitors.
I can't imagine why they would have some details on an SD slot, but still not be sure if it's going to appear. Either it's there or it isn't.
The processor and GPU sound right, but given the CPU/ GPU upgrades why not "optimize" iOS to push a retina display? I thought we all discussed the ability of the A9 dual core GPU combo as being able to push the pixels technically, no?
A retina display really makes sense in allot of ways, not the least of which would be competing with kindle in readability. The ipad screen is still too soft for text and it starkly stands against the iphone. The screen needs an upgrade IMO and would be just as much of a "Kindle Killer feature" as antireflective coatings. Further it would only make photos, videos and games look even better.
Just like the killer feature on IP4 was the screen, so to is the screen on the iPad. Especially when you consider all of the chatter that "specs don't matter" to Apple. If clock rates, RAM etc don't matter then it's the screen that does because that's all an ipad really is, a screen. Everything else inside is arguably irrelevant except maybe to developers whom Apple seems all to happy to appease when it comes to iOS API's and upgrading hardware as evidenced in this report. Dual Core A9 and GPU should make everyone on the "back-end" happy, but I don't know about the RAM
Like the cameras, 512mb of RAM is in line with other iOS devices, but not the competition. Referring to the "back-end" I think devs would also drool over 1GB of RAM and the added cost would seem to me to be minimal both in terms of dollars, physical space and power usage while it would be a huge "cost" when arguing specs with an Android competitor. It's an easy spec to exploit in marketing I don't think Apple would leave the door open even if they didn't really need the RAM. I don't think we'll see less than 1GB personally. The Dev's would be happy for quite some time for sure.
I wonder how much of a report like this based on insider bar talk? Are the components and/ or prototypes people see only part of the story? Maybe some parts will get used, some won't, maybe Apple's thinking/ talking about certain components and someone is reporting that Apple already signed the contract. People talk, often out of their butts.
Interesting to me is that this report doesn't prevent the possibility of a "pro" ipad either that perhaps a "retina" display would be used in. Further it almost corroborates a "pro" ipad by being vague about the possibility of an SD card. So maybe this information is on ipad V2 and maybe some of these other rumors apply to iPad V2 "Pro" and that's why some of the details don't add up.
I could see Apple keeping the same prices with these specs and maybe even dropping Ipad V1 down $100 if they offer it as spec'd in this report and maybe the retina screen would require a $100 price jump. I'd pay for it that's for sure.
It also makes sense to include "retina displays" only on the pro models if (as the report mentions) availability is too low. Although do we know this is true for Apple? It may be for eveyone else, but that's because Apple might have bought up the entire inventory of said screens.
A "pro" model would create a huge buzz and if you can't afford it, then there's still the almost as spiffy, also upgraded, save a few hundred bucks model with the same guts and a different screen and SSD capacity.
Also this may be why there is no mention of the larger capacity SSD. Maybe the capacity on Ipad2 will remain the same while the "pro" model get the larger storage capacities. I dunno, it just feels like we're talking about two different machines with the rumors lately.
Overall to me, this report sounds "too plausible" if you will, but I tend to be overly optimistic. I'm sure Apple will milk the current specs for what they are worth, but I was really hoping they' shoot for the stars on this one.
I still think a "wet dream" ipad is what will make Apple the king of touch devices and the timing is just right for such a thing to happen. By the time you've caught your competition with their pants down twice, you've basically won, game over. It would be impossible for many competitors to remain when there are 20 million Ipads sold and a major upgrade would almost certainly help sell that number of ipads when it's weighed against the competitions offerings.
...and a higher resolution screen and 5mp camera too. They would have a valid point. Why is Apple suddenly slacking off?
A lot of it is cost. Apple is using the best screen, the biggest batteries, the most rigid case, etc. The Moto tablet has a higher Rez, which would have been nice for Apple to have had on the first model, which I'm using to post to this thread. But it costs $800, and it's got 32GB flash. What will the battery life be? From what I've heard, it will be substantially less than 10 hours, which is a real number, not one of those "up to" numbers most other manufacturers use.
I totally agree with the concept Apple used for the iPhone/Touch, which was doubling the Rez of the screen. If it's true, which does make sense, that the high Rez screen would not be able to be made in quantity (quantity for Apple, that is), then it wouldn't be good for them to use some intermediate Rez screen, fragmenting the iPad market, which a double Rez screen wouldn't do nearly as much.
I would like to see higher Rez cameras. But we can look to the Galaxy Tab. It has higher Rez cameras, but they suck. Good cameras cost more. The iPhone costs $650. It has high quality cameras. The Touch costs half that, and the rear camera is much cheaper. The iPad actually costs less than the iPhone, but is a much bigger device, with lower margins. As the song goes "Something's gotta give!"
Yeah, and then you show them the dozens of apps in the fast switching bar, and they'll shut up.
Those icons listed in Fast App Switcher in iOS 4.x are not necessarily using any RAM. They are just a list of your last accessed apps in the order from left to right in which you last access them. While it defeats part of Apple?s goal to make iOS unlike desktop OSes I do wish they?d put a badge on the icons in FAS that are still using RAM as I come across people who say something like ?I wish there was a way I could delete all the apps at once instead of doing them one at a time.?
I totally buy what you are saying. The improvement of tech spec does not really merit an upgrade. Usually upgrades happen when completely new features like 3 axis gyro or facetime make part of the new devices.
I do think that the iPad revolutionized the way we experience the web. It really is better at browsing the web than any other device.
Still, the iPad has not reached its full potential just yet. So much more can be done with it and I am not referring to processors or displays at all but rather this is a huge opportunity to change what we think of in terms of the way we utilize technology
I'm going to get the new one. My wife, who hasn't been using this one, as she considers it to be mine, even though I've tried to get her to, wants this one afterwards.
I do think the new specs are enough to upgrade to. More than double the processing power is a big draw, even if there are other things I'd like to see as well. But it doesn't matter. There are so many people who don't have one yet, that uograders will be a fairly small percentage. I imagine that most people can't afford to do this every year.
Comments
- IPhone 4 already comes with 512 MB of RAM. I see upgrading iPad to only 512 MB to be a serious error.
- A production goal of 5 million per quarter is way off the mark. Even given the modest specs quoted in the article this iPad will sell like hot cakes. This would mean production facilities for at least 3 million a month.
- If they don't know for sure about an SD card slot how can they know anything about iPad 2. This makes me wonder if the whole report is fantasy work.
- I was expecting far better improvements with respect to processor power (as in watts) than is indicated here. That is if they even have their numbers right. Something is fishy here.
- If the power numbers are right that indicates that they did not transition to 32nm. I was really thinking Apple would push hard to make that happen.
Well a few concerns anyway. The biggest disappointment will likely be RAM, the year old iPhone 4 has that much. On the other hand this more than doubles RAMmavailable to apps. The lack of a mention about flash storage sucks too. This may mean no significant upgrade which really sucks at the highway robbery rates Apple gets for flash.In the end this upgrade won't stop me from buying an iPad 2 but it won't cause me to rush out and get one either. The tiny RAM upgrade is a significant cooler here. I was really hoping iPad 2 could support a whole new range of apps with a big RAM upgrade.
This upgrade will be great for fence sitters who don't like to buy the first version of anything. But I'll be waiting patiently for v3.
RAM is also on the rise, the report says. "For making full use of GPU upgrading advantage, iPad 2 needs bigger memory bandwidth. So iPad 2 has 512MB RAM, same as iPhone 4 and twice as much as iPad 1, but running at higher clock 1,066 MHz for getting bigger memory bandwidth (iPhone 4 memory clock is 800 MHz)."
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
How old r u? GROW UP
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
...and a higher resolution screen and 5mp camera too. They would have a valid point. Why is Apple suddenly slacking off?
Mini iPad Launching in 2011
It seems funny that since we already have a mini iPad in the iPod Touch they would consider making just a smaller iPad than just refreshing a bigger iPod Touch XL. According to Digitimes a 5-7-inch iPad will be launching in 2011. Digitimes quoted senior analyst Mingchi Kuo who have said the smaller iPad will measure between 5 – 7-inches, and will cost under $400 when it goes on sale early 2011.
It’s a funny idea best left on April 1st and quickly forgotten. Even though we know that way too many people would buy such a “Mini iPad” at that price.
Who would get the smaller iPad compared to the normal size??
http://www.ipadcollegebook.com/tag/mingchi-kuo
You judge his work.....Just Google his name for an interesting set of "facts" about Apple products.
... the poor recyclability of [carbon fibre]....
Carbon fibre doesn't need to be recyclable. It's biodegradable. Just grind it up, put it in a landfill, and you're done.
Anyway, Apple are more likely to transition to liquid metal than to carbon fibre.
What does this mean?
It means that Apple can tap a huge market without requiring people to "upgrade" their current iPads. Only when the iPad approaches saturation (meaning those who would buy an iPad have already bought one) does Apple need to create huge upgrades with features that drive people to upgrade their product. And often the tipping point of an upgrade is 2 version delta.
Apple has been timing their feature improvement, major features perfectly in the past, so I'm not sure why they wouldn't know what they are doing with the iPad.
I would guess this new feature set will cause some upgrades (maybe not too many), but will drive sales for those who wait for ver2 of a product. So ver3 will cause large ver1 upgrades and a few ver2 upgrades and still drive new sales. Once ver4 is out, the market may be near saturated but by that time they have a user distribution of upgrades.
There is some benefit to having a slight spread in the user-base.
Unlike the iPod market (and possibly the iPhone market, due to limited # of carriers), the iPad is not near saturation.
What does this mean?
It means that Apple can tap a huge market without requiring people to "upgrade" their current iPads. Only when the iPad approaches saturation (meaning those who would buy an iPad have already bought one) does Apple need to create huge upgrades with features that drive people to upgrade their product. And often the tipping point of an upgrade is 2 version delta.
Apple has been timing their feature improvement, major features perfectly in the past, so I'm not sure why they wouldn't know what they are doing with the iPad.
I would guess this new feature set will cause some upgrades (maybe not too many), but will drive sales for those who wait for ver2 of a product. So ver3 will cause large ver1 upgrades and a few ver2 upgrades and still drive new sales. Once ver4 is out, the market may be near saturated but by that time they have a user distribution of upgrades.
There is some benefit to having a slight spread in the user-base.
I totally buy what you are saying. The improvement of tech spec does not really merit an upgrade. Usually upgrades happen when completely new features like 3 axis gyro or facetime make part of the new devices.
I do think that the iPad revolutionized the way we experience the web. It really is better at browsing the web than any other device.
Still, the iPad has not reached its full potential just yet. So much more can be done with it and I am not referring to processors or displays at all but rather this is a huge opportunity to change what we think of in terms of the way we utilize technology
Interesting perspective:
http://www.businessinsider.com/chart...eat-the-ipad-3
That was from the developers perspective. But it's true that a lot of people don't want to spend more than $399 for a tablet. Of course, before the iPad came out, it was said from a survey that if it were below $699 it would sell well. And then, that latest survey was for Android tablets. People buying those are apparently cheaper. We just have to look at the problem they have selling apps to Android owners as opposed to those buying iOS devices, where it's now estimated that there are about 108 apps per device, many of them paid for.
The 5 million figure seems too low.
Not to me. You have to remember that the iPhone isn't expected to go on sale until the end of March at the earliest, so almost all of the 5 million that they are predicting would be made before it even goes on sale. I suspect that 3-4 million would be more than enough for the first couple of weeks after launch. So if this figure is true maybe they are planning to launch in early to mid March.
I can just see myself going to a friends house with my iPad and asking them if they want to watch anything from the list of films I have as opposed to just taking three or four DVDs with me and running out of options.
I'm pretty sure that you can already do this if you have your movies backed up on your home computer and have the Air Video app on your iPad -- just provided that your home internet is up and going and your friend's house/wherever has wi-fi (maybe it works just as well over 3G). I also don't know for sure if Air Video supports video-out to televisions.
For me personally, with remote access to my music and movie collections on my home computer, large amounts of storage on the mobile devices don't matter much at all anymore. All I need is an online connection. But then I do think that if iPads came with around 256gb or more of storage, I'd re-consider and probably make use of it.
- IPhone 4 already comes with 512 MB of RAM. I see upgrading iPad to only 512 MB to be a serious error.
- A production goal of 5 million per quarter is way off the mark. Even given the modest specs quoted in the article this iPad will sell like hot cakes. This would mean production facilities for at least 3 million a month.
- If they don't know for sure about an SD card slot how can they know anything about iPad 2. This makes me wonder if the whole report is fantasy work.
- I was expecting far better improvements with respect to processor power (as in watts) than is indicated here. That is if they even have their numbers right. Something is fishy here.
- If the power numbers are right that indicates that they did not transition to 32nm. I was really thinking Apple would push hard to make that happen.
Well a few concerns anyway. The biggest disappointment will likely be RAM, the year old iPhone 4 has that much. On the other hand this more than doubles RAMmavailable to apps. The lack of a mention about flash storage sucks too. This may mean no significant upgrade which really sucks at the highway robbery rates Apple gets for flash.In the end this upgrade won't stop me from buying an iPad 2 but it won't cause me to rush out and get one either. The tiny RAM upgrade is a significant cooler here. I was really hoping iPad 2 could support a whole new range of apps with a big RAM upgrade.
We don't know how close this really is. So far, they've all been guesses. With a number of competing tablets and phones getting 1 Gb of RAM, it might be thought that we need it too, but that may not be as true. Apple's method of multitasking needs much less RAM in the first place. When I double click the button on mine, I find 94 apps in the fast switching bar. But that isn't a problem for the device, as they aren't using RAM. The same case can't be made for Android devices, which have those apps sucking RAM and CPU cycles, even though they're not being used while in the background, and open.
So more RAM will be needed for various editing apps. Adobe isn't sure yet if more than 512 MB would be needed, assuming people really do want those apps for tablets, which is something I'm arguing with them about.
The word that's been out for some time is that the new dual core cpu's will on average, use less power than the current cortex single core 9 at the same speed. But a dual core VR543 will use more power. Apple can't push to make 32 nm happen. They're doing it as fast as it can be done.
Going to a dual-core CPU with a dual-core, desktop-caliber GPU and it's a minimal upgrade? Based on the current specs of the iPad, game developers have created titles that are already console quality. With this bump in processing and graphics power, the other tablets will still miss out when it comes to developers.
What good is a powerful tablet if you have nothing to run on it is what the competition will face. The iPad has grabbed of of the top developers with few of them producing top-tier titles. Once Microsoft brings Office to the iPad, the other tablets are as good as history.
Will MS be dumb enough to do so?
I can see this coming from a mile away. When Android, and blackberry fanatics see the iPad 2 has 512MB RAM (we don't know yet), here's a line they might say
"Haha iPad 2 has 512MB of RAM, what a piece of sh!t! My Xoom/playbook has 1GB of RAM!"
Yeah, and then you show them the dozens of apps in the fast switching bar, and they'll shut up.
I can't imagine why they would have some details on an SD slot, but still not be sure if it's going to appear. Either it's there or it isn't.
The processor and GPU sound right, but given the CPU/ GPU upgrades why not "optimize" iOS to push a retina display? I thought we all discussed the ability of the A9 dual core GPU combo as being able to push the pixels technically, no?
A retina display really makes sense in allot of ways, not the least of which would be competing with kindle in readability. The ipad screen is still too soft for text and it starkly stands against the iphone. The screen needs an upgrade IMO and would be just as much of a "Kindle Killer feature" as antireflective coatings. Further it would only make photos, videos and games look even better.
Just like the killer feature on IP4 was the screen, so to is the screen on the iPad. Especially when you consider all of the chatter that "specs don't matter" to Apple. If clock rates, RAM etc don't matter then it's the screen that does because that's all an ipad really is, a screen. Everything else inside is arguably irrelevant except maybe to developers whom Apple seems all to happy to appease when it comes to iOS API's and upgrading hardware as evidenced in this report. Dual Core A9 and GPU should make everyone on the "back-end" happy, but I don't know about the RAM
Like the cameras, 512mb of RAM is in line with other iOS devices, but not the competition. Referring to the "back-end" I think devs would also drool over 1GB of RAM and the added cost would seem to me to be minimal both in terms of dollars, physical space and power usage while it would be a huge "cost" when arguing specs with an Android competitor. It's an easy spec to exploit in marketing I don't think Apple would leave the door open even if they didn't really need the RAM. I don't think we'll see less than 1GB personally. The Dev's would be happy for quite some time for sure.
I wonder how much of a report like this based on insider bar talk? Are the components and/ or prototypes people see only part of the story? Maybe some parts will get used, some won't, maybe Apple's thinking/ talking about certain components and someone is reporting that Apple already signed the contract. People talk, often out of their butts.
Interesting to me is that this report doesn't prevent the possibility of a "pro" ipad either that perhaps a "retina" display would be used in. Further it almost corroborates a "pro" ipad by being vague about the possibility of an SD card. So maybe this information is on ipad V2 and maybe some of these other rumors apply to iPad V2 "Pro" and that's why some of the details don't add up.
I could see Apple keeping the same prices with these specs and maybe even dropping Ipad V1 down $100 if they offer it as spec'd in this report and maybe the retina screen would require a $100 price jump. I'd pay for it that's for sure.
It also makes sense to include "retina displays" only on the pro models if (as the report mentions) availability is too low. Although do we know this is true for Apple? It may be for eveyone else, but that's because Apple might have bought up the entire inventory of said screens.
A "pro" model would create a huge buzz and if you can't afford it, then there's still the almost as spiffy, also upgraded, save a few hundred bucks model with the same guts and a different screen and SSD capacity.
Also this may be why there is no mention of the larger capacity SSD. Maybe the capacity on Ipad2 will remain the same while the "pro" model get the larger storage capacities. I dunno, it just feels like we're talking about two different machines with the rumors lately.
Overall to me, this report sounds "too plausible" if you will, but I tend to be overly optimistic. I'm sure Apple will milk the current specs for what they are worth, but I was really hoping they' shoot for the stars on this one.
I still think a "wet dream" ipad is what will make Apple the king of touch devices and the timing is just right for such a thing to happen. By the time you've caught your competition with their pants down twice, you've basically won, game over. It would be impossible for many competitors to remain when there are 20 million Ipads sold and a major upgrade would almost certainly help sell that number of ipads when it's weighed against the competitions offerings.
...and a higher resolution screen and 5mp camera too. They would have a valid point. Why is Apple suddenly slacking off?
A lot of it is cost. Apple is using the best screen, the biggest batteries, the most rigid case, etc. The Moto tablet has a higher Rez, which would have been nice for Apple to have had on the first model, which I'm using to post to this thread. But it costs $800, and it's got 32GB flash. What will the battery life be? From what I've heard, it will be substantially less than 10 hours, which is a real number, not one of those "up to" numbers most other manufacturers use.
I totally agree with the concept Apple used for the iPhone/Touch, which was doubling the Rez of the screen. If it's true, which does make sense, that the high Rez screen would not be able to be made in quantity (quantity for Apple, that is), then it wouldn't be good for them to use some intermediate Rez screen, fragmenting the iPad market, which a double Rez screen wouldn't do nearly as much.
I would like to see higher Rez cameras. But we can look to the Galaxy Tab. It has higher Rez cameras, but they suck. Good cameras cost more. The iPhone costs $650. It has high quality cameras. The Touch costs half that, and the rear camera is much cheaper. The iPad actually costs less than the iPhone, but is a much bigger device, with lower margins. As the song goes "Something's gotta give!"
Yeah, and then you show them the dozens of apps in the fast switching bar, and they'll shut up.
Those icons listed in Fast App Switcher in iOS 4.x are not necessarily using any RAM. They are just a list of your last accessed apps in the order from left to right in which you last access them. While it defeats part of Apple?s goal to make iOS unlike desktop OSes I do wish they?d put a badge on the icons in FAS that are still using RAM as I come across people who say something like ?I wish there was a way I could delete all the apps at once instead of doing them one at a time.?
I totally buy what you are saying. The improvement of tech spec does not really merit an upgrade. Usually upgrades happen when completely new features like 3 axis gyro or facetime make part of the new devices.
I do think that the iPad revolutionized the way we experience the web. It really is better at browsing the web than any other device.
Still, the iPad has not reached its full potential just yet. So much more can be done with it and I am not referring to processors or displays at all but rather this is a huge opportunity to change what we think of in terms of the way we utilize technology
I'm going to get the new one. My wife, who hasn't been using this one, as she considers it to be mine, even though I've tried to get her to, wants this one afterwards.
I do think the new specs are enough to upgrade to. More than double the processing power is a big draw, even if there are other things I'd like to see as well. But it doesn't matter. There are so many people who don't have one yet, that uograders will be a fairly small percentage. I imagine that most people can't afford to do this every year.
Will MS be dumb enough to do so?
Smart enough to do so.