I would like to see the display tech from the iPhone 5 in the iPad, that and the battery tech from the mini should make it much thinner OR give it a 15 hour battery life at the same size/weight?
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.
Yeah, you actually did argue against numbers the other day. A quote from your last argument, telling me why we don't need to number them, and why it wouldn't be confusing if every year, they were just named the "iPad":
" In the store, you'll see "the new iPad". The product's name will be 'iPad'. You'll also see "iPad" in the store. That's the model released the previous year. The name of that product is also iPad. Delineated by the year of introduction.
The existence of the iPad mini probably even throws out the idea of having two iPads available at once, much less three, so that's not even a concern. If it were, it'd just be iPad, iPad, and the new iPad in the store (in a hypothetical situation years down the road). For next year, it would have been iPad 2, iPad, and the new iPad. That's no more difficult to figure out than what "G" and "S" and "GS" mean."
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.
Well you run the risk of people not being to upgrade to the new iPhone because they're mid contract. The iPhone refreshes almost have to be yearly or beyond.
It isn't just the Mac Pro, Apple has totally lost it with respect to desktop computers as the just released models are as much a regression as they area step forward. I know that more than a few people where expecting a Mac Mini at the $799 level to come with a vastly improved discrete GPU, instead we got nothing. This is frankly a huge step backwards for the Mac Mini platform so yeah it is probably crying in the corner fully ashamed to show its face in public.
The killer here is that ever desktop took a step backwards yesterday. It is almost as if Apple has lost Touch with its customer base. Slower hard drives slower video and an all around ripoff pricing scheme for that hardware.
I don't recall, did any of them in the past have a discreet GPU, other than perhaps models where the G4 had no on chip graphics, or the same with earlier Intel chips? I didn't expect a discreet GPU. These aren't meant for uses where it would matter that much.
I know people are always complaining about some Apple configuration, But it's up to Apple to decide what their market is for their machines. If their machine isn't for a particular user, they seem to be willing to give that user up. No point in complaining about it.
If Apple wasn't successful, then we would have a right to complain, but as they are very successful, we really don't have that right to say they should have done this or that. We can just complain that it's not what we want, which is something altogether different.
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.
This lead to the desperate A5X thicker battery.
Apple should of course have waited and released the real iPad3.
Apple wants to release the new iPad in late Q3-early Q4 to maximise holiday season.
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.
There is a 95% chance that Apple will repeat everything wrong they did after Steve left 1985. 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) 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.
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.
"in his very first Apple business deal it's thoroughly documented he pocketed $500 that should have been split with Woz.'
Do you have a link for this? I was told that Jobs was supposed to have split the proceeds from the sale of his minibus... but neglected to do so.
I would like to see the display tech from the iPhone 5 in the iPad, that and the battery tech from the mini should make it much thinner OR give it a 15 hour battery life at the same size/weight?
There's no 'battery tech' in the Mini. It uses a lower power (non retina) display.
Unless "Ming-Chi Kuo" means "inside" in Chinese, I don't see why he would be labeled an insider.
The surprise of yesterday's iPad update, to me, was that they called it a 4th generation iPad. There is another way to interpret "this", the 5th generation iPad (lighter or otherwise) isn't coming out until next October.
Any mention of what they will do with remaining inventory of 3rd G iPad once 4th gen iPads become available?
Check Apple's Refurb. page...all three SDD sizes are available for the iPad 2 and 3 there.
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.
How about trying to update their software as meticulously as their hardware. Sure the Apps "look" amazing and most work well for as basic as they are...but now that they've divorced themselves from Google almost completely (save for Safari) they had better start a very aggressive initiative on "Search" and "Maps". IMO, they are already a decade behind Google, Bing, Yahoo in search. Not to mention the abysmal display that is iTunes, Podcasts, etc...Forstall better step it up if he wants to live up to tall the hype Jobs seemed to place on him.
I read the Gartenberg article too and agree, but I don't think Apple's done yet with TV.
Historically Apple has placed it's release cycles by OS. Summer = OSX/Mac, Fall = iOS/iDevice (the sync is complete now that the iPad has moved to Fall releases)
Late Winter/early Spring has always been reserved for "one more thing". This year we saw the Apple TV move from a Fall release to Winter/Spring release cycle. If you take this at face value...which I remain under the impression that people read too much into Apple's scheduling and not enough time looked back at past moves...that can only mean we haven't seen the best of the Apple TV yet.
People have been rumoring new Remote hardware and possibly (finally) App store Apps for Apple TV. To me, that is the next best step for this Device. These two updates (IMO) should pair together for 4 reasons. First because you can't have great App experiences without a great UI at the same time. And secondly because I don't believe the "Remote App" is a satisfactory UI to pair with 1st and/or 3rd party apps. Third, because NOT EVERYONE has an iPhone/Touch/iPad/Mini to pair with the Apple TV. It must have a Naitive Remote. Which means, lastly, this native remote must be a totally new interface that perfectly matches the experience of interacting with the HT. IMO you need tactile/Eyes-free and touch based feedback to have a truly synced UI with home entertainment.
I would love to see a newer/updated remote AT THE VERY LEAST. Right now i can live without App Store stuff. I'd like to see a DVR paired with QTR receiver for Over-Air pick-ups...although I'm pretty sure that'll never happen.
"in his very first Apple business deal it's thoroughly documented he pocketed $500 that should have been split with Woz.'
Do you have a link for this? I was told that Jobs was supposed to have split the proceeds from the sale of his minibus... but neglected to do so.
The quote may not be 100% accurate in the wording, but I believe he's talking about the story of the game "Breakout" for Atari. Jobs would get a set amount of money, but it would increase based on how quickly he got the program finished. He enlisted the help of Woz and got it done in 1/2 the time. He agreed to pay Woz a flat fee, that of which he told Woz 1/2 of what Jobs was actually going to get from Atari. I think that's how it goes. It was from the Isaacson Bio of Jobs. I'd love to find the quote but i listened to the Audio book.
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.
This lead to the desperate A5X thicker battery.
Apple should of course have waited and released the real iPad3.
Apple wants to release the new iPad in late Q3-early Q4 to maximise holiday season.
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.
There is a 95% chance that Apple will repeat everything wrong they did after Steve left 1985. 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) 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.
I agree this is what the iPad 3rd gen SHOULD HAVE LOOKED LIKE six months ago. But I really think this iPad is premature. I think Apple was in such a hurry to update their entire iOS line that they just rushed this 4th gen out without really taking a good hard look at it.
Now, it's also possible that Apple updated the iPad to the 4th gen so that all current Gen iOS devices all have the "Lightning connector". Which they all but plainly stated this during the iPad Mini presentation. So I believe Apple knew that the gen 4 iPad was not truly updated, I would call this a Gen 3.1 iPad instead of an iPad 4th gen. So it's quite possible we will still see a thinner and lighter iPad 5th gen in April, but I don't think it's likely since the release has now been move to Fall. I also think this is quite clearly a strategic move on Apple's part to give a good initial launch to the iPad Mini. Perhaps a combination of all these things:
Just thinking out-loud...
First, they wanted to update all their iOS devices to "Lightning".
This way they can drop the 30-pin production lines as quickly as possible and switch to the "Lightning" production lines. In the long run this will be more cost effective.
And just sell whatever they have left of the 30-pin models "as long as supplies last".
Second, give people a little incentive to upgrade their previous iPads, but not enough to neglect the hot/new product...iPad Mini = keep iPad 10" form factor, weight, but boost performance.
Keep the Mini in the limelight, but offer a current compatible option to the Mini and the iOS Ecosystem.
I think the Mini's price is definitely based on supply not demand.
Third, Move all iPad release cycles synced to save manuf. dollars on a consistent schedule...just like the Macbooks, just like the iPod.
Efficiency First.
..smart move Cap'n Cook!
It's pretty easy to see (this year particularly) that Apple is looking for Efficient production. The staggered releases of the Mac's is a sure sign Apple is so far head of the curve, and having such issues with supply that they have to keep release cycles across product lines consistent. We're talking about 10's of Millions of devices per quarter now. So Cook is SO the right person for the CEO job now. Jobs knew what he was doing. Apple's current family of products are in their Summer-Autumn phase and they need efficiency and smooth production to keep the ball rolling, not someone to lead the company by innovation. The Winter Phase will be the point where we need someone to launch Apple to a new Spring...that might be Someone yet to be seen from Apple...could be someone completely outside the company....very likely IMO. But that's another topic for another day.
Well...4th generation IS just a speed bump. It's possible they might drop another ipad next spring.
As long as Apple's competitors can't count on Apple being as predictable as they have in the past, they will have to plan far more conservatively. I like it!
This guy may be talking out of his ass, but if Apple DID do this, that's the one I'd buy. Need the large screen but my arm keeps getting tired of holding my iPad3. Weight is the only issue I have with it that I'd be willing to buy a new one so soon for. Apple may know this. I hope they do.
Totally Agree here. The only thing that's keeping me from upgrading my iPad 2 is weight. Non-retina is fine
Totally Agree here. The only thing that's keeping me from upgrading my iPad 2 is weight. Non-retina is fine
In that case, it sounds like the Mini would be perfect for you, as it's crazy light, even compared to the iPad 2, and plus everything you see on the display will look sharper.
I've had both the iPad 2 and the iPad 3, and yes, the iPad 3 is slightly heavier, and I would be able to tell the two apart simply by lifting them, even if I was blindfolded, but the weight difference is not an issue that concerns me too much. If weight is somebody's main priority, then clearly, the Mini would be the tablet that they should get.
I think that a lot of people are going to be very surprised when they walk into an Apple store and actually pick up an iPad Mini and hold it in their hands for the first time, due to the crazy lightness.
This guy correctly predicted 15" rMBP, amongst other things.
The current iPad design is great (I am owning the original iPad), the A6X chip and better FaceTime camera is just what I need. Should I upgrade or wait for iPad 5? Anyone has any idea that can offer?
3 years from now, like FireWire was orphaned back in the day, the 30 pin connector may not be supported in iOS. At that time, the iPhone 5 will be the budget iPhone, and this iPad will take the place of the iPad 2 as the budget iPad. I think the goal was to move everything iOS related to Lightning, so that they can start phasing out the 30-pin connector in their planning.
"...while the $399 iPad 2 remains without a high-resolution Retina display." The iPad 2 did get a retina display. That's what we now call the iPad 3. My prediction is that the iPad 3's price will eventually drop and the iPad 2 will no longer be sold.
Hold on weren't apple just saying how awful the Samsung products were for being too thin in their UK letter? Ah yes here's the quote: "but the Samsung products are very thin" That smug Apple apology letter has almost turned me off Apple, the iPhone 5 maps were bad enough but this is just a stupid childish way to behave!
Comments
Yeah, you actually did argue against numbers the other day. A quote from your last argument, telling me why we don't need to number them, and why it wouldn't be confusing if every year, they were just named the "iPad":
" In the store, you'll see "the new iPad". The product's name will be 'iPad'. You'll also see "iPad" in the store. That's the model released the previous year. The name of that product is also iPad. Delineated by the year of introduction.
The existence of the iPad mini probably even throws out the idea of having two iPads available at once, much less three, so that's not even a concern. If it were, it'd just be iPad, iPad, and the new iPad in the store (in a hypothetical situation years down the road). For next year, it would have been iPad 2, iPad, and the new iPad. That's no more difficult to figure out than what "G" and "S" and "GS" mean."
Confusing as can be.
Well you run the risk of people not being to upgrade to the new iPhone because they're mid contract. The iPhone refreshes almost have to be yearly or beyond.
I don't recall, did any of them in the past have a discreet GPU, other than perhaps models where the G4 had no on chip graphics, or the same with earlier Intel chips? I didn't expect a discreet GPU. These aren't meant for uses where it would matter that much.
I know people are always complaining about some Apple configuration, But it's up to Apple to decide what their market is for their machines. If their machine isn't for a particular user, they seem to be willing to give that user up. No point in complaining about it.
If Apple wasn't successful, then we would have a right to complain, but as they are very successful, we really don't have that right to say they should have done this or that. We can just complain that it's not what we want, which is something altogether different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa
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.
This lead to the desperate A5X thicker battery.
Apple should of course have waited and released the real iPad3.
Apple wants to release the new iPad in late Q3-early Q4 to maximise holiday season.
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.
There is a 95% chance that Apple will repeat everything wrong they did after Steve left 1985. 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) 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.
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.
"in his very first Apple business deal it's thoroughly documented he pocketed $500 that should have been split with Woz.'
Do you have a link for this? I was told that Jobs was supposed to have split the proceeds from the sale of his minibus... but neglected to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by irnchriz
I would like to see the display tech from the iPhone 5 in the iPad, that and the battery tech from the mini should make it much thinner OR give it a 15 hour battery life at the same size/weight?
There's no 'battery tech' in the Mini. It uses a lower power (non retina) display.
Originally Posted by hentaiboy
There's no 'battery tech' in the Mini.
NONE whatsoever, eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Unless "Ming-Chi Kuo" means "inside" in Chinese, I don't see why he would be labeled an insider.
The surprise of yesterday's iPad update, to me, was that they called it a 4th generation iPad. There is another way to interpret "this", the 5th generation iPad (lighter or otherwise) isn't coming out until next October.
Any mention of what they will do with remaining inventory of 3rd G iPad once 4th gen iPads become available?
Check Apple's Refurb. page...all three SDD sizes are available for the iPad 2 and 3 there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
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.
How about trying to update their software as meticulously as their hardware. Sure the Apps "look" amazing and most work well for as basic as they are...but now that they've divorced themselves from Google almost completely (save for Safari) they had better start a very aggressive initiative on "Search" and "Maps". IMO, they are already a decade behind Google, Bing, Yahoo in search. Not to mention the abysmal display that is iTunes, Podcasts, etc...Forstall better step it up if he wants to live up to tall the hype Jobs seemed to place on him.
I read the Gartenberg article too and agree, but I don't think Apple's done yet with TV.
Historically Apple has placed it's release cycles by OS. Summer = OSX/Mac, Fall = iOS/iDevice (the sync is complete now that the iPad has moved to Fall releases)
Late Winter/early Spring has always been reserved for "one more thing". This year we saw the Apple TV move from a Fall release to Winter/Spring release cycle. If you take this at face value...which I remain under the impression that people read too much into Apple's scheduling and not enough time looked back at past moves...that can only mean we haven't seen the best of the Apple TV yet.
People have been rumoring new Remote hardware and possibly (finally) App store Apps for Apple TV. To me, that is the next best step for this Device. These two updates (IMO) should pair together for 4 reasons. First because you can't have great App experiences without a great UI at the same time. And secondly because I don't believe the "Remote App" is a satisfactory UI to pair with 1st and/or 3rd party apps. Third, because NOT EVERYONE has an iPhone/Touch/iPad/Mini to pair with the Apple TV. It must have a Naitive Remote. Which means, lastly, this native remote must be a totally new interface that perfectly matches the experience of interacting with the HT. IMO you need tactile/Eyes-free and touch based feedback to have a truly synced UI with home entertainment.
I would love to see a newer/updated remote AT THE VERY LEAST. Right now i can live without App Store stuff. I'd like to see a DVR paired with QTR receiver for Over-Air pick-ups...although I'm pretty sure that'll never happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
"in his very first Apple business deal it's thoroughly documented he pocketed $500 that should have been split with Woz.'
Do you have a link for this? I was told that Jobs was supposed to have split the proceeds from the sale of his minibus... but neglected to do so.
The quote may not be 100% accurate in the wording, but I believe he's talking about the story of the game "Breakout" for Atari. Jobs would get a set amount of money, but it would increase based on how quickly he got the program finished. He enlisted the help of Woz and got it done in 1/2 the time. He agreed to pay Woz a flat fee, that of which he told Woz 1/2 of what Jobs was actually going to get from Atari. I think that's how it goes. It was from the Isaacson Bio of Jobs. I'd love to find the quote but i listened to the Audio book.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shompa
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.
This lead to the desperate A5X thicker battery.
Apple should of course have waited and released the real iPad3.
Apple wants to release the new iPad in late Q3-early Q4 to maximise holiday season.
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.
There is a 95% chance that Apple will repeat everything wrong they did after Steve left 1985. 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) 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.
I agree this is what the iPad 3rd gen SHOULD HAVE LOOKED LIKE six months ago. But I really think this iPad is premature. I think Apple was in such a hurry to update their entire iOS line that they just rushed this 4th gen out without really taking a good hard look at it.
Now, it's also possible that Apple updated the iPad to the 4th gen so that all current Gen iOS devices all have the "Lightning connector". Which they all but plainly stated this during the iPad Mini presentation. So I believe Apple knew that the gen 4 iPad was not truly updated, I would call this a Gen 3.1 iPad instead of an iPad 4th gen. So it's quite possible we will still see a thinner and lighter iPad 5th gen in April, but I don't think it's likely since the release has now been move to Fall. I also think this is quite clearly a strategic move on Apple's part to give a good initial launch to the iPad Mini. Perhaps a combination of all these things:
Just thinking out-loud...
First, they wanted to update all their iOS devices to "Lightning".
This way they can drop the 30-pin production lines as quickly as possible and switch to the "Lightning" production lines. In the long run this will be more cost effective.
And just sell whatever they have left of the 30-pin models "as long as supplies last".
Second, give people a little incentive to upgrade their previous iPads, but not enough to neglect the hot/new product...iPad Mini = keep iPad 10" form factor, weight, but boost performance.
Keep the Mini in the limelight, but offer a current compatible option to the Mini and the iOS Ecosystem.
I think the Mini's price is definitely based on supply not demand.
Third, Move all iPad release cycles synced to save manuf. dollars on a consistent schedule...just like the Macbooks, just like the iPod.
Efficiency First.
..smart move Cap'n Cook!
It's pretty easy to see (this year particularly) that Apple is looking for Efficient production. The staggered releases of the Mac's is a sure sign Apple is so far head of the curve, and having such issues with supply that they have to keep release cycles across product lines consistent. We're talking about 10's of Millions of devices per quarter now. So Cook is SO the right person for the CEO job now. Jobs knew what he was doing. Apple's current family of products are in their Summer-Autumn phase and they need efficiency and smooth production to keep the ball rolling, not someone to lead the company by innovation. The Winter Phase will be the point where we need someone to launch Apple to a new Spring...that might be Someone yet to be seen from Apple...could be someone completely outside the company....very likely IMO. But that's another topic for another day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by koban4max
Well...4th generation IS just a speed bump. It's possible they might drop another ipad next spring.
As long as Apple's competitors can't count on Apple being as predictable as they have in the past, they will have to plan far more conservatively. I like it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber
This guy may be talking out of his ass, but if Apple DID do this, that's the one I'd buy. Need the large screen but my arm keeps getting tired of holding my iPad3. Weight is the only issue I have with it that I'd be willing to buy a new one so soon for. Apple may know this. I hope they do.
Totally Agree here. The only thing that's keeping me from upgrading my iPad 2 is weight. Non-retina is fine
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1
Totally Agree here. The only thing that's keeping me from upgrading my iPad 2 is weight. Non-retina is fine
In that case, it sounds like the Mini would be perfect for you, as it's crazy light, even compared to the iPad 2, and plus everything you see on the display will look sharper.
I've had both the iPad 2 and the iPad 3, and yes, the iPad 3 is slightly heavier, and I would be able to tell the two apart simply by lifting them, even if I was blindfolded, but the weight difference is not an issue that concerns me too much. If weight is somebody's main priority, then clearly, the Mini would be the tablet that they should get.
I think that a lot of people are going to be very surprised when they walk into an Apple store and actually pick up an iPad Mini and hold it in their hands for the first time, due to the crazy lightness.
The current iPad design is great (I am owning the original iPad), the A6X chip and better FaceTime camera is just what I need. Should I upgrade or wait for iPad 5? Anyone has any idea that can offer?
3 years from now, like FireWire was orphaned back in the day, the 30 pin connector may not be supported in iOS. At that time, the iPhone 5 will be the budget iPhone, and this iPad will take the place of the iPad 2 as the budget iPad. I think the goal was to move everything iOS related to Lightning, so that they can start phasing out the 30-pin connector in their planning.
Originally Posted by spstanley
The iPad 2 did get a retina display.
Except it didn't.
That's what we now call the iPad 3.
That's not the iPad 2, now is it?!
My prediction is that the iPad 3's price will eventually drop and the iPad 2 will no longer be sold.
Your prediction is wrong. The iPad 3 is discontinued.