Are you saying they will do nothing in any of the statements he made?
I can conceive for a 2048x1536 iPad this fall is Apple wanting to get so far ahead of the competition to make the iPad another iPod, not an iPhone, in terms of market dominace by unit share. That is the only believable reason they would do this.
However, when I look at the larger picture and account for every puzzle piece I see this would require Apple having investing in this HW, having it ready for a 2011 release and having the other key aspects to support such a high res display without negatively affecting the rest of the product?s usability. I don?t think al of these are inline for 2011, and maybe not even for 2012 or 2013.
There is nothing technically unbelievable about this happening. It would even allow for 1080p output on the AppleTV. Why do you think this is not believable?
The only reasons I can see holding Apple back are:
They can milk the $99 device for longer (though it?s also possible that by having a yearly update at $99 they can grab an even more sales from this cheap CE upgrade).
They won?t upgrade the AppleTV to 1080p output until they can secure the licensing of iTunes Store video sales and rentals to 1080p output to simplify the ecosystem for consumers.
Why do you think this is also unbelievable? Saying you don?t think they will do it is one thing, but it?s certainly not a technical challenge. The only aspect that seems to be missing from iOS is disc support.
There has been no evidence of this expect for some cryptic remarks about iOS? future, the known efficiency of iOS on ARM, and the desire for a proper home server with RAIDed drives, not a single drive system that the family shares.
The only thing believable is aTv with iOS 5. I suppose I should have mentioned that, but with all the rest being so out of there, I didn't even think of it.
No, I simply don't see any of the rest as being something Apple has a need to do from their standpoint. Not iPad3 this year, no home server, etc.
I suspect we will see a revamped MobileMe very soon. While they aren't allowing anyone to purchase it anymore they are still encouraging people to sign up for the 2 month free trial.
Renewing your subscription at the full price is purchasing it. They are still doing that. I know only too well.
Yes, there are always higher standards from the professional realm that seem to set the bar too high for the breakout innovation at lower levels. I wonder what the large-format photographers said about image quality when the 35mm Leica came out.
I'm coming from the point of view where I see the iPhone 4's combination of camera, software and screen as amazing. Therefore, the same combination on the 9.5" double-resolution iPad screen will be what i would call stunning. You may only be impressed or mildly astonished by such images.
And then your own images which you've gathered with all that glass may look so good that you will need to carry one around yourself. "The best 5X7 high-res screen is the one you have with you."
Being that commercial photography was most of what my professional life was about, I can speak to that.
First of all, when Leica first came out with their camera, everyone laughed. It was crap as far as quality went. It was always crap when compared to larger formats, and that was true until the end. Even today, Leica's new 35mm size rangefinder digital is considered to be a wealthy persons toy. Their S2 is a different matter, assuming they can fix the focussing problems.
Quote:
I will stop bothering you with this, after I point out that Apple does not NEED to do this, but I feel that certain operatives within the company WANT to do it. And many others besides me WANT them to do it too.
You are right that there are probably some business reasons not to do it, such as bankrolling an entire screen-production facility separate from the standard iPad lines. And I can't show you a 'single good reason' FOR doing it, as that is an exercise of imagination, and that always stops the discussion when none is forthcoming from the other side.
I actually have a good photographic reason for NEEDing such a screen, but this is the last place where I would discuss it. (It ain't got nuthin' to do with feelthy pictures, either.)
No whining from here if they don't do it, I assure you.
I'm sure we all want a high Rez iPad. I do. I have the first. I recently bought the second, and I will buy the third.
I know some people within Apple, and I'm not hearing anything about this. I wonder just who the operatives in Apple are to whom you are referring. While I can't say that it won't happen 100%, it would only happen if there was some serious overriding reason to do so. That there are people who want one right now is not a good reason. We are happy enough to be buying this at a rate that is straining the production capacity of Apple's suppliers as it is. What good would it do them to rush another model out the door so soon after this one?
I've been talking to Adobe about apps for the iPad, for which they have two right now. But they are simple. There are some things that simply can't be done to RAw images right now on an iOS device, and until apple allows what must be done with files, it won't happen. A higher Rez screen won't make a difference there. We can be sure that Apple is working on such a device, but it will require faster processors and gpus, at the least. This is a lot of work. You don't rework an SoC in six months to market.
Yes, there are always higher standards from the professional realm that seem to set the bar too high for the breakout innovation at lower levels. I wonder what the large-format photographers said about image quality when the 35mm Leica came out.
I'm coming from the point of view where I see the iPhone 4's combination of camera, software and screen as amazing. Therefore, the same combination on the 9.5" double-resolution iPad screen will be what i would call stunning. You may only be impressed or mildly astonished by such images.
And then your own images which you've gathered with all that glass may look so good that you will need to carry one around yourself. "The best 5X7 high-res screen is the one you have with you."
I will stop bothering you with this, after I point out that Apple does not NEED to do this, but I feel that certain operatives within the company WANT to do it. And many others besides me WANT them to do it too.
You are right that there are probably some business reasons not to do it, such as bankrolling an entire screen-production facility separate from the standard iPad lines. And I can't show you a 'single good reason' FOR doing it, as that is an exercise of imagination, and that always stops the discussion when none is forthcoming from the other side.
I actually have a good photographic reason for NEEDing such a screen, but this is the last place where I would discuss it. (It ain't got nuthin' to do with feelthy pictures, either.)
No whining from here if they don't do it, I assure you.
I agree the iPhone 4 takes remarkably good photographs...for a phone. Good enough for most people probably not to need a point and shoot. But you chose the word 'stunning', not me. Landscape photography requires superb glass and a reasonably-sized sensor to get 'stunning', something no tablet will ever have. It's not important though, I see your point. Photographs on a double-res iPad would be joyous. That said, I don't see the iPad ever being an ideal device for taking pictures. I think Apple got it spot on to make the cameras FaceTime-ready rather than reaching for the stars with the specs without justification.
I hope you get your iPad3, but I don't see it happening and I think when you can't come up with a 'single good reason' for doing something, that's usually the time when you decide not to do that thing :P Especially when it costs millions of dollars to do it!
Apple is in a different world than it has been in for 26 of the last 33 years.
CE dominates and there are different rules to the game -- and I believe Apple wants to set the rules.
If they have to release 2 or 3 versions of a device with 12 months to stay ahead of the competition -- I think they will do it. They have risked too much to attain their market advantage... and will not let it slip away.
I agree, that if iOS 5 is to be revolutionary and necessary for an iP5 announce/release in July -- the devs would have it now.
Why does an iOS major release need to be tied to the iPhone -- why not another iDevice?.
Or, why, like OS X, can't an iOS major release support all current iDevices -- and be released when it makes sense for the OS?
Or, one final question: Has Apple forked iOS 4.3x to support the current iDevices -- and are the planning a whole new iDevice category where they will use and exploit features in iOS 5.
If so, then iOS 5 need not be shown until this new iDevice category is announced -- and the Devs can get the beta the same day without any disadvantage.
This latter, is the most far-fetched -- but makes as much sense as some of the other reasons for advancing/delaying the next iOS release.
.
Of all the rumors being bandied around, the one that iOS 5 might be late is the most likely to be correct, if just for the fact that as software, it can fall behind if they're having major problems. That doesn't mean that if it does, it's intentional.
But, like everything else, we'll find out when Apple tells us. I don't like the idea that it will be late. The iPhone is the centerpiece of their strategy, and I would think that they want to introduce new models complete with new OS. If it changes so that the iPad becomes that center, then possibly, we'll see a change in software release strategy at some point. The iPods are losing their importance, even though the Touch is selling very well. But the Touch has an advantage in that when the new OS comes out, current owners get it immediately, and the new models in September come with it.
See, this is more like it. Imagination! It really helps in prediction, especially of the future. (joke, credit goes to . . . )
The tablet form is a window on the connected world, the one we've been waiting for. Not the anchored desktop, not the awkward laptop, but the one that's handheld. Why shouldn't they make it as good a window as possible as soon as they can, rather than waiting for arbitrary release schedules? The question is, can they make it already? Not whether they will.
Oops, I said I wasn't going to say any more about it.
That's one of the beauties behind an iPad HD and/or the ATV HD.
They aren't obsoleting the current products -- they are just extending the line with higher-priced premium models.
For drill, lets say the iPad HD 64 GB entry model is $799 and the ATV HD is $149.
Within reason, they can set pricing to control the demand (and manufacturing requirements).
But they can make a statement, set the bar for another year (or 2) and sell a reasonable amount of product (say 2 Million) within the 1st 3-5 months.
They can continue to sell the current models as well as the new models. They can adjust prices as required, on both the current and new models.
Apple is often criticized for being too secret and not offering providing future information for platform planning...
I maintain, that that is exactly what Apple has done with each iDevice announcement -- the difference is that the future product plan is realized almost immediately (weeks or a few months).
Compare that with RIMM, MMI, HP, MSFT, Sammy -- where products are announced and never appear or are obsolete before they ship.
.
But you're not addressing any major matters such as fragmentation, new SoC, R&D lag time, manufacturing line development, etc.
All of this must be addressed first. Of course, there will be more people unhappy that Apple came out with a new model so soon than people who will be happy about it.
Yeah, and his use of it didn't have anything to do with Steve Jobs using it in the exact same context, publicly, very recently.
I doubt it did. Steve Jobs wasn't the first person to use the word. The poster wants to use the word. Is it not possible that that was his opinion (and the word he's always used) before Steve used the word?
Stop with the iPad3 already, no matter what you want to call it! Apple has no reason to come out with one, and I haven't seen a single good reason why they should, but there are many reasons why they shouldn't. This is much more a whine from people wanting a higher Rez model as soon as possible, then it is a solid business reason for Apple to do so.
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
I doubt it did. Steve Jobs wasn't the first person to use the word. The poster wants to use the word. Is it not possible that that was his opinion (and the word he's always used) before Steve used the word?
Watching the pathetic flailings of Dell, Motorola, Samsung and such in the tablet arena, it is hard not to think of "flummoxed" to describe them once it is in your head.
At a loss...
Confused...
Back on their heels...
In disarray...
Rudderless...
Grasping at straws...
Head in the sand...
None of those sum up the competition so simply... I wonder if Ireland has a non-Jobs-tainted term to suggest?
Watching the pathetic flailings of Dell, Motorola, Samsung and such in the tablet arena, it is hard not to think of "flummoxed" to describe them once it is in your head.
At a loss...
Confused...
Back on their heels...
In disarray...
Rudderless...
Grasping at straws...
Head in the sand...
None of those sum up the competition so simply... I wonder if Ireland has a non-Jobs-tainted term to suggest?
For someone that believes "Flummoxed" is Steve Jobs' word, I doubt it.
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
On the other hand, they can't make them fast enough after the refresh now as it is. Add holiday shopping pressures to the mix and I would say your line fo thinking argues AGAINST the fall refresh. As it stands now they have huge demand for a good part of the year instead of all stacked up in the fall. Honestly, I heard very few people worrying about the iPad being long in the tooth last December (outside of the internets).
The holiday season is the LAST time you want to be dealing with supply constraints because of the pressure consumers feel to have *something* in hand to give as a gift. Competitors, lame though they may be, would Stan to gain from that scenario...
It is difficult to imagine how cloud computing in general is going to work. In its basic form it works like Dropbox or iDisk. In that case, you copy files to it like an external hard disk and can then access it from another computer. It doesn't care what kind of data you use. But when you throw an iPhone into the mix you are limited to only the files that iOS apps can open and without local storage you are limited to what you can do with the data.
actually I don't think you would copy files anywhere. Your files would be in your "personal folder". You would see one file storage area, not a "cloud" vs "local". Sure on the phone it can't open everything, so open it on the computer. Same "personal" folder on both.
Apple can make it seamless.
The question is how good will it work in the background. How will it choose what subset to cache on the phone? If you change a file will it wait till you're on wifi before it uploads or do it straight away? If all files are always available, how do you tell it which songs and videos you want available on your flight?
Edit: ie how does it minimize unnecessary file movements, keep file access fast, make sure your files are safe, work on phone on flights, not overuse data on 3G, work when the internet is down at home etc.
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bageljoey
On the other hand, they can't make them fast enough after the refresh now as it is. Add holiday shopping pressures to the mix and I would say your line fo thinking argues AGAINST the fall refresh. As it stands now they have huge demand for a good part of the year instead of all stacked up in the fall. Honestly, I heard very few people worrying about the iPad being long in the tooth last December (outside of the internets).
The holiday season is the LAST time you want to be dealing with supply constraints because of the pressure consumers feel to have *something* in hand to give as a gift. Competitors, lame though they may be, would Stan to gain from that scenario...
Several things:
1) the Fall upgrade cycle, as originally suggested by Gruber, seems to make sense for the iPad as a product.
2) the iPad 1, likely, was announced when it was because: it (and the iOS fork) was ready; the devs needed lead time for the new form factor; to set the bar for the competition; to have time to define and build demand for the product. Having all been been successfully addressed, these reasons no longer make much sense for the product line.
3) we can assume that by Fall 2011 iPad 2 supply demand will be in balance -- with adequate supply for the holiday season
4) if done properly, a Fall addition to the iPad line at the upper end should have little effect on the holiday buying of the iPad 2 -- it could actually help sales of the iPad 2. Price, availability, features are all part of this as well as not obsolescing or reducing the appeal of the iPad 2. It is a classic marketing problem -- Apple should be able to do this.
5) as some others have mentioned, there are some "power" enhancements needed for more specialized uses of an iPad -- in Photo Editing, AV Post Processing, CAD, Medicine, Education, Gaming, etc. While these uses can justify a more expensive iPad, "normal" user requirements are better met by a less-expensive main-stream iPad -- the iPad 2.
We have 3 iPad 2s and 3 iPad 1s -- I bought a referb iPad 1 at the same time I ordered the iPad 2s.
I don't think of the iPad 1 as a second-class citizen.
I will buy at least 1 of the next version of iPad -- but do not expect to feel either the iPad 1s or iPad 2s will be obsolete.
I think we will be better served over a 2-3 year period with iPads of varying ages than with traditional computers (any form factor) of varying ages -- and will have saved an estimated $3,000-$4,000 in accessories, software, batteries, etc.
I want to throw this final item in just to stir the pot.
Within the next month or 2 Apple is expected to release "jaw-dropping" versions of its "Pro" apps: Final Cut Studio and Logic. These apps currently have very complex, specialized (read non-Apple) UIs. They seem to "cry out" for a simplified, intuitive, multitouch UI. An iPad as a graphics tablet or control surface could greatly enhance these products.
The Mac Pro Apps use special Apple ProRes codecs to efficiently process and manipulate high-quality video, The codecs were ported to iOS 4.3... but no iOS apps use them...
The iPad 2 demos of GarageBand and iMovie point the way for A/V editing and production using a touch interface. Randy Ubillos, who did the iPad 2 iMove demo is the originator of what was later to become Final Cut.
Call me crazy, but Apple could release a specialty iPad device, with ThunderBolt, as a multitouch UI accessory for these new Pro Mac apps -- and it could be tied to a release cycle independent from the "traditional" iPad line.
actually I don't think you would copy files anywhere. Your files would be in your "personal folder". You would see one file storage area, not a "cloud" vs "local". Sure on the phone it can't open everything, so open it on the computer. Same "personal" folder on both.
.
I'm thinking that there needs to be a standard protocol for cloud computing. We are already hobbled with different disk based formats be it HFS+ NTFS or Unix file systems. The cloud needs to be a universal file system which of course necessitates iOS having one.
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
Not really. Did you notice the lines for the iPad, both models? Do you really think that people weren't buying because of when it came out? Did you notice that Apple sold 7.3 million during the holiday season as well?
Apple like to stay on message. The way they introduce models enables them to do that. So they have iPhones in June, iPods in September, iPads in March/April, etc. This way, they get the press and the public to think of that one major new item. There's no mixed message. This gives them mucho free publicity that they wouldn't get if several things came out at once.
There's another good reason for why they do it this way. People are only going to buy so much at once. Why would Apple want iPads vying with iPods for sales? That makes no sense, and would be a very bad marketing step. One thing I learned in advertising at the beginning of my career, was that you have to keep people focussed on your message. Never split that message up.
If Apple came out with new iPods and iPads at the same time, people would be torn between which to buy at that time. One would win out over the other. This way, Apple gets the advantage of people lining up several times a year to buy new products that aren't being challenged by other new Apple products.
One of the big reasons why Apple left the Macworld shows was because they were expected to introduce a range of products at each show. They didn't want to be forced to do that, so they stopped going. It wasn't the expense. When they were small, and struggling, they needed those expos for exposure, because they couldn't command the press several times a year when they came out with new products. But as we know, that's not a problem anymore.
So, as I keep saying, I don't see a single good reason for a new iPad in September, unless sales are falling, and their competitors sales are sailing. But I'm not so certain that they have enough time to do it right.
Comments
Are you saying they will do nothing in any of the statements he made?
I can conceive for a 2048x1536 iPad this fall is Apple wanting to get so far ahead of the competition to make the iPad another iPod, not an iPhone, in terms of market dominace by unit share. That is the only believable reason they would do this.
However, when I look at the larger picture and account for every puzzle piece I see this would require Apple having investing in this HW, having it ready for a 2011 release and having the other key aspects to support such a high res display without negatively affecting the rest of the product?s usability. I don?t think al of these are inline for 2011, and maybe not even for 2012 or 2013.
There is nothing technically unbelievable about this happening. It would even allow for 1080p output on the AppleTV. Why do you think this is not believable?
The only reasons I can see holding Apple back are:
Why do you think this is also unbelievable? Saying you don?t think they will do it is one thing, but it?s certainly not a technical challenge. The only aspect that seems to be missing from iOS is disc support.
There has been no evidence of this expect for some cryptic remarks about iOS? future, the known efficiency of iOS on ARM, and the desire for a proper home server with RAIDed drives, not a single drive system that the family shares.
The only thing believable is aTv with iOS 5. I suppose I should have mentioned that, but with all the rest being so out of there, I didn't even think of it.
No, I simply don't see any of the rest as being something Apple has a need to do from their standpoint. Not iPad3 this year, no home server, etc.
"Flummoxed" is not exclusive to Steve Jobs.
Yeah, and his use of it didn't have anything to do with Steve Jobs using it in the exact same context, publicly, very recently.
I suspect we will see a revamped MobileMe very soon. While they aren't allowing anyone to purchase it anymore they are still encouraging people to sign up for the 2 month free trial.
Renewing your subscription at the full price is purchasing it. They are still doing that. I know only too well.
Yes, there are always higher standards from the professional realm that seem to set the bar too high for the breakout innovation at lower levels. I wonder what the large-format photographers said about image quality when the 35mm Leica came out.
I'm coming from the point of view where I see the iPhone 4's combination of camera, software and screen as amazing. Therefore, the same combination on the 9.5" double-resolution iPad screen will be what i would call stunning. You may only be impressed or mildly astonished by such images.
And then your own images which you've gathered with all that glass may look so good that you will need to carry one around yourself. "The best 5X7 high-res screen is the one you have with you."
Being that commercial photography was most of what my professional life was about, I can speak to that.
First of all, when Leica first came out with their camera, everyone laughed. It was crap as far as quality went. It was always crap when compared to larger formats, and that was true until the end. Even today, Leica's new 35mm size rangefinder digital is considered to be a wealthy persons toy. Their S2 is a different matter, assuming they can fix the focussing problems.
I will stop bothering you with this, after I point out that Apple does not NEED to do this, but I feel that certain operatives within the company WANT to do it. And many others besides me WANT them to do it too.
You are right that there are probably some business reasons not to do it, such as bankrolling an entire screen-production facility separate from the standard iPad lines. And I can't show you a 'single good reason' FOR doing it, as that is an exercise of imagination, and that always stops the discussion when none is forthcoming from the other side.
I actually have a good photographic reason for NEEDing such a screen, but this is the last place where I would discuss it. (It ain't got nuthin' to do with feelthy pictures, either.)
No whining from here if they don't do it, I assure you.
I'm sure we all want a high Rez iPad. I do. I have the first. I recently bought the second, and I will buy the third.
I know some people within Apple, and I'm not hearing anything about this. I wonder just who the operatives in Apple are to whom you are referring. While I can't say that it won't happen 100%, it would only happen if there was some serious overriding reason to do so. That there are people who want one right now is not a good reason. We are happy enough to be buying this at a rate that is straining the production capacity of Apple's suppliers as it is. What good would it do them to rush another model out the door so soon after this one?
I've been talking to Adobe about apps for the iPad, for which they have two right now. But they are simple. There are some things that simply can't be done to RAw images right now on an iOS device, and until apple allows what must be done with files, it won't happen. A higher Rez screen won't make a difference there. We can be sure that Apple is working on such a device, but it will require faster processors and gpus, at the least. This is a lot of work. You don't rework an SoC in six months to market.
Renewing your subscription at the full price is purchasing it. They are still doing that. I know only too well.
You can't buy new subscriptions anymore, either online or boxed but you already know that so my previous post stands.
Expect to see something soon. They aren't going to leave free trial people hanging IMHO.
Yes, there are always higher standards from the professional realm that seem to set the bar too high for the breakout innovation at lower levels. I wonder what the large-format photographers said about image quality when the 35mm Leica came out.
I'm coming from the point of view where I see the iPhone 4's combination of camera, software and screen as amazing. Therefore, the same combination on the 9.5" double-resolution iPad screen will be what i would call stunning. You may only be impressed or mildly astonished by such images.
And then your own images which you've gathered with all that glass may look so good that you will need to carry one around yourself. "The best 5X7 high-res screen is the one you have with you."
I will stop bothering you with this, after I point out that Apple does not NEED to do this, but I feel that certain operatives within the company WANT to do it. And many others besides me WANT them to do it too.
You are right that there are probably some business reasons not to do it, such as bankrolling an entire screen-production facility separate from the standard iPad lines. And I can't show you a 'single good reason' FOR doing it, as that is an exercise of imagination, and that always stops the discussion when none is forthcoming from the other side.
I actually have a good photographic reason for NEEDing such a screen, but this is the last place where I would discuss it. (It ain't got nuthin' to do with feelthy pictures, either.)
No whining from here if they don't do it, I assure you.
I agree the iPhone 4 takes remarkably good photographs...for a phone. Good enough for most people probably not to need a point and shoot. But you chose the word 'stunning', not me. Landscape photography requires superb glass and a reasonably-sized sensor to get 'stunning', something no tablet will ever have. It's not important though, I see your point. Photographs on a double-res iPad would be joyous. That said, I don't see the iPad ever being an ideal device for taking pictures. I think Apple got it spot on to make the cameras FaceTime-ready rather than reaching for the stars with the specs without justification.
I hope you get your iPad3, but I don't see it happening and I think when you can't come up with a 'single good reason' for doing something, that's usually the time when you decide not to do that thing :P Especially when it costs millions of dollars to do it!
Yes!
Apple is in a different world than it has been in for 26 of the last 33 years.
CE dominates and there are different rules to the game -- and I believe Apple wants to set the rules.
If they have to release 2 or 3 versions of a device with 12 months to stay ahead of the competition -- I think they will do it. They have risked too much to attain their market advantage... and will not let it slip away.
I agree, that if iOS 5 is to be revolutionary and necessary for an iP5 announce/release in July -- the devs would have it now.
Why does an iOS major release need to be tied to the iPhone -- why not another iDevice?.
Or, why, like OS X, can't an iOS major release support all current iDevices -- and be released when it makes sense for the OS?
Or, one final question: Has Apple forked iOS 4.3x to support the current iDevices -- and are the planning a whole new iDevice category where they will use and exploit features in iOS 5.
If so, then iOS 5 need not be shown until this new iDevice category is announced -- and the Devs can get the beta the same day without any disadvantage.
This latter, is the most far-fetched -- but makes as much sense as some of the other reasons for advancing/delaying the next iOS release.
.
Of all the rumors being bandied around, the one that iOS 5 might be late is the most likely to be correct, if just for the fact that as software, it can fall behind if they're having major problems. That doesn't mean that if it does, it's intentional.
But, like everything else, we'll find out when Apple tells us. I don't like the idea that it will be late. The iPhone is the centerpiece of their strategy, and I would think that they want to introduce new models complete with new OS. If it changes so that the iPad becomes that center, then possibly, we'll see a change in software release strategy at some point. The iPods are losing their importance, even though the Touch is selling very well. But the Touch has an advantage in that when the new OS comes out, current owners get it immediately, and the new models in September come with it.
See, this is more like it. Imagination! It really helps in prediction, especially of the future. (joke, credit goes to . . . )
The tablet form is a window on the connected world, the one we've been waiting for. Not the anchored desktop, not the awkward laptop, but the one that's handheld. Why shouldn't they make it as good a window as possible as soon as they can, rather than waiting for arbitrary release schedules? The question is, can they make it already? Not whether they will.
Oops, I said I wasn't going to say any more about it.
Well, I'm not barring you from speaking about it.
That's one of the beauties behind an iPad HD and/or the ATV HD.
They aren't obsoleting the current products -- they are just extending the line with higher-priced premium models.
For drill, lets say the iPad HD 64 GB entry model is $799 and the ATV HD is $149.
Within reason, they can set pricing to control the demand (and manufacturing requirements).
But they can make a statement, set the bar for another year (or 2) and sell a reasonable amount of product (say 2 Million) within the 1st 3-5 months.
They can continue to sell the current models as well as the new models. They can adjust prices as required, on both the current and new models.
Apple is often criticized for being too secret and not offering providing future information for platform planning...
I maintain, that that is exactly what Apple has done with each iDevice announcement -- the difference is that the future product plan is realized almost immediately (weeks or a few months).
Compare that with RIMM, MMI, HP, MSFT, Sammy -- where products are announced and never appear or are obsolete before they ship.
.
But you're not addressing any major matters such as fragmentation, new SoC, R&D lag time, manufacturing line development, etc.
All of this must be addressed first. Of course, there will be more people unhappy that Apple came out with a new model so soon than people who will be happy about it.
Yeah, and his use of it didn't have anything to do with Steve Jobs using it in the exact same context, publicly, very recently.
I doubt it did. Steve Jobs wasn't the first person to use the word. The poster wants to use the word. Is it not possible that that was his opinion (and the word he's always used) before Steve used the word?
Stop with the iPad3 already, no matter what you want to call it! Apple has no reason to come out with one, and I haven't seen a single good reason why they should, but there are many reasons why they shouldn't. This is much more a whine from people wanting a higher Rez model as soon as possible, then it is a solid business reason for Apple to do so.
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
I doubt it did. Steve Jobs wasn't the first person to use the word. The poster wants to use the word. Is it not possible that that was his opinion (and the word he's always used) before Steve used the word?
Watching the pathetic flailings of Dell, Motorola, Samsung and such in the tablet arena, it is hard not to think of "flummoxed" to describe them once it is in your head.
At a loss...
Confused...
Back on their heels...
In disarray...
Rudderless...
Grasping at straws...
Head in the sand...
None of those sum up the competition so simply... I wonder if Ireland has a non-Jobs-tainted term to suggest?
Watching the pathetic flailings of Dell, Motorola, Samsung and such in the tablet arena, it is hard not to think of "flummoxed" to describe them once it is in your head.
At a loss...
Confused...
Back on their heels...
In disarray...
Rudderless...
Grasping at straws...
Head in the sand...
None of those sum up the competition so simply... I wonder if Ireland has a non-Jobs-tainted term to suggest?
For someone that believes "Flummoxed" is Steve Jobs' word, I doubt it.
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
On the other hand, they can't make them fast enough after the refresh now as it is. Add holiday shopping pressures to the mix and I would say your line fo thinking argues AGAINST the fall refresh. As it stands now they have huge demand for a good part of the year instead of all stacked up in the fall. Honestly, I heard very few people worrying about the iPad being long in the tooth last December (outside of the internets).
The holiday season is the LAST time you want to be dealing with supply constraints because of the pressure consumers feel to have *something* in hand to give as a gift. Competitors, lame though they may be, would Stan to gain from that scenario...
It is difficult to imagine how cloud computing in general is going to work. In its basic form it works like Dropbox or iDisk. In that case, you copy files to it like an external hard disk and can then access it from another computer. It doesn't care what kind of data you use. But when you throw an iPhone into the mix you are limited to only the files that iOS apps can open and without local storage you are limited to what you can do with the data.
actually I don't think you would copy files anywhere. Your files would be in your "personal folder". You would see one file storage area, not a "cloud" vs "local". Sure on the phone it can't open everything, so open it on the computer. Same "personal" folder on both.
Apple can make it seamless.
The question is how good will it work in the background. How will it choose what subset to cache on the phone? If you change a file will it wait till you're on wifi before it uploads or do it straight away? If all files are always available, how do you tell it which songs and videos you want available on your flight?
Edit: ie how does it minimize unnecessary file movements, keep file access fast, make sure your files are safe, work on phone on flights, not overuse data on 3G, work when the internet is down at home etc.
We have a problem Houston.
Cloud-based not only implies but states the operating system is founded on the Cloud. It's not.
Adding Cloud Services is not Cloud-based.
If you can't grasp the difference no one can truly respect the reporting.
Agreed! I'm glad I'm not the only one who saw this and rolled their eyes...
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
On the other hand, they can't make them fast enough after the refresh now as it is. Add holiday shopping pressures to the mix and I would say your line fo thinking argues AGAINST the fall refresh. As it stands now they have huge demand for a good part of the year instead of all stacked up in the fall. Honestly, I heard very few people worrying about the iPad being long in the tooth last December (outside of the internets).
The holiday season is the LAST time you want to be dealing with supply constraints because of the pressure consumers feel to have *something* in hand to give as a gift. Competitors, lame though they may be, would Stan to gain from that scenario...
Several things:
1) the Fall upgrade cycle, as originally suggested by Gruber, seems to make sense for the iPad as a product.
2) the iPad 1, likely, was announced when it was because: it (and the iOS fork) was ready; the devs needed lead time for the new form factor; to set the bar for the competition; to have time to define and build demand for the product. Having all been been successfully addressed, these reasons no longer make much sense for the product line.
3) we can assume that by Fall 2011 iPad 2 supply demand will be in balance -- with adequate supply for the holiday season
4) if done properly, a Fall addition to the iPad line at the upper end should have little effect on the holiday buying of the iPad 2 -- it could actually help sales of the iPad 2. Price, availability, features are all part of this as well as not obsolescing or reducing the appeal of the iPad 2. It is a classic marketing problem -- Apple should be able to do this.
5) as some others have mentioned, there are some "power" enhancements needed for more specialized uses of an iPad -- in Photo Editing, AV Post Processing, CAD, Medicine, Education, Gaming, etc. While these uses can justify a more expensive iPad, "normal" user requirements are better met by a less-expensive main-stream iPad -- the iPad 2.
We have 3 iPad 2s and 3 iPad 1s -- I bought a referb iPad 1 at the same time I ordered the iPad 2s.
I don't think of the iPad 1 as a second-class citizen.
I will buy at least 1 of the next version of iPad -- but do not expect to feel either the iPad 1s or iPad 2s will be obsolete.
I think we will be better served over a 2-3 year period with iPads of varying ages than with traditional computers (any form factor) of varying ages -- and will have saved an estimated $3,000-$4,000 in accessories, software, batteries, etc.
I want to throw this final item in just to stir the pot.
Within the next month or 2 Apple is expected to release "jaw-dropping" versions of its "Pro" apps: Final Cut Studio and Logic. These apps currently have very complex, specialized (read non-Apple) UIs. They seem to "cry out" for a simplified, intuitive, multitouch UI. An iPad as a graphics tablet or control surface could greatly enhance these products.
The Mac Pro Apps use special Apple ProRes codecs to efficiently process and manipulate high-quality video, The codecs were ported to iOS 4.3... but no iOS apps use them...
The iPad 2 demos of GarageBand and iMovie point the way for A/V editing and production using a touch interface. Randy Ubillos, who did the iPad 2 iMove demo is the originator of what was later to become Final Cut.
Call me crazy, but Apple could release a specialty iPad device, with ThunderBolt, as a multitouch UI accessory for these new Pro Mac apps -- and it could be tied to a release cycle independent from the "traditional" iPad line.
.
actually I don't think you would copy files anywhere. Your files would be in your "personal folder". You would see one file storage area, not a "cloud" vs "local". Sure on the phone it can't open everything, so open it on the computer. Same "personal" folder on both.
.
I'm thinking that there needs to be a standard protocol for cloud computing. We are already hobbled with different disk based formats be it HFS+ NTFS or Unix file systems. The cloud needs to be a universal file system which of course necessitates iOS having one.
The argument is fall is a much better time for the annual iPad update than late winter/early spring.
Switching to releasing an iPad every fall nicely positions Apple for the Xmas shopping season; but with the current release schedule, you get people saying "Don't buy an iPad for Christmas as a new iPad will come out soon."
Not really. Did you notice the lines for the iPad, both models? Do you really think that people weren't buying because of when it came out? Did you notice that Apple sold 7.3 million during the holiday season as well?
Apple like to stay on message. The way they introduce models enables them to do that. So they have iPhones in June, iPods in September, iPads in March/April, etc. This way, they get the press and the public to think of that one major new item. There's no mixed message. This gives them mucho free publicity that they wouldn't get if several things came out at once.
There's another good reason for why they do it this way. People are only going to buy so much at once. Why would Apple want iPads vying with iPods for sales? That makes no sense, and would be a very bad marketing step. One thing I learned in advertising at the beginning of my career, was that you have to keep people focussed on your message. Never split that message up.
If Apple came out with new iPods and iPads at the same time, people would be torn between which to buy at that time. One would win out over the other. This way, Apple gets the advantage of people lining up several times a year to buy new products that aren't being challenged by other new Apple products.
One of the big reasons why Apple left the Macworld shows was because they were expected to introduce a range of products at each show. They didn't want to be forced to do that, so they stopped going. It wasn't the expense. When they were small, and struggling, they needed those expos for exposure, because they couldn't command the press several times a year when they came out with new products. But as we know, that's not a problem anymore.
So, as I keep saying, I don't see a single good reason for a new iPad in September, unless sales are falling, and their competitors sales are sailing. But I'm not so certain that they have enough time to do it right.