Why in the hell would I buy and LTE iPad when I can use any LTE smartphone to connect my iPad to in order to get internet?
Because not everybody wants to carry around two devices to do one thing. Plus, since you're on an Apple board, very few people on here have an LTE smartphone to tether.
Because tethering eats up your phone battery quicker than cellular tech in a tablet and you've got to fiddle with your phone.
Some folks buying tablets with cell technology are banking on eventually being able to add their tablet to their post paid account. AT&T and Verizon both have said that shared data plans are coming so the convenience of having built in cell tech may be too much of a lure for some people.
It's the same damn story every year, and some people never learn. There is no way that Apple is ever going to include every single feature that a few whiners whine about on the internet. Anybody who thinks otherwise is totally ignorant as to how Apple operates and why they do what they do. Some people completely lack objectivity and they are too blinded by their own personal needs and wants, which shows that these people don't have a clue as to what Apple is about. They fail to see the big picture.
Apple is not designing the iPad for you, as in you personally, they are designing the iPad for the majority of people, not a few extremists. As an example: So fucking what if an iPad doesn't have an SD card slot? Apple obviously made a strategic and business decision at one point in time, and they have decided that people like you who must have an SD card slot are not important to them at all. They do not give a shit about that particular feature. So, go buy an Android tablet and quit whining, because an iPad will most likely never have any such slot. It would have already had one, if that was Apple's intention. The same goes for Flash or any number of other ridiculous features which people have whined and moaned about.
People have been whining about that alleged retina display for the longest time now, and go figure, the new iPad will have such a display, but I guess it's time to whine about other stuff now. And I see that somebody here has already labelled the iPad 3 (or whatever it's going to be called) a fail? On which fail scale is that? On your own little private, personal fail scale which nobody else on the planet gives a shit about?
In the real world, the iPad 3 will sell at least 65 million units in 2012, lines will be massive and it will be sold out many places. Anybody who would label the iPad 3 a fail already, even before it's been presented is obviously totally delusional and lives on a different planet. If there is no LTE, then big fucking deal, go cry me a river, or even better, go buy some junky Android tablet. I would guess that Apple is most likely going to make the iPhone 5 (or whatever the fuck it's going to be called) the first device to include LTE.
Indeed, it's the same damn story every time Apple is about to announce something. Same old people whining. About what? About how others whine about Apple not putting in all possible features. About how someone (however few) is predicting an Apple failure. It's the victim mentality that is the fail here. Apple is no longer David, the little engine that could or lion cornered. Trolling for doomsayers and naysayers is no longer fashionable. Whining about whiners who whine about SD cards is akin to mocking John McCain in the 2012 election. Predicting an Apple success is no longer a bet against all odds. Not is it a reflection of any form of intelligence, any justification for arrogance. It's just a tired act.
Be happy that the electronics are getting a boost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
I've always been sceptical of 4G being in the iPad 3. Seems more likely to go into the next iPhone first.
4G is of little value in an iPhone. At least compared to its value in an iPad. Beyond that iPad is. An excellent place for tech that isn't ready for ultra low power.
Quote:
Of course, they can release a 4G model whenever they want, since it would be a separate model and would only release in some regions (it makes no sense selling 4G products in countries that don't have 4G yet).
it wouldnt be a separate model at all.
Quote:
It's plausible that they'd release 4G versions along with the next iPhone (which would also come in 3G and 4G flavours).
Not even remotely possible
Quote:
Since it's going to be thicker, I'm kind of worried it'll be heavier.
I really dont get this whine about less than a mm of thickness. A surprising amount of weight can be lost simply by going to a thinner screen glass. People need to chill and realize that iPad3 is not the end of the world. It will be what ever it is nothing more and nothing less. If you don't like what it is you don't buy.
The more information that comes out, the more I'm tempted to hold off.
Make your buying decision on real facts.
Quote:
A high Res display and Siri are great, but Apple should keep pushing the envelope.
And just how is a display that has never been made before not pushing the envelope?
Quote:
"Good enough" is how you go from market leader to an also ran. They have the lead in tablet computing - padding their pockets for year by making a device that isn't cutting edge will harm the company.
Just putting a high res screen in this device is cutting edge.
Quote:
LTE is pretty common in the Android world, the iPad really needs to have it.
I'd be surprised if it doesn't.
Quote:
It's fine that Apple doesn't want to include an SD slot, but make a 128GB model available then.
I tend to agree more storage would be nice but that new screen won't be cheap this year.
Quote:
I know processor speed isn't everything, but if Android makers are using quad cores, then make sure that the processor and graphics are powerful enough to drive the Retina display. The rumors are saying that the cameras are better, but they should at least be to the iPhone 4 level.
The cameras would be the very last thing I'd worry about. In fact they are a waste of space, power and time.
Quote:
Hopefully we'll all be pleasantly surprised on Wednesday.
Actually with all of the leaks there will be no surprises. Further if you are already dismissing the high resolution screen as a major step forward then you really don't have a clue as to what cutting edge is.
I've yet to see a huge desire expressed in the marketplace over flash storage size. Demand does impact Apples planning. If we don't get larger storage sizes people will have to become more vocal.
Cost is the other factor. Not so much the cost for the flash modules but the cost of the new screen. I suspect it will be substantially more expensive this year due to production ramp and new tooling costs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
Isn't Apple one of the biggest purchasers of flash on the planet? I thought that they pretty much had the market cornered and get preferential pricing?
When you get to be Apples size you can corner the market on price but the price of flash has been falling anyways. In any event as noted above they simply may not be motivated to increase flash size in an iPad.
Quote:
With that said, I believe that the iPad uses two NAND modules while the iPhone uses just one. The 64GB iPhone 4S used a single 64GB module, meaning that it should be pretty trivial to add two 64GB modules to an iPad 3.
yep! This is the really sad part here. As an aside I do wish that Apple would consider the use of blade storage in the iPad. That is. Storage on a separate card, that is upgradeable.
Quote:
The question is whether Apple had the stomach to make such a move or if it will continue for the third strait year with the same capacities.
Stomach? If customer demand isn't here it doesn't matter. Beyond that I believe their entire focus has been on getting retina right on this machine. It is the right priority for Apple and a good portion of their customer base.
I'd be the first to want to see more flash but if I had to make a choice it would be to have more RAM than flash. IPad is constantly showing me issues or performance glitches directly related to the lack of RAM. It is actually strange that it hasn't even been mentioned yet in this thread. In many cases the lack of RAM costs people real $$$$$ especially if they use Safari over 3G.
I don't care if the iPad3 has LTE because I'll be buying the wi-fi only model anyway.
I don't need LTE at all in fact. LTE coverage just isn't where it needs to be for it to matter at this time.
Maybe in another year it might factor into my decision making on a product, but for now, it's a non-issue that probably matters more to bloggers and android spec sheet monkeys.
In terms of actual use, HSPA+ can keep me happy for a bit.
The only thing I'd really like to see from Apple is a proper keyboard dock for the iPad, similar to ASUS Transformer.
The jewel in the crown will be that retina screen.
(Heh, notice how people aren't talking about net books anymore, eh?)
GPU should be impressive progression. (Even if the 'Rogue' is out of reach for now. Got to leave something to coo about for the iPad4?) If the iPad 2 is 4-9 times faster than iPad 1 then any sort of improvement should have the iPad 3 more comfortable with the retina screen than my iPhone 4 is!
I think Ram will need a significant boost. I notice how my iPhone 4 gets choppy and slow with lots of even modest apps open.
For me, the real dark horse is the use of an SD card slot. I'd like one. To spring it out of the iPad and spring it into the iMac or Air for example. *looks at the image apps that are increasingly competing on the iPad. Doing 'retina' style work. Don't we need a way to get info in/out of the iPad real fast rather than the (polite) slow dock connector?
One sure sign of great design is that it's difficult to improve. Brilliant engineering can often be recognized by the way in which successive iterations become ever more subtle, because tiny, evolutionary changes are all that can be made without reducing the quality of the end result. Separated from its popular redefinition as a dominance game played by the ignorant via conspicuous consumption, taste is really nothing more than sensitivity? the capacity for subtle perception.
Because concepts like taste and elegance have historically been among the trappings of oppression and we fancy ourselves a democracy, we as a culture now suspect the very words. It's time to remember that "refinement" is nothing more than the process of discarding what isn't intrinsic until only the real thing remains. It's figuratively and literally the inverse of how we make crap. Instead of elegance, we tastelessly base our economy, endeavors, and lives on false assumptions and inevitably destroy what we've created in hopes of squeezing another buck out of it. Advertising is a great example of this, being nothing more than propaganda designed to dupe people into valuing the "new and improved," never more so than when it's neither. You can no more advertise elegance than you can fight for peace.
Once we all decided the purpose of life was to Get Rich, it was inevitable that destructive vulgarity would not only be accepted and admired, but the only thing we aspire to. It's not about what bad you carry or what fork you use: vulgarity results from a lack of integrity, first in ourselves, and then (inevitably) in everything we touch. If we rewrite "The Emperor's New Clothes" for our time, its the Emperor who's wise and his subjects who're fools. The moral is that, having been subjected to exacting design standards for thousands of years, the human body is unlikely to be improved by slapping this season's Versace on it. Boredom, in particular, is almost entirely a statement about the inability of the bored to pay attention. It's both an aesthetic and a moral failing ? the two are inextricable.
Meanwhile, back at the nerd ranch, tech journalism remains at the forefront of a largely unexamined and completely fallacious assumption built into capitalism: that change itself is good. Conflating elegant design with profitability is a mistake when our economy guarantees that they're antithetical far more often than not. Personal electronics have become the physical equivalent of stockbrokers churning their clients: making changes to portfolios which benefit only the broker. So long as the primary goal is to profit by creating change, an exploding car will always be preferable to a gorgeous, reliable, efficient, and safe one. Of course we love to blow tihs up, don't we? So long as its other peoples' tihs.
Consider that if the last version of anything met a real need in an extraordinarily effective way, why should the next version be significantly different? Have our needs already really changed so much so quickly, or are we just bored, which is to say, not paying attention?
great post... love it... and their isn't a "I WANT YOU TO DO THIS" in it.
I think that I have it right - A tablet is something that you need to be motivated to buy. An iPhone is a phone - hundreds of millions of people have them. Apple is still the most hip brand, so people will buy an iPhone without really even understanding why it's different than Android.
An iPad might be cool, but the market is no where near what the phone market is. And subsidized pricing makes it even cheaper (up front) for someone to own an iPhone.
hundreds of millions have them?.. LOL... try more than 60% percent of the WORLDS popula tion... or Billions of people have them... of course if you were talking about smartphones such as the iphone then you are correct, sir!
What was the "major change" from the iPad to the iPad 2? It was nothing like the iPhone changes between name changes. The 2G-->3G iPhone looked very different. The 3GS-->4 looked VERY different and was a good reason for a name change.
Maybe they don't have the same theory for the iPads because honestly I do not see much of a difference between the form factor/material of the iPad vs the iPad 2.
Therefore I think the third-gen iPad will be the iPad 3.
Let me guess - you were one of the ones whining that the iPhone 4S wasn't a 'real' upgrade, too. Right?
You really need to get past simply looking at the case. In the case of the 4S, for example, virtually everything about the phone other than the case was changed. That's a major upgrade. The equivalent would be replacing a Hyundai with a BMW, but keeping the same tires. Would you still be complaining that it wasn't an upgrade?
Same thing with the iPad 3. If it truly does have a Retina Display, that is a major upgrade even if nothing else has changed. The display is the key to this device and a drastic improvement in the display is critical. Plus, faster speed is important, as well.
Unfortunately, I'm still convinced that some of the rumored 'features' are coming from short sellers who hope to profit from the share price drop when it turns out that the product doesn't meet all the hype.
For the poster who said apple HAS to go quad core to compete with the tegra 3 quad core. You do realize that the A5 ran circles around the tegra 2 and early benchmarks show that tegra 3 is faster in CPU intensive tasks, the graphic tasks are still behind the A5 SGX543 combo. Which means Apple is almost a full cycle ahead of the Tegras. Would I like to see a quad core? Sure. But if a duo core can run the retina apps smoothly and be more power efficient, I am fine with that as well.
And why are people saying that the retina display is a minor upgrade. Sure, for mobile phone screens, it might not be as impressive. But a 2048x1536 on a 10 inch screen? A year ago, people would have called you crazy if apple was able to do this without a price increase.
I think the reason apple might not be going to 128 is due to cost. They want to keep the base model to 499 and the top model around 800 ish. Having a top model at 999 will make the iPad 'seem' more expensive even if thebase price is the same. Of course, on tech forums, we have many people who are willing to pay more for 128 or even 256. But I think we are a minority in terms of the customer base.
As for LTE, again, would be nice to have but not a deal breaker for most people.
For the poster who said apple HAS to go quad core to compete with the tegra 3 quad core. You do realize that the A5 ran circles around the tegra 2 and early benchmarks show that tegra 3 is faster in CPU intensive tasks, the graphic tasks are still behind the A5 SGX543 combo. Which means Apple is almost a full cycle ahead of the Tegras. Would I like to see a quad core? Sure. But if a duo core can run the retina apps smoothly and be more power efficient, I am fine with that as well.
And why are people saying that the retina display is a minor upgrade. Sure, for mobile phone screens, it might not be as impressive. But a 2048x1536 on a 10 inch screen? A year ago, people would have called you crazy if apple was able to do this without a price increase.
I think the reason apple might not be going to 128 is due to cost. They want to keep the base model to 499 and the top model around 800 ish. Having a top model at 999 will make the iPad 'seem' more expensive even if thebase price is the same. Of course, on tech forums, we have many people who are willing to pay more for 128 or even 256. But I think we are a minority in terms of the customer base.
As for LTE, again, would be nice to have but not a deal breaker for most people.
I agree with most of that. It's interesting that the Apple haters are so big on specs and "must haves" and have completely forgotten what the device is for and why it's so great. Let me remind them:
I dunno, I think they actually might put LTE in it. But you'll see more backlash from putting LTE in and people hitting their quotas a halfway through the month than if they didn't put it in.
That is an oft-repeated shibboleth. Downloading the data faster has nothing to do with downloading more.
You will hit the quota on exaclty the same day if you visit the same websites. But with LTE, the sites load faster.
LTE will NOT make you download any more or any less data than 3G.
This is from an old interview with Jony Ive but I think it sums up Apple's thinking quite nicely. Most non-tech types have no clue what quad-core or LTE is. So when a techie says iPad needs to have it b/c Transformer Prime or whatever has it I say how many devices have they sold compared to iPad? I would argue that things like quad-core and LTE are cold, are inhumane are things most people wouldnt get, but a retina display certainly is not. The minute someone turns on the device and sees it they get it.
Quote:
There's a widespread perception that computers in general have taken on a generic appearance, i.e., the standard beige box. Why do you think this has been the case?
Ive: I don't think this comes from the designers. I think it is because of cost considerations. That, therefore, defines the priorities for the designer. It is an industry that has become incredibly conservative from a design perspective. It is an industry where there is an obsession about product attributes that you can measure. How fast is it? How big is the hard drive? How fast is the CD? That is a very comfortable because you can say 8 is better than 6. But it's also very inhuman and very cold. In that sense, the industry has missed out on the more emotive, less tangible product attributes. But to me, that is why I bought an Apple computer in the first place. That is why I came to work for Apple. It's because I've always sensed that Apple had a desire to do more than the bare minimum.
That is an oft-repeated shibboleth. Downloading the data faster has nothing to do with downloading more.
You will hit the quota on exaclty the same day if you visit the same websites. But with LTE, the sites load faster.
LTE will NOT make you download any more or any less data than 3G.
To say otherwise is just plain foolish.
Sorry, but you have it backwards. Your argument is the foolish one.
You don't think that people are more likely to use their phone (or tablet) to download data if it's faster? There are plenty of times that I didn't do something on my iPhone (or started and then gave up because it was taking too long) which I might do if it were significantly faster.
But, then, maybe you're right. People probably don't use any more data today than when they had to use a 9600 baud modem to download things.
Some people completely lack objectivity and they are too blinded by their own personal needs and wants, which shows that these people don't have a clue as to what Apple is about. They fail to see the big picture.
Apple includes/excludes features depending on total profits. They often exclude a feature from the current product if it would be more profitable to hold it in reserve for the next iteration.
One major improvement is all it takes to sell. LTE is unnecessary - it would not drive sales and profits. Not as much as it might in the iPad 4.
Lots of people will buy the iPad for a better display this time around, and Apple will get many of them to buy yet another iPad next time around if they hold a feature in reserve.
As an aside I do wish that Apple would consider the use of blade storage in the iPad. That is. Storage on a separate card, that is upgradeable.
Quit whining.
Apple can make lots of profits by selling an extra 16 Gigs for $100.
Allowing customers to go buy an SD card instead of paying Apple for the increased storage is not the most profitable route for Apple. There is NO reason why they have failed to include an SD slot except for the ability to make more profits by excluding it.
You want extra storage? Buy it from Apple. Not from some third party. Sheesh.
You'd think Apple is doing this stuff for the customer, instead of the shareholders. It don't work like that.
Comments
Why in the hell would I buy and LTE iPad when I can use any LTE smartphone to connect my iPad to in order to get internet?
Because not everybody wants to carry around two devices to do one thing. Plus, since you're on an Apple board, very few people on here have an LTE smartphone to tether.
Some folks buying tablets with cell technology are banking on eventually being able to add their tablet to their post paid account. AT&T and Verizon both have said that shared data plans are coming so the convenience of having built in cell tech may be too much of a lure for some people.
Apple is not designing the iPad for you, as in you personally, they are designing the iPad for the majority of people, not a few extremists. As an example: So fucking what if an iPad doesn't have an SD card slot? Apple obviously made a strategic and business decision at one point in time, and they have decided that people like you who must have an SD card slot are not important to them at all. They do not give a shit about that particular feature. So, go buy an Android tablet and quit whining, because an iPad will most likely never have any such slot. It would have already had one, if that was Apple's intention. The same goes for Flash or any number of other ridiculous features which people have whined and moaned about.
People have been whining about that alleged retina display for the longest time now, and go figure, the new iPad will have such a display, but I guess it's time to whine about other stuff now.
In the real world, the iPad 3 will sell at least 65 million units in 2012, lines will be massive and it will be sold out many places. Anybody who would label the iPad 3 a fail already, even before it's been presented is obviously totally delusional and lives on a different planet. If there is no LTE, then big fucking deal, go cry me a river, or even better, go buy some junky Android tablet. I would guess that Apple is most likely going to make the iPhone 5 (or whatever the fuck it's going to be called) the first device to include LTE.
Be happy that it has a better screen.
Be happy that the electronics are getting a boost.
I've always been sceptical of 4G being in the iPad 3. Seems more likely to go into the next iPhone first.
4G is of little value in an iPhone. At least compared to its value in an iPad. Beyond that iPad is. An excellent place for tech that isn't ready for ultra low power.
Of course, they can release a 4G model whenever they want, since it would be a separate model and would only release in some regions (it makes no sense selling 4G products in countries that don't have 4G yet).
it wouldnt be a separate model at all.
It's plausible that they'd release 4G versions along with the next iPhone (which would also come in 3G and 4G flavours).
Not even remotely possible
Since it's going to be thicker, I'm kind of worried it'll be heavier.
I really dont get this whine about less than a mm of thickness. A surprising amount of weight can be lost simply by going to a thinner screen glass. People need to chill and realize that iPad3 is not the end of the world. It will be what ever it is nothing more and nothing less. If you don't like what it is you don't buy.
The more information that comes out, the more I'm tempted to hold off.
Make your buying decision on real facts.
A high Res display and Siri are great, but Apple should keep pushing the envelope.
And just how is a display that has never been made before not pushing the envelope?
"Good enough" is how you go from market leader to an also ran. They have the lead in tablet computing - padding their pockets for year by making a device that isn't cutting edge will harm the company.
Just putting a high res screen in this device is cutting edge.
LTE is pretty common in the Android world, the iPad really needs to have it.
I'd be surprised if it doesn't.
It's fine that Apple doesn't want to include an SD slot, but make a 128GB model available then.
I tend to agree more storage would be nice but that new screen won't be cheap this year.
I know processor speed isn't everything, but if Android makers are using quad cores, then make sure that the processor and graphics are powerful enough to drive the Retina display. The rumors are saying that the cameras are better, but they should at least be to the iPhone 4 level.
The cameras would be the very last thing I'd worry about. In fact they are a waste of space, power and time.
Hopefully we'll all be pleasantly surprised on Wednesday.
Actually with all of the leaks there will be no surprises. Further if you are already dismissing the high resolution screen as a major step forward then you really don't have a clue as to what cutting edge is.
Cost is the other factor. Not so much the cost for the flash modules but the cost of the new screen. I suspect it will be substantially more expensive this year due to production ramp and new tooling costs.
Isn't Apple one of the biggest purchasers of flash on the planet? I thought that they pretty much had the market cornered and get preferential pricing?
When you get to be Apples size you can corner the market on price but the price of flash has been falling anyways. In any event as noted above they simply may not be motivated to increase flash size in an iPad.
With that said, I believe that the iPad uses two NAND modules while the iPhone uses just one. The 64GB iPhone 4S used a single 64GB module, meaning that it should be pretty trivial to add two 64GB modules to an iPad 3.
yep! This is the really sad part here. As an aside I do wish that Apple would consider the use of blade storage in the iPad. That is. Storage on a separate card, that is upgradeable.
The question is whether Apple had the stomach to make such a move or if it will continue for the third strait year with the same capacities.
Stomach? If customer demand isn't here it doesn't matter. Beyond that I believe their entire focus has been on getting retina right on this machine. It is the right priority for Apple and a good portion of their customer base.
I'd be the first to want to see more flash but if I had to make a choice it would be to have more RAM than flash. IPad is constantly showing me issues or performance glitches directly related to the lack of RAM. It is actually strange that it hasn't even been mentioned yet in this thread. In many cases the lack of RAM costs people real $$$$$ especially if they use Safari over 3G.
I don't need LTE at all in fact. LTE coverage just isn't where it needs to be for it to matter at this time.
Maybe in another year it might factor into my decision making on a product, but for now, it's a non-issue that probably matters more to bloggers and android spec sheet monkeys.
In terms of actual use, HSPA+ can keep me happy for a bit.
The only thing I'd really like to see from Apple is a proper keyboard dock for the iPad, similar to ASUS Transformer.
The jewel in the crown will be that retina screen.
(Heh, notice how people aren't talking about net books anymore, eh?)
GPU should be impressive progression. (Even if the 'Rogue' is out of reach for now. Got to leave something to coo about for the iPad4?) If the iPad 2 is 4-9 times faster than iPad 1 then any sort of improvement should have the iPad 3 more comfortable with the retina screen than my iPhone 4 is!
I think Ram will need a significant boost. I notice how my iPhone 4 gets choppy and slow with lots of even modest apps open.
For me, the real dark horse is the use of an SD card slot. I'd like one. To spring it out of the iPad and spring it into the iMac or Air for example. *looks at the image apps that are increasingly competing on the iPad. Doing 'retina' style work. Don't we need a way to get info in/out of the iPad real fast rather than the (polite) slow dock connector?
I guess Thunderbolt 'lite' isn't ready yet?
Lemon Bon Bon.
One sure sign of great design is that it's difficult to improve. Brilliant engineering can often be recognized by the way in which successive iterations become ever more subtle, because tiny, evolutionary changes are all that can be made without reducing the quality of the end result. Separated from its popular redefinition as a dominance game played by the ignorant via conspicuous consumption, taste is really nothing more than sensitivity? the capacity for subtle perception.
Because concepts like taste and elegance have historically been among the trappings of oppression and we fancy ourselves a democracy, we as a culture now suspect the very words. It's time to remember that "refinement" is nothing more than the process of discarding what isn't intrinsic until only the real thing remains. It's figuratively and literally the inverse of how we make crap. Instead of elegance, we tastelessly base our economy, endeavors, and lives on false assumptions and inevitably destroy what we've created in hopes of squeezing another buck out of it. Advertising is a great example of this, being nothing more than propaganda designed to dupe people into valuing the "new and improved," never more so than when it's neither. You can no more advertise elegance than you can fight for peace.
Once we all decided the purpose of life was to Get Rich, it was inevitable that destructive vulgarity would not only be accepted and admired, but the only thing we aspire to. It's not about what bad you carry or what fork you use: vulgarity results from a lack of integrity, first in ourselves, and then (inevitably) in everything we touch. If we rewrite "The Emperor's New Clothes" for our time, its the Emperor who's wise and his subjects who're fools. The moral is that, having been subjected to exacting design standards for thousands of years, the human body is unlikely to be improved by slapping this season's Versace on it. Boredom, in particular, is almost entirely a statement about the inability of the bored to pay attention. It's both an aesthetic and a moral failing ? the two are inextricable.
Meanwhile, back at the nerd ranch, tech journalism remains at the forefront of a largely unexamined and completely fallacious assumption built into capitalism: that change itself is good. Conflating elegant design with profitability is a mistake when our economy guarantees that they're antithetical far more often than not. Personal electronics have become the physical equivalent of stockbrokers churning their clients: making changes to portfolios which benefit only the broker. So long as the primary goal is to profit by creating change, an exploding car will always be preferable to a gorgeous, reliable, efficient, and safe one. Of course we love to blow tihs up, don't we? So long as its other peoples' tihs.
Consider that if the last version of anything met a real need in an extraordinarily effective way, why should the next version be significantly different? Have our needs already really changed so much so quickly, or are we just bored, which is to say, not paying attention?
great post... love it... and their isn't a "I WANT YOU TO DO THIS" in it.
reminds me of an article on Existentialism.
I think that I have it right - A tablet is something that you need to be motivated to buy. An iPhone is a phone - hundreds of millions of people have them. Apple is still the most hip brand, so people will buy an iPhone without really even understanding why it's different than Android.
An iPad might be cool, but the market is no where near what the phone market is. And subsidized pricing makes it even cheaper (up front) for someone to own an iPhone.
hundreds of millions have them?.. LOL... try more than 60% percent of the WORLDS popula tion... or Billions of people have them... of course if you were talking about smartphones such as the iphone then you are correct, sir!
What was the "major change" from the iPad to the iPad 2? It was nothing like the iPhone changes between name changes. The 2G-->3G iPhone looked very different. The 3GS-->4 looked VERY different and was a good reason for a name change.
Maybe they don't have the same theory for the iPads because honestly I do not see much of a difference between the form factor/material of the iPad vs the iPad 2.
Therefore I think the third-gen iPad will be the iPad 3.
Let me guess - you were one of the ones whining that the iPhone 4S wasn't a 'real' upgrade, too. Right?
You really need to get past simply looking at the case. In the case of the 4S, for example, virtually everything about the phone other than the case was changed. That's a major upgrade. The equivalent would be replacing a Hyundai with a BMW, but keeping the same tires. Would you still be complaining that it wasn't an upgrade?
Same thing with the iPad 3. If it truly does have a Retina Display, that is a major upgrade even if nothing else has changed. The display is the key to this device and a drastic improvement in the display is critical. Plus, faster speed is important, as well.
Unfortunately, I'm still convinced that some of the rumored 'features' are coming from short sellers who hope to profit from the share price drop when it turns out that the product doesn't meet all the hype.
And why are people saying that the retina display is a minor upgrade. Sure, for mobile phone screens, it might not be as impressive. But a 2048x1536 on a 10 inch screen? A year ago, people would have called you crazy if apple was able to do this without a price increase.
I think the reason apple might not be going to 128 is due to cost. They want to keep the base model to 499 and the top model around 800 ish. Having a top model at 999 will make the iPad 'seem' more expensive even if thebase price is the same. Of course, on tech forums, we have many people who are willing to pay more for 128 or even 256. But I think we are a minority in terms of the customer base.
As for LTE, again, would be nice to have but not a deal breaker for most people.
For the poster who said apple HAS to go quad core to compete with the tegra 3 quad core. You do realize that the A5 ran circles around the tegra 2 and early benchmarks show that tegra 3 is faster in CPU intensive tasks, the graphic tasks are still behind the A5 SGX543 combo. Which means Apple is almost a full cycle ahead of the Tegras. Would I like to see a quad core? Sure. But if a duo core can run the retina apps smoothly and be more power efficient, I am fine with that as well.
And why are people saying that the retina display is a minor upgrade. Sure, for mobile phone screens, it might not be as impressive. But a 2048x1536 on a 10 inch screen? A year ago, people would have called you crazy if apple was able to do this without a price increase.
I think the reason apple might not be going to 128 is due to cost. They want to keep the base model to 499 and the top model around 800 ish. Having a top model at 999 will make the iPad 'seem' more expensive even if thebase price is the same. Of course, on tech forums, we have many people who are willing to pay more for 128 or even 256. But I think we are a minority in terms of the customer base.
As for LTE, again, would be nice to have but not a deal breaker for most people.
I agree with most of that. It's interesting that the Apple haters are so big on specs and "must haves" and have completely forgotten what the device is for and why it's so great. Let me remind them:
http://www.siliconvalley.com/news/ci_20094793
I dunno, I think they actually might put LTE in it. But you'll see more backlash from putting LTE in and people hitting their quotas a halfway through the month than if they didn't put it in.
That is an oft-repeated shibboleth. Downloading the data faster has nothing to do with downloading more.
You will hit the quota on exaclty the same day if you visit the same websites. But with LTE, the sites load faster.
LTE will NOT make you download any more or any less data than 3G.
To say otherwise is just plain foolish.
There's a widespread perception that computers in general have taken on a generic appearance, i.e., the standard beige box. Why do you think this has been the case?
Ive: I don't think this comes from the designers. I think it is because of cost considerations. That, therefore, defines the priorities for the designer. It is an industry that has become incredibly conservative from a design perspective. It is an industry where there is an obsession about product attributes that you can measure. How fast is it? How big is the hard drive? How fast is the CD? That is a very comfortable because you can say 8 is better than 6. But it's also very inhuman and very cold. In that sense, the industry has missed out on the more emotive, less tangible product attributes. But to me, that is why I bought an Apple computer in the first place. That is why I came to work for Apple. It's because I've always sensed that Apple had a desire to do more than the bare minimum.
That is an oft-repeated shibboleth. Downloading the data faster has nothing to do with downloading more.
You will hit the quota on exaclty the same day if you visit the same websites. But with LTE, the sites load faster.
LTE will NOT make you download any more or any less data than 3G.
To say otherwise is just plain foolish.
It certainly could if people use their device more b/c it's so mch faster.
That is an oft-repeated shibboleth. Downloading the data faster has nothing to do with downloading more.
You will hit the quota on exaclty the same day if you visit the same websites. But with LTE, the sites load faster.
LTE will NOT make you download any more or any less data than 3G.
To say otherwise is just plain foolish.
Sorry, but you have it backwards. Your argument is the foolish one.
You don't think that people are more likely to use their phone (or tablet) to download data if it's faster? There are plenty of times that I didn't do something on my iPhone (or started and then gave up because it was taking too long) which I might do if it were significantly faster.
But, then, maybe you're right. People probably don't use any more data today than when they had to use a 9600 baud modem to download things.
Some people completely lack objectivity and they are too blinded by their own personal needs and wants, which shows that these people don't have a clue as to what Apple is about. They fail to see the big picture.
Apple includes/excludes features depending on total profits. They often exclude a feature from the current product if it would be more profitable to hold it in reserve for the next iteration.
One major improvement is all it takes to sell. LTE is unnecessary - it would not drive sales and profits. Not as much as it might in the iPad 4.
Lots of people will buy the iPad for a better display this time around, and Apple will get many of them to buy yet another iPad next time around if they hold a feature in reserve.
As an aside I do wish that Apple would consider the use of blade storage in the iPad. That is. Storage on a separate card, that is upgradeable.
Quit whining.
Apple can make lots of profits by selling an extra 16 Gigs for $100.
Allowing customers to go buy an SD card instead of paying Apple for the increased storage is not the most profitable route for Apple. There is NO reason why they have failed to include an SD slot except for the ability to make more profits by excluding it.
You want extra storage? Buy it from Apple. Not from some third party. Sheesh.
You'd think Apple is doing this stuff for the customer, instead of the shareholders. It don't work like that.