Yeah that seems to be true. If apps aren't designed for multi-threading over 4 cores. What would be the purpose of the cores?
My point was that apps are automatically designed to use as many cores as the device has. The OS handles that for you assuming your compile target is the current iOS version.
It's still locked to each carrier and other carriers are rendered inoperable thereafter.
Keep dreaming.
I was referring from a supply chain and manufacturing efficiency standpoint. Apple doesn't like lots of SKU numbers.
One of Apple's main core competencies is that its operations are so streamlined.
Plus, I'm pretty sure ideally Apple wants to be carrier agnostic with a digital SIM card, using iTunes to activate with various carriers. However, the carriers hold the cards on this front.
I'd imagine that most people are not storing their entire favorite music collection locally to their phone so much at this point. There is less reason to.
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
Yes, but you can buy a model with more capacity if you wish. Or are you saying 64GBs isn't enough?
Personally, I think 16GBs will remain, but for the $399 iPad 2. The iPad HD will be offered in 32/64/128GB models at 499/599/699 respectively. This is Apple's MO: increase functionality and storage, keep the same price points. Since the iPad 2 didn't double the storage, it seems a likely time for Apple to do so.
I would say higher storage is much more likely than quad-core.
Sound like it, and this sucks big time, retina, 4 or two cores, larger ram... What good do all these do on a storge level of 16 gb for a device hats not jut a laptop replacement but in many respects much more versatile than a laptop? 16g is ipod nano storage capacity, not iPad... A few albums, 20-30 apps, couple of games and movies and you are done, no room to store photos, take vids from the camera, store PDFs and content in reader apps, no iTunesu, podcasts, audiobooks, no large game apps, no storage for interactive books, etc. etc. and all that of course made even worse with iPad apps using retina resolution graphics...
What to load first and what to offload and where? I could see iCloud being os some assistance with 32gb iPads, but 16gb ones? The air 4 years ago had 60gb standard and arguably the iPad is now much more versatile than the air, it's more app rich for sure, and 4 year onwards iPad starts with a fourth of that?
I wouldn't be too surprised to see iCloud support for iBooks, even Videos and maybe apps ala iTunes Match.
I don't know... but I can see where 16 GB is enough for some uses -- especially dedicated uses like the Square Register POST application for retail. In some cases it is silly to pay for extra capacity if you don't need it.
It sounds like you need more SDD -- why not pay the extra $100-$200 and get an iPad that meets your requirements? You'd still be paying less than for a laptop
I have no music and no Photos on my iPad (iCloud iTunes Match and PhotoStream), a few videos (Podcast Tutorials): .2 GB, 192 iBooks 5.8 GB, 524 Apps: 36.8 GB.
I could limit the apps to the few high-use ones -- and easily get by on a 16 GB iPad.
I chose to buy the 64 GB model because it is better for resale or hand-me-down.
I don't mean to pick on you, but an inexpensive Ford Focus is not the right car for everyone -- any more than an expensive Ferrari is.
It's ridiculous for people to get mad at rumors that may or may not be true. You have one more day to wait then we'll all know the truth about what's inside the new iPad (whatever it ends up being called). The A4 was a Cortex-A8 and the A5 is a Cortex-A9, correct? The A5X could be a quad-core Cortex-A9 (like in the Playstation Vita) seeings how it'd be based on the same architecture. If Apple does do an 'A6' next year it could be based on a Cortex-A15 which would be a completely different architecture. Either way it'll run every app designed for it perfectly and we'll all know the details in less than 24 hours. It's almost like waiting for Santa to come, you appreciate what he gave you but he still left a few things off your list.
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
You just put what I wanted to say in words. Thanks!
iCloud is designed to reduce the need for local storage. I expect big things for iCloud in 2012 and 2013. Apple is just getting going.
Whatever the iCloud becomes, and it has a long way to go, let them first hire these 12 people they out an ad for recently, it can never replace local storage, unless of course wifi and cell networks become ubiquitous in every part of the western world, and they are far from there, Anyway by the same token of logic why not release the air too with 32gbs (16 for the os by and large)? I have much more uses for my iPad than for the air at the moment. A lot of people could easily fill up 32gbs solely with apps:4-5 games at 1gb each (board and trivia games, action and adventure ones, flight simipulators, tons of games available, travel graphic design, music, video and photo editing apps, interactive or rich content books and reference apps...very, very easily you run out of space solely on apps, and then you have apps such as food reader and document apps interfacing with servers that need to have some local storage, you might need a few more gbs to store a movie or two in cars and plains and trains from plex or other media servers, retina will make the iPad great for viewing home movies and hosting photos as well as brochures...
And of course where's the space then for music, audio books, podcasts, video podcasts and iTunes u, all sorts of mags that are very very bulky for bookshelf. Rich content books for iBooks...
And to top it all retina gfx will put much more increased demands for storage than the previous gen iPad.
To whatever level the iCloud progresses too it will barely be able to cater for 10-20% of all that, and always Witt the provision that good fast wifi (and relatively cheap) will be around the corner, or cell networks, which is not the case at all.
If at the very east there is no option for 128gbs of space (entry level storage for the air...) mark my words a lot of people will be very dissapointed if they go for either the 16 or the 32gb model. The iPad is not a phone, it's a post pc device, a phone with 16gb even in 2012 could be justified, but a convergent tablet super capable device with uses that stop pretty much where our imagination stops, simply isn't.
I ll repeat this, the iPad has so much more uses than say an air, yet you get the option for 256gbs for the air and not the iPad (and technically it is possible)...
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
You can always plan for the trip and upload the videos you're planning to watch before and take them off when you get back. It's generally what I do
Yes, but you can buy a model with more capacity if you wish. Or are you saying 64GBs isn't enough?
Personally, I think 16GBs will remain, but for the $399 iPad 2. The iPad HD will be offered in 32/64/128GB models at 499/599/699 respectively. This is Apple's MO: increase functionality and storage, keep the same price points. Since the iPad 2 didn't double the storage, it seems a likely time for Apple to do so.
I would say higher storage is much more likely than quad-core.
Oh, that's perfectly acceptable. I think most of us are just concerned that the iPad 3 would be "crippled" with 16GB again in the base configuration.
An iPad 2 at 16GB for $399 makes sense. An iPad 3 with 16GB for $499 is a slap to the face. Three years in a row with the same entry-level capacity would be a mark of complacency and greed.
Yes, but you can buy a model with more capacity if you wish. Or are you saying 64GBs isn't enough?
Personally, I think 16GBs will remain, but for the $399 iPad 2. The iPad HD will be offered in 32/64/128GB models at 499/599/699 respectively. This is Apple's MO: increase functionality and storage, keep the same price points. Since the iPad 2 didn't double the storage, it seems a likely time for Apple to do so.
I would say higher storage is much more likely than quad-core.
I don't need an iPad with 128 GB of storage. But I want Apple to release one because it will likely mean that the lower capacity models will drop in price.
16 GB wouldn't work for what I'd want it for. 32 would be a tight fit. 64 GB is getting into the cost-prohitibitve range.
iCloud is designed to reduce the need for local storage. I expect big things for iCloud in 2012 and 2013. Apple is just getting going.
iCloud is designed to increase the need for local storage, especially on iOS devices. It's a push & sync service, not a "hard drive" in the sky per se.
Yeah, but have you seen the files sizes on some of Apple's latest initiative: TextBooks?
Throw in a few high resolution games, some movies, music and, some iTextBooks and you're ****ed with 16GB.
You're fucked regardless of what kind or combination of files you load if you need more than the 14.5GB of user space afforded on the 16GB model. Same goes for the limits of the larger models or anything else. I don't see why that means there should be no 16GB option if that is where the price point puts it this year. I don't want 16GB because I found i ended up needing more last year so I'll go for a larger capacity this year. Seems pretty simple to me.
I don't know... but I can see where 16 GB is enough for some uses -- especially dedicated uses like the Square Register POST application for retail. In some cases it is silly to pay for extra capacity if you don't need it.
It sounds like you need more SDD -- why not pay the extra $100-$200 and get an iPad that meets your requirements? You'd still be paying less than for a laptop
I have no music and no Photos on my iPad (iCloud iTunes Match and PhotoStream), a few videos (Podcast Tutorials): .2 GB, 192 iBooks 5.8 GB, 524 Apps: 36.8 GB.
I could limit the apps to the few high-use ones -- and easily get by on a 16 GB iPad.
I chose to buy the 64 GB model because it is better for resale or hand-me-down.
I don't mean to pick on you, but an inexpensive Ford Focus is not the right car for everyone -- any more than an expensive Ferrari is.
I ca only see 16gb as adequate for terminal type usages, retail uses where the iPad holds a few interactive menu apps say, or a few brochures, but to me that's just about. People shouldn't be paying for what they do not need, but to make the entry model at 32 for peanuts more in terms of flash cost is a valid demand, when most people are not going to use the iPad for such limited niche uses.
My iPad 1 is 16gb cause that was the only available one then a month after release at the store and I could not wait to use one, after years of expecting the apple tablet. My 2 was 32gbs which i thought was a happy medium at this stage of the iPads evolution and with pretty good hand me down value. I was very much waiting for when they go retina display to get max storage too cause it ll do wanders for my reading.
So my plans where to max out this gen with 128gbs, if apple don't offer me that, and stick with 64gbs it will be like offering me a Ferrari with no option for leather upholstery and a nice expensive car interior (tenuous analogy but since you started me on cars). And for them to have an entry level model (cause no one can or should afford max capacities, the times are hard financially) again at 16gbs just to shave off a 3-4 or so dollars per device, on iPad 3, after more than 2 years, and for a third year it will sell, it's just very hard to stomach. Like I said, the nano has 16gb for god's sake...
And I think I am very much justified to demand that by the third iteration of the iPad it doesn't max out to as much as it did 2 or so years ago, am I not? No apple device has kept the same storages for 2 going into 3 years, have they? Wouldn't you be asking how come the mac or the MacBook pros in 3 years have not raised storage capacities?
Yeah, but have you seen the files sizes on some of Apple's latest initiative: TextBooks?
Throw in a few high resolution games, some movies, music and, some iTextBooks and you're ****ed with 16GB.
I agree that the 16GB storage space will not be enough for a lot of people. I just want to point out that while 2D games will take up more space because of the high-res art needed. The 3D games WON'T necessarily need more space. Sharper textures and things will increase it sure but it won't increase solely because they're in high-resolution.
My point was that apps are automatically designed to use as many cores as the device has. The OS handles that for you assuming your compile target is the current iOS version.
I'd argue its pretty easy to come up with infinite examples of how more storage can be used.
My next question would be. Seeing as the features in the iPad are limited to the price point in which Apple wants to sell. What are the absolute most important features that bring the most value for $499?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
Comments
3GB for $30 makes it the highest priority imaginable.
Yeah that seems to be true. If apps aren't designed for multi-threading over 4 cores. What would be the purpose of the cores?
My point was that apps are automatically designed to use as many cores as the device has. The OS handles that for you assuming your compile target is the current iOS version.
It's still locked to each carrier and other carriers are rendered inoperable thereafter.
Keep dreaming.
I was referring from a supply chain and manufacturing efficiency standpoint. Apple doesn't like lots of SKU numbers.
One of Apple's main core competencies is that its operations are so streamlined.
Plus, I'm pretty sure ideally Apple wants to be carrier agnostic with a digital SIM card, using iTunes to activate with various carriers. However, the carriers hold the cards on this front.
I'd imagine that most people are not storing their entire favorite music collection locally to their phone so much at this point. There is less reason to.
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
Yes, but you can buy a model with more capacity if you wish. Or are you saying 64GBs isn't enough?
Personally, I think 16GBs will remain, but for the $399 iPad 2. The iPad HD will be offered in 32/64/128GB models at 499/599/699 respectively. This is Apple's MO: increase functionality and storage, keep the same price points. Since the iPad 2 didn't double the storage, it seems a likely time for Apple to do so.
I would say higher storage is much more likely than quad-core.
Sound like it, and this sucks big time, retina, 4 or two cores, larger ram... What good do all these do on a storge level of 16 gb for a device hats not jut a laptop replacement but in many respects much more versatile than a laptop? 16g is ipod nano storage capacity, not iPad... A few albums, 20-30 apps, couple of games and movies and you are done, no room to store photos, take vids from the camera, store PDFs and content in reader apps, no iTunesu, podcasts, audiobooks, no large game apps, no storage for interactive books, etc. etc. and all that of course made even worse with iPad apps using retina resolution graphics...
What to load first and what to offload and where? I could see iCloud being os some assistance with 32gb iPads, but 16gb ones? The air 4 years ago had 60gb standard and arguably the iPad is now much more versatile than the air, it's more app rich for sure, and 4 year onwards iPad starts with a fourth of that?
I wouldn't be too surprised to see iCloud support for iBooks, even Videos and maybe apps ala iTunes Match.
I don't know... but I can see where 16 GB is enough for some uses -- especially dedicated uses like the Square Register POST application for retail. In some cases it is silly to pay for extra capacity if you don't need it.
It sounds like you need more SDD -- why not pay the extra $100-$200 and get an iPad that meets your requirements? You'd still be paying less than for a laptop
I have no music and no Photos on my iPad (iCloud iTunes Match and PhotoStream), a few videos (Podcast Tutorials): .2 GB, 192 iBooks 5.8 GB, 524 Apps: 36.8 GB.
I could limit the apps to the few high-use ones -- and easily get by on a 16 GB iPad.
I chose to buy the 64 GB model because it is better for resale or hand-me-down.
I don't mean to pick on you, but an inexpensive Ford Focus is not the right car for everyone -- any more than an expensive Ferrari is.
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
You just put what I wanted to say in words. Thanks!
iCloud is designed to reduce the need for local storage. I expect big things for iCloud in 2012 and 2013. Apple is just getting going.
Whatever the iCloud becomes, and it has a long way to go, let them first hire these 12 people they out an ad for recently, it can never replace local storage, unless of course wifi and cell networks become ubiquitous in every part of the western world, and they are far from there, Anyway by the same token of logic why not release the air too with 32gbs (16 for the os by and large)? I have much more uses for my iPad than for the air at the moment. A lot of people could easily fill up 32gbs solely with apps:4-5 games at 1gb each (board and trivia games, action and adventure ones, flight simipulators, tons of games available, travel graphic design, music, video and photo editing apps, interactive or rich content books and reference apps...very, very easily you run out of space solely on apps, and then you have apps such as food reader and document apps interfacing with servers that need to have some local storage, you might need a few more gbs to store a movie or two in cars and plains and trains from plex or other media servers, retina will make the iPad great for viewing home movies and hosting photos as well as brochures...
And of course where's the space then for music, audio books, podcasts, video podcasts and iTunes u, all sorts of mags that are very very bulky for bookshelf. Rich content books for iBooks...
And to top it all retina gfx will put much more increased demands for storage than the previous gen iPad.
To whatever level the iCloud progresses too it will barely be able to cater for 10-20% of all that, and always Witt the provision that good fast wifi (and relatively cheap) will be around the corner, or cell networks, which is not the case at all.
If at the very east there is no option for 128gbs of space (entry level storage for the air...) mark my words a lot of people will be very dissapointed if they go for either the 16 or the 32gb model. The iPad is not a phone, it's a post pc device, a phone with 16gb even in 2012 could be justified, but a convergent tablet super capable device with uses that stop pretty much where our imagination stops, simply isn't.
I ll repeat this, the iPad has so much more uses than say an air, yet you get the option for 256gbs for the air and not the iPad (and technically it is possible)...
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.
And even where possible, the tiered pricing structues of the carriers, increased throttling on unlimited plans, and airwave congestion are going to make hitting the cloud wirelessly more and more troublesome as more of these devices get put into use.
You can always plan for the trip and upload the videos you're planning to watch before and take them off when you get back. It's generally what I do
?And, to a degree, he's probably right that more storage will be needed because the apps will likely be larger.
According to my copy of the "iTunes Connect Developer Guide (version 7.3, January 23, 2012)", the maximum iOS app sizes still 2GB.
Yes, but you can buy a model with more capacity if you wish. Or are you saying 64GBs isn't enough?
Personally, I think 16GBs will remain, but for the $399 iPad 2. The iPad HD will be offered in 32/64/128GB models at 499/599/699 respectively. This is Apple's MO: increase functionality and storage, keep the same price points. Since the iPad 2 didn't double the storage, it seems a likely time for Apple to do so.
I would say higher storage is much more likely than quad-core.
Oh, that's perfectly acceptable. I think most of us are just concerned that the iPad 3 would be "crippled" with 16GB again in the base configuration.
An iPad 2 at 16GB for $399 makes sense. An iPad 3 with 16GB for $499 is a slap to the face. Three years in a row with the same entry-level capacity would be a mark of complacency and greed.
Yes, but you can buy a model with more capacity if you wish. Or are you saying 64GBs isn't enough?
Personally, I think 16GBs will remain, but for the $399 iPad 2. The iPad HD will be offered in 32/64/128GB models at 499/599/699 respectively. This is Apple's MO: increase functionality and storage, keep the same price points. Since the iPad 2 didn't double the storage, it seems a likely time for Apple to do so.
I would say higher storage is much more likely than quad-core.
I don't need an iPad with 128 GB of storage. But I want Apple to release one because it will likely mean that the lower capacity models will drop in price.
16 GB wouldn't work for what I'd want it for. 32 would be a tight fit. 64 GB is getting into the cost-prohitibitve range.
According to my copy of the "iTunes Connect Developer Guide (version 7.3, January 23, 2012)", the maximum iOS app sizes still 2GB.
Yeah, but have you seen the files sizes on some of Apple's latest initiative: TextBooks?
Throw in a few high resolution games, some movies, music and, some iTextBooks and you're ****ed with 16GB.
iCloud is designed to reduce the need for local storage. I expect big things for iCloud in 2012 and 2013. Apple is just getting going.
iCloud is designed to increase the need for local storage, especially on iOS devices. It's a push & sync service, not a "hard drive" in the sky per se.
Yeah, but have you seen the files sizes on some of Apple's latest initiative: TextBooks?
Throw in a few high resolution games, some movies, music and, some iTextBooks and you're ****ed with 16GB.
You're fucked regardless of what kind or combination of files you load if you need more than the 14.5GB of user space afforded on the 16GB model. Same goes for the limits of the larger models or anything else. I don't see why that means there should be no 16GB option if that is where the price point puts it this year. I don't want 16GB because I found i ended up needing more last year so I'll go for a larger capacity this year. Seems pretty simple to me.
I don't know... but I can see where 16 GB is enough for some uses -- especially dedicated uses like the Square Register POST application for retail. In some cases it is silly to pay for extra capacity if you don't need it.
It sounds like you need more SDD -- why not pay the extra $100-$200 and get an iPad that meets your requirements? You'd still be paying less than for a laptop
I have no music and no Photos on my iPad (iCloud iTunes Match and PhotoStream), a few videos (Podcast Tutorials): .2 GB, 192 iBooks 5.8 GB, 524 Apps: 36.8 GB.
I could limit the apps to the few high-use ones -- and easily get by on a 16 GB iPad.
I chose to buy the 64 GB model because it is better for resale or hand-me-down.
I don't mean to pick on you, but an inexpensive Ford Focus is not the right car for everyone -- any more than an expensive Ferrari is.
I ca only see 16gb as adequate for terminal type usages, retail uses where the iPad holds a few interactive menu apps say, or a few brochures, but to me that's just about. People shouldn't be paying for what they do not need, but to make the entry model at 32 for peanuts more in terms of flash cost is a valid demand, when most people are not going to use the iPad for such limited niche uses.
My iPad 1 is 16gb cause that was the only available one then a month after release at the store and I could not wait to use one, after years of expecting the apple tablet. My 2 was 32gbs which i thought was a happy medium at this stage of the iPads evolution and with pretty good hand me down value. I was very much waiting for when they go retina display to get max storage too cause it ll do wanders for my reading.
So my plans where to max out this gen with 128gbs, if apple don't offer me that, and stick with 64gbs it will be like offering me a Ferrari with no option for leather upholstery and a nice expensive car interior (tenuous analogy but since you started me on cars). And for them to have an entry level model (cause no one can or should afford max capacities, the times are hard financially) again at 16gbs just to shave off a 3-4 or so dollars per device, on iPad 3, after more than 2 years, and for a third year it will sell, it's just very hard to stomach. Like I said, the nano has 16gb for god's sake...
And I think I am very much justified to demand that by the third iteration of the iPad it doesn't max out to as much as it did 2 or so years ago, am I not? No apple device has kept the same storages for 2 going into 3 years, have they? Wouldn't you be asking how come the mac or the MacBook pros in 3 years have not raised storage capacities?
Yeah, but have you seen the files sizes on some of Apple's latest initiative: TextBooks?
Throw in a few high resolution games, some movies, music and, some iTextBooks and you're ****ed with 16GB.
I agree that the 16GB storage space will not be enough for a lot of people. I just want to point out that while 2D games will take up more space because of the high-res art needed. The 3D games WON'T necessarily need more space. Sharper textures and things will increase it sure but it won't increase solely because they're in high-resolution.
My point was that apps are automatically designed to use as many cores as the device has. The OS handles that for you assuming your compile target is the current iOS version.
My next question would be. Seeing as the features in the iPad are limited to the price point in which Apple wants to sell. What are the absolute most important features that bring the most value for $499?
Rip a couple of your DVDs, or buy/rent a few iTS movies for a trans-oceanic flight and your storage space gets eaten up pretty fast. There are plenty of examples where an online connection, either over wi-fi or cellular, is either impractical or impossible.