You know, this analysis is just a bit silly. If MS Surface does start to gain traction in the business community, making the iPad thinner or changing the display technology will have F-all to do with regaining market share for AAPL. Significant upgrades to a major product line every 6 months is not without cost in customer alienation. Not saying they won't do it (they did do it yesterday after all), but it will have nothing to do with MS Surface, just their obsession with thinner and lighter.
I think Apple should avoid doing refresh on a predictable scheduled. This slow sales a lot at the end of the cycle and create impossible to meet demand at launch.
They should just suprise the market each time and avoid those predictable patterns.
I certainly hope so. It seems the only area where wide aspect screens excel at all is with video playback. That's great if all you're going to do is use the iPad for watching video, but everything else suffers.
Nope.
This is the real iPad3. The iPad3 that was released was a desperate product when plans did go wrong.
TSMC production of A6 tanked and Qualcomms 28nm baseband chip was delayed.
There is no evidence to support this idea. Apple didn't start looking at TSMC until after Samsung became a problem.
Beyond that a company like Apple always has contingency plans. It is part of prudent business management because business isn't clock work like.
This lead to the desperate A5X thicker battery.
Have you used an iPad 3? Nothing disparate at all about the device, fundamentally it was the best tablet on the market.
Apple should of course have waited and released the real iPad3.
Not at all. IPad 3 takes what was a proof of concept machine and turns it into a viable platform.
Apple wants to release the new iPad in late Q3-early Q4 to maximise holiday season.
That may be part of the reason. The biggest component here though is being able to market new against Microsofts new Surface product.
This is the new Apple. About maximising profits. Steve's Apple was about making the greatest products possible, then get profit. And when customers starts to feel milked for money, its over.
Read a bit about Apple, the first Mac and other products and you will find that Steve was all about profits.
There is a 95% chance that Apple will repeat everything wrong they did after Steve left 1985.
Well they totally screwed up the desktop I will give you that much. Yesterday's iOS releases though are all about Apple doing the right things.
Just like back then, Apple will have a couple of great years before the decline starts.
Apple have already started with a wasteful dividend and share buy back. Apple should have instead fixed iCloud (by using revamped Xserve/Xsan Unix clustering)
What does Xserve/Xsan have to do with iCloud? Your logic here escapes me. By the way I do think iCloud needs some fixing but that has more to do with the basic concept.
and bought/build a foundry to produce its own SoCs and NAND flash. Just one dividend could have bought AMD bought back Fab30 in Germany. If AMD was a separate part of Apple, they would have kept their X86 license. Apple could have done a custom X86 chip with DSPs and other fun stuff they have inside the A series SoC.
While we can debate the specifics I do agree that Apple needs its own foundry. The difference is I see them being better off simply buying all new.
In your opinion what do you think they will call the next generation iPad? I think that the "iPad with retina display" tagname is confusing for the average consumer. They won't know what's new because they're uninformed. Everyone knew what the "new iPad" was of course because, well, it was new and was different than "iPad 2".
Do you think they will call the 5th Gen iPad "the new iPad" again?
That's interesting. Since they've dropped the 3rd iPad, perhaps the 5th will be "iPad with retina display", also dropping the 4th iPad. Or, as I've said before, it could be "the new iPad", with the 4th gen being sold as "iPad" at $399 (and the iPad 2 at $299).
Originally Posted by TheHecta
You just proved my point. The iPad 2 is still available because it is able to be differentiated from the "iPad with Retina Display". The iPad 3 cannot and therefore the iPad 4th gen is not a substantial update.
So why'd they keep the iPhone 4 when the 4S came out? "The iPad 3 cannot" is entirely subjective, and very probably wrong. Fewer changes are made with Macs and they're still differentiable between models.
That means smaller batteries. Thickness and weight are due to the batteries, and batteries are sized to give 10 hours of use given the particular power demands of the system-on-chip (SoC) and display. Reduce the power demands of the SoC and display and you can use smaller batteries. Smaller batteries allow thinner iPads.
It is a mistake to believe that Apples only goal is smaller batteries and a thinner device. If that was the case iPad 4 would have been thinner. Instead the extra efficiency is going to power, power in this case being system performance. Frankly it is important that Apple is taking this avenue as iPad 3s performance can be wanting at times.
Hence, as Kuo implies, power-efficiency is the key to thinner and lighter iPads. Apple knew this years ago, and it's why they chose to develop their own ARM designs instead of being forced to buy off-the-shelf SoCs from Intel (at Intel prices.) This year's A6 processor delivers twice the performance while consuming less energy than its predecessor, the A5.
Power efficiency is key to higher performance.
Power-efficiency is also why Apple is developing IGZO-based LCD panels (and reportedly planning IGZO-based OLED panels with a new low-cost, high-yield production process.) Because IGZO conductors are 40 times (40 X, not 40%) more conductive than amorphous silicon. Apple is doing the heavy lifting to make iPad and iPhone screens more efficient. And better looking too, since IGZO conductors are also more transparent than amorphous silicon, producing brighter displays.
A more efficient display means that they can do things like up the performance or expand the amount of flash. There are real issues of performance with iPads, I don't see a huge rush to even thinner devices when they need to deal with real issues. When IGZO comes I'm really hopping for some of that power budget going to other areas of the machine.
Meanwhile, Microsoft is still hedging its bets with the "Surface With Windows 8 Pro" and its red-hot Intel processor. With "perimeter venting" to dissipate all that hot air. Like a coal-burning locomotive in a world of electric trains.
Yeah a joke in the tablet world. However you need to realize that there is a size able market for better performing tablets. The issue here though is that that means a new processor to start with, as such I don't see an Apple A7 for about another year, maybe longer. This is where I see this analyst falling on his face, a viable iPad 5 would require all new internal hardware that doesn't exist yet. More importantly that hardware would need to be built on a sub 32nm process, which significantly limits Apple vendor wise.
So why'd they keep the iPhone 4 when the 4S came out? "The iPad 3 cannot" is entirely subjective, and very probably wrong. Fewer changes are made with Macs and they're still differentiable between models.
I thought they kept the iPhone 4 around because they reduced the storage to 8GB and by then (almost a whole year later) the parts were cheaper and they could afford to lower the price in order to differentiate it.
I thought they kept the iPhone 4 around because they reduced the storage to 8GB and by then (almost a whole year later) the parts were cheaper and they could afford to lower the price in order to differentiate it.
Hmm. You also have to take into account that they started using a brand new chip in the iPad 2 when the 3rd one came out…
I still think they should keep that around next year for $299.
This is absolute silliness. This type of article pops up almost every time Apple makes a product announcement. History shows us that Apple updates their products once a year and sometimes a year-and-a-half. I think people publish this type of article just to get hits on their website.
and now history shows that sometimes they will do it in half a year.
Sorry but 'history shows' appears to be weakening as Tim Cook takes Steve Job's advice and runs with it. He's not necessarily doing as Steve did and the whole 'once a year' may go out the window for some things. This could be the first one.
It's time to restart 'history' and expect anything.
So now that everything is updated (save Mac Pro, which is coming soon) what do we have to look forward to/argue about? Apple TV? Since everything has been updated from iPod to Macs, seems there isn't much to wish for? Right?
There is still the Mac Pro.
It's a matter of time before they upgrade the Cinema Display to to same thickness, or thinness of the new iMac.
As for the TV thing, Michael Gartenberg mentioned something smart the other day: The entire TV market, at $30B, isn't quite large enough to interest Apple. That's amazing thing about Apple - whatever market they go after needs to have a potential grow really, really, really ginormous.
I've said it before... The iPad market is the Personal TV market -- and much greater potential than for the the behemoth in the family room.
Sure, if you don't count the Retina display as a new feature.
(I *still* say that to the average buyer, as opposed to an AI forum geek, the Retina display is "Yeah, yeah, that DOES look nice... so how long did you say the battery lasts again?")
[...] It seems the only area where wide aspect screens excel at all is with video playback.
That's what some of us were screaming back in 2005 when laptop displays started going "wide screen." We wound up with LESS actual display area. Of course we got the benefit of... um...
Seems they just no longer exist. They must be being held back for replacements. The iPad 3 is available in the refurb store, though.
Interesting. Usually, when a product update is upcoming, someone would notice slower shipment delays and diminishing inventory. This time, nada. Did they time this to perfection or are they saving up lots of them for repairs and replacements?
Hah! Caught you! After that long argument about why the iPad name was enough, and that we didn't need numbers to describe older models, "just call the old model the iPad", you're reduced to calling it the iPad 3, thereby agreeing with what I said after all.
I knew you would do it.
What manner of nonsense is this? I've called it "iPad 3" on occasion since launch. Call it "iPad 3", call it the "3rd generation iPad". It's the same thing. It means the same thing. Fortunately for the iPad, the numbers actually mean the right product.
I never said "we [don't] need numbers to describe older models". I know for a fact that I said numbers in this argument itself. You know that; you can go back and look at it. It doesn't need to be MARKETED with numbers in the name. The easiest way to distinguish older models, then, is to use numbers—namely the year of introduction—just like with Macs.
Marketing Name
Internal Name
Generation Name
Colloquialism
iPad
iPad (2010)
first-gen iPad
iPad
iPad 2
iPad (2011)
second-gen iPad
iPad 2
the new iPad
iPad (Early 2012)
third-gen iPad
iPad 3
iPad with retina display
iPad (Late 2012)
fourth-gen iPad
iPad 4
Maybe I'm "unique" in thinking this makes sense, too. It's how they do it for computers, and since the iPad is a computer…
Originally Posted by TBell
While Apple is the dominant player now with tablets, it can lose its position. It will act aggressively.
And good for them in doing it! Let's just hope that getting the jump on this doesn't lead to the wrong perceptions, yeah?
Actually, there is another model -- there was a revision A of the iPad 2 WiFi.
This is more of a iPad 3s than a 4 yet still the iPhone 6g is called 5. The next IPad will still release in march. Apple just wanted the iPhone to get the a6 and lighting first. But also wants the lighting out as fast as possible( no reason to buy it with soon to be outdated accessories). Apple might finish off the lighting in the iPod line soon. That is the only thing lacking. The iOS platform now is fully lighting, why can't anyone point that out as there reasoning.
You're clearly well-intended, but, damn, the only way I can put it is there's too much rubbish here to sort through your whole trash pile.
But for starters, every new strategically important tech product release is the end a desperate struggle full of frustrations and compromises, trying to coordinate the release, ramp-up and actual delivery of components from many different suppliers, all of Apple's own internal arms (in overall product design, OS and app software, ties to the developing ecosystems of the Cloud and store, relationships with telco's and resellers all over the world, the status of hugely complex IP litigation in progress and emerging, all of the aspects of the assembly and production lines via Foxconn and others, and much more - involving probably tens of thousands of people, all with their own interests and opinions involved.
So no new product is ever "ready" - let alone everything everyone would like it to be. And your contention that they should "of course" waited to "release the real iPad 3," would have left them with no new model for a year and half and that would have made many parts of their world - customers, resellers, competitors, the press and the stock market - more than antsy. The loss of "momentum" would have been palpable.
The newly discontinued "new iPad" then, WAS the "real" iPad 3. And this is gen 4, a fluidly fast, useful upgrade of the 3rd, that itself's beginning to feel a bit heavy in the overall landscape. And gen 5 will be released when it hits its next minimally acceptable internally specced target (which will certainly include being at least lighter and thinner), whenever that is. And people who don't get that will bitch about what that one won't have.
Further, given Apple's whole history of "market segmentation" and the way they "pack" options into models, if people were going to leave Apple because they get "milked for money," the company would have disappeared 15 years ago. And since no one seems to really be ready to let go of the "what would Jobs have done" meme, I will remind you that while Steve always loved creating "insanely great products," he was never against creating "insanely great profits" as well. (After all, even though the guy remains a personal icon and inspiration to me, in his very first Apple business deal it's thoroughly documented he pocketed $500 that should have been split with Woz.)
And it won't be perfect, and it won't include every feature on any tablet anywhere, but it will be released.
Pedal to the medal folks. Schiller nailed it.
They waited 16 months in between the 4 and 4S and the sky didn't fall, they could've easily waited the same time with the iPad.
Interesting. Usually, when a product update is upcoming, someone would notice slower shipment delays and diminishing inventory. This time, nada. Did they time this to perfection or are they saving up lots of them for repairs and replacements?
There was probably a slow down in demand because of 1. The iPad mini rumors and 2. Christmas is 2 months away, well the holidays. Didn't mean to leave out our brethren of different faiths.
Comments
You know, this analysis is just a bit silly. If MS Surface does start to gain traction in the business community, making the iPad thinner or changing the display technology will have F-all to do with regaining market share for AAPL. Significant upgrades to a major product line every 6 months is not without cost in customer alienation. Not saying they won't do it (they did do it yesterday after all), but it will have nothing to do with MS Surface, just their obsession with thinner and lighter.
I think Apple should avoid doing refresh on a predictable scheduled. This slow sales a lot at the end of the cycle and create impossible to meet demand at launch.
They should just suprise the market each time and avoid those predictable patterns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackMohack
Wonder if it will keep the 4:3 ratio
I certainly hope so. It seems the only area where wide aspect screens excel at all is with video playback. That's great if all you're going to do is use the iPad for watching video, but everything else suffers.
There is no evidence to support this idea. Apple didn't start looking at TSMC until after Samsung became a problem.
Beyond that a company like Apple always has contingency plans. It is part of prudent business management because business isn't clock work like. Have you used an iPad 3? Nothing disparate at all about the device, fundamentally it was the best tablet on the market. Not at all. IPad 3 takes what was a proof of concept machine and turns it into a viable platform. That may be part of the reason. The biggest component here though is being able to market new against Microsofts new Surface product. Read a bit about Apple, the first Mac and other products and you will find that Steve was all about profits. Well they totally screwed up the desktop I will give you that much. Yesterday's iOS releases though are all about Apple doing the right things. What does Xserve/Xsan have to do with iCloud? Your logic here escapes me. By the way I do think iCloud needs some fixing but that has more to do with the basic concept.
While we can debate the specifics I do agree that Apple needs its own foundry. The difference is I see them being better off simply buying all new.
Originally Posted by TheHecta
In your opinion what do you think they will call the next generation iPad? I think that the "iPad with retina display" tagname is confusing for the average consumer. They won't know what's new because they're uninformed. Everyone knew what the "new iPad" was of course because, well, it was new and was different than "iPad 2".
Do you think they will call the 5th Gen iPad "the new iPad" again?
That's interesting. Since they've dropped the 3rd iPad, perhaps the 5th will be "iPad with retina display", also dropping the 4th iPad. Or, as I've said before, it could be "the new iPad", with the 4th gen being sold as "iPad" at $399 (and the iPad 2 at $299).
Originally Posted by TheHecta
You just proved my point. The iPad 2 is still available because it is able to be differentiated from the "iPad with Retina Display". The iPad 3 cannot and therefore the iPad 4th gen is not a substantial update.
So why'd they keep the iPhone 4 when the 4S came out? "The iPad 3 cannot" is entirely subjective, and very probably wrong. Fewer changes are made with Macs and they're still differentiable between models.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So why'd they keep the iPhone 4 when the 4S came out? "The iPad 3 cannot" is entirely subjective, and very probably wrong. Fewer changes are made with Macs and they're still differentiable between models.
I thought they kept the iPhone 4 around because they reduced the storage to 8GB and by then (almost a whole year later) the parts were cheaper and they could afford to lower the price in order to differentiate it.
Originally Posted by TheHecta
I thought they kept the iPhone 4 around because they reduced the storage to 8GB and by then (almost a whole year later) the parts were cheaper and they could afford to lower the price in order to differentiate it.
Hmm. You also have to take into account that they started using a brand new chip in the iPad 2 when the 3rd one came out…
I still think they should keep that around next year for $299.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpenzone
This is absolute silliness. This type of article pops up almost every time Apple makes a product announcement. History shows us that Apple updates their products once a year and sometimes a year-and-a-half. I think people publish this type of article just to get hits on their website.
and now history shows that sometimes they will do it in half a year.
Sorry but 'history shows' appears to be weakening as Tim Cook takes Steve Job's advice and runs with it. He's not necessarily doing as Steve did and the whole 'once a year' may go out the window for some things. This could be the first one.
It's time to restart 'history' and expect anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
So now that everything is updated (save Mac Pro, which is coming soon) what do we have to look forward to/argue about? Apple TV? Since everything has been updated from iPod to Macs, seems there isn't much to wish for? Right?
There is still the Mac Pro.
It's a matter of time before they upgrade the Cinema Display to to same thickness, or thinness of the new iMac.
As for the TV thing, Michael Gartenberg mentioned something smart the other day: The entire TV market, at $30B, isn't quite large enough to interest Apple. That's amazing thing about Apple - whatever market they go after needs to have a potential grow really, really, really ginormous.
I've said it before... The iPad market is the Personal TV market -- and much greater potential than for the the behemoth in the family room.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
The iPad 3 was also a speed bump.
Sure, if you don't count the Retina display as a new feature.
(I *still* say that to the average buyer, as opposed to an AI forum geek, the Retina display is "Yeah, yeah, that DOES look nice... so how long did you say the battery lasts again?")
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bancho
[...] It seems the only area where wide aspect screens excel at all is with video playback.
That's what some of us were screaming back in 2005 when laptop displays started going "wide screen." We wound up with LESS actual display area. Of course we got the benefit of... um...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Seems they just no longer exist. They must be being held back for replacements. The iPad 3 is available in the refurb store, though.
Interesting. Usually, when a product update is upcoming, someone would notice slower shipment delays and diminishing inventory. This time, nada. Did they time this to perfection or are they saving up lots of them for repairs and replacements?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Originally Posted by melgross
Hah! Caught you! After that long argument about why the iPad name was enough, and that we didn't need numbers to describe older models, "just call the old model the iPad", you're reduced to calling it the iPad 3, thereby agreeing with what I said after all.
I knew you would do it.
What manner of nonsense is this? I've called it "iPad 3" on occasion since launch. Call it "iPad 3", call it the "3rd generation iPad". It's the same thing. It means the same thing. Fortunately for the iPad, the numbers actually mean the right product.
I never said "we [don't] need numbers to describe older models". I know for a fact that I said numbers in this argument itself. You know that; you can go back and look at it. It doesn't need to be MARKETED with numbers in the name. The easiest way to distinguish older models, then, is to use numbers—namely the year of introduction—just like with Macs.
Marketing Name
Internal Name
Generation Name
Colloquialism
iPad
iPad (2010)
first-gen iPad
iPad
iPad 2
iPad (2011)
second-gen iPad
iPad 2
the new iPad
iPad (Early 2012)
third-gen iPad
iPad 3
iPad with retina display
iPad (Late 2012)
fourth-gen iPad
iPad 4
Maybe I'm "unique" in thinking this makes sense, too. It's how they do it for computers, and since the iPad is a computer…
Originally Posted by TBell
While Apple is the dominant player now with tablets, it can lose its position. It will act aggressively.
And good for them in doing it! Let's just hope that getting the jump on this doesn't lead to the wrong perceptions, yeah?
Actually, there is another model -- there was a revision A of the iPad 2 WiFi.
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Actually, there is another model -- there was a revision A of the iPad 2 WiFi.
Right, but like the Mac, its model number would be under the "iPad (2011)" umbrella.
They waited 16 months in between the 4 and 4S and the sky didn't fall, they could've easily waited the same time with the iPad.
There was probably a slow down in demand because of 1. The iPad mini rumors and 2. Christmas is 2 months away, well the holidays. Didn't mean to leave out our brethren of different faiths.
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah
…lighting out as fast as possible…
Am I the first one to find humor here? We've said this in a few different ways before, but still.