Indeed. And that won't come from thinner glass. Battery looks like the best candidate for weight reduction.
Yes, were it to get an IGZO display that sips power they could back off on the available power if the goal was to lighten it up along the lines of the iPad mini and the iPhone 5.
ETA: Granted that wide range of panel sources probably precludes that. Too bad I've heard nice things.
Yes, were it to get an IGZO display that sips power they could back off on the available power if the goal was to lighten it up along the lines of the iPad mini and the iPhone 5.
I don't think Apple could reduce the weight by 33% without shrinking the battery by at least 25%, which would require a new, more efficient screen technology. The screen consumes most of the battery power. IGZO-based OLED isn't ready yet, and when it is, I would expect to see very small screens first. (Hint: iWatch.) But IGZO-based LCD could be ready for mass production by now.
IGZO conductors have anywhere from 20 times to 40 times better electron mobility (lower resistance) than the current amorphous silicon. That could drastically cut back on power use. IGZO also has better transparency than amorphous silicon. And apparently IGZO-based LCD screens don't need to be constantly refreshed like current LCD screens. If the image isn't moving, no refresh is needed. That saves even more power, especially in smartphones and pads showing home screens etc.
The reduction of the glass substrate is most likely the least of the reasons for the weight reduction. 1/20 of a millimetre? Come on. The smaller battery, but mostly the thinner, smaller far lighter chassis is the reason.
It all adds up so any little bit of weight shed will help. I understand the case will be filled with Helium too. /s
Meh, The iPad 4 is powerful enough to run Android, iOS, Windows Phone and Windows XP with all those viruses at the same time, while giving all day battery life.
Trolling are we? The iPad has a very long ways to go before it can be considered powerful enough.
My point is: We need something to take advantage of the iPad, before worrying about more horsepower, no?
There are many apps, including Apples Safari, that could use more horsepower and RAM. In fact Safari can down right such on iPad if you visit the wrong sight.
I'm not talking about "heavier" programs, I'm talking about more functionality.
Which is heavier. Functionality isn't free you know.
Isn't it time to toy with the Apple Thunderbolt display? Put the thing (iPad) run OSX 10.9 when docked to the thunderbolt display, for example. Bang, the hybrids from Google and Microsoft are dead.
It has so much potential...
Well this I agree with. But it also depends upon where Apple wants to take it. IOS may never have the functionality we want.
It all adds up so any little bit of weight shed will help. I understand the case will be filled with Helium too. /s
Helium costs to much! They likely will use all of the hot air released in this thread! IPads would be floating so high then that NORAD would have to track them as space junk.
... Isn't it time to toy with the Apple Thunderbolt display? Put the thing (iPad) run OSX 10.9 when docked to the thunderbolt display, for example. Bang, the hybrids from Google and Microsoft are dead. …
This makes no sense. In the first case, it's only value would be more screen real estate because the way you describe it, it can only run OS X programs when connected to the Thunderbolt display. It also makes no sense because if the iPad was powerful enough to run desktop OS X when connected to the display, then why not do it all the time? If instead you mean using it as an extra screen on your desktop, that functionality is already available.
The only way it makes any sense at all is if the iPad ran both OS's simultaneously all the time like Windows 8 does. And if that's what you think is a good idea then you know nothing about iPads at all.
Lighter weigh, better speakers are good additions along with a longer battery life.
Don't mention speakers, you'll be attacked around here. For whatever oddball reason some folks on this forum are very defensive when it comes to speaker criticism of Apple's products. Heck, I was asked to buy external speakers when I complained that my new ALL-IN-ONE iMac has worse speakers than its five year old counterpart. "They aren't meant for music, anyway" - one of the more hilarious replies.
5 - More optimized? It's probably the most efficient and low-profile OS in existence, other than bare-bones UNIX. It's why the iOS experience is smoother than the competitors by an order 2, with half the processor power and RAM. But yes, it will be improved upon I'm sure.
I'll repeat. The iPad 4 was 2X faster then the iPad 3. If the OS was more optimises for the A7 I'd notice this more. Seriously, double the speed difference and I never noticed it? That wasn't a question.
I keep reading comments on the Internet to the effect that the new iMac has "bad" speakers but the very first thing everyone I know who's actually bought one and uses it says when they turn it on is … "Wow, sounds a lot better."
They don't sound better. I've own 4 iMacs. This is my fourth. My last was 5 years old. Because of the thin chin the sound sounds like it's being funnelled through the chin. I've tested this extensively, even side by side with the old product. It's worse. It's worse. It's worse.
I read your ideas, they are horrendous. Now quit spamming links to your website on this forum. Your first post and you link it to your site. How rude.
Here are some better ideas:
New batch of icons and a cleaner design throughout the OS.
Up-to-date app icons (not ‘live’) for weather, clock and calendar apps; default, and third party.
A dedicated dictionary app.
A dedicated weather app on iPad.
A dedicated calculator app on iPad.
Quick access to brightness on iPhone. (shortcuts menu)
Quick reply for texts.
Scrollable folders (one big gaming folder, woo!)
More reliable iMessage sending and syncing infrastructure.
Clear all button in NC.
Per-app password (on/off option).
OS settings Siri commands (e.g. “turn off WiFi and Bluetooth”).
B&W edit option in photos app.
Ability to copy part of a text message.
Ability to cancel outgoing text before progress bar reaches the end.
Ability to cancel a-yet-to-read “Delivered” iMessage.
Automatic up-to-date unread badges on e-mail app icon. (the lack of this wrecks my head)
Don't mention speakers, you'll be attacked around here. For whatever oddball reason some folks on this forum are very defensive when it comes to speaker criticism of Apple's products.
I won't attack you for disliking the speakers because I'm something of an audiophile myself, but having said that I never expect mass market products like phones, tablets, and computers to have quality speakers.
I want to see them pay more attention to speakers. For example, the speakers in my new iMac sound worse than my 5 year old iMac. I'm not gong to explain that last point. Suffice it say they do sound worse, and no, there is nothing wrong with them. The 5 mm chin was just a shitty trade off, and ultimately a bad design decision. .
You can't violate the laws of physics. If you want good sound, you have to push air. The smaller the speaker and the smaller the amp power, the worse the sound. The smaller the cabinet, the less the bass.
Modern TVs have the same problem because the cabinets are so thin. TVs had better sound in 1954 than they have today.
It's a miracle Apple's products sound as good as they do. But when they prioritize "thinness" over every other aspect, there are going to be sacrifices and good native sound is one of them. IMO, Apple's obsession with thin is one of their faults.
Comments
It is a pleasure to read this thread. Many thoughtful comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Man
Lighter weigh, better speakers are good additions along with a longer battery life.
Longer battery life? I have never had the slightest complaint about battery life on my iPad 4. Or my mini for that matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Indeed. And that won't come from thinner glass. Battery looks like the best candidate for weight reduction.
Yes, were it to get an IGZO display that sips power they could back off on the available power if the goal was to lighten it up along the lines of the iPad mini and the iPhone 5.
ETA: Granted that wide range of panel sources probably precludes that. Too bad I've heard nice things.
Originally Posted by pedromartins
Put the thing (iPad) run OSX 10.9 when docked to the thunderbolt display, for example. Bang, the hybrids from Google and Microsoft are dead.
They're already dead. No use shooting your own live horse, then shooting dead horses.
Originally Posted by pedromartins
It has so much potential...
Apple only goes after positive potential. Not the negative.
Originally Posted by jfc1138
Yes, were it to get an IGZO display that sips power they could back off on the available power if the goal was to lighten it up along the lines of the iPad mini and the iPhone 5.
I don't think Apple could reduce the weight by 33% without shrinking the battery by at least 25%, which would require a new, more efficient screen technology. The screen consumes most of the battery power. IGZO-based OLED isn't ready yet, and when it is, I would expect to see very small screens first. (Hint: iWatch.) But IGZO-based LCD could be ready for mass production by now.
IGZO conductors have anywhere from 20 times to 40 times better electron mobility (lower resistance) than the current amorphous silicon. That could drastically cut back on power use. IGZO also has better transparency than amorphous silicon. And apparently IGZO-based LCD screens don't need to be constantly refreshed like current LCD screens. If the image isn't moving, no refresh is needed. That saves even more power, especially in smartphones and pads showing home screens etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
The reduction of the glass substrate is most likely the least of the reasons for the weight reduction. 1/20 of a millimetre? Come on. The smaller battery, but mostly the thinner, smaller far lighter chassis is the reason.
It all adds up so any little bit of weight shed will help. I understand the case will be filled with Helium too. /s
Well this I agree with. But it also depends upon where Apple wants to take it. IOS may never have the functionality we want.
????????????????????????????
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
... Isn't it time to toy with the Apple Thunderbolt display? Put the thing (iPad) run OSX 10.9 when docked to the thunderbolt display, for example. Bang, the hybrids from Google and Microsoft are dead. …
This makes no sense. In the first case, it's only value would be more screen real estate because the way you describe it, it can only run OS X programs when connected to the Thunderbolt display. It also makes no sense because if the iPad was powerful enough to run desktop OS X when connected to the display, then why not do it all the time? If instead you mean using it as an extra screen on your desktop, that functionality is already available.
The only way it makes any sense at all is if the iPad ran both OS's simultaneously all the time like Windows 8 does. And if that's what you think is a good idea then you know nothing about iPads at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
It all adds up so any little bit of weight shed will help. I understand the case will be filled with Helium too. /s
It adds up, but reducing the glass substrate by 1/20 of a mm is nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Man
Lighter weigh, better speakers are good additions along with a longer battery life.
Don't mention speakers, you'll be attacked around here. For whatever oddball reason some folks on this forum are very defensive when it comes to speaker criticism of Apple's products. Heck, I was asked to buy external speakers when I complained that my new ALL-IN-ONE iMac has worse speakers than its five year old counterpart. "They aren't meant for music, anyway" - one of the more hilarious replies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
5 - More optimized? It's probably the most efficient and low-profile OS in existence, other than bare-bones UNIX. It's why the iOS experience is smoother than the competitors by an order 2, with half the processor power and RAM. But yes, it will be improved upon I'm sure.
I'll repeat. The iPad 4 was 2X faster then the iPad 3. If the OS was more optimises for the A7 I'd notice this more. Seriously, double the speed difference and I never noticed it? That wasn't a question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I keep reading comments on the Internet to the effect that the new iMac has "bad" speakers but the very first thing everyone I know who's actually bought one and uses it says when they turn it on is … "Wow, sounds a lot better."
They don't sound better. I've own 4 iMacs. This is my fourth. My last was 5 years old. Because of the thin chin the sound sounds like it's being funnelled through the chin. I've tested this extensively, even side by side with the old product. It's worse. It's worse. It's worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
It doesn't need, but I would like that too.
About the iMac: you have no reason at all. The speakers are much better...
I'm lying, am I? I've owned 4 iMacs, but I'm lying about the speakers this time round, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilution
I totally agree. If newer revisions are worse than the older versions in any way, that's bad.
Who the hell wants to lug around Bluetooth speakers with a mobile device.
The form over function speakers/SD card slot/no DVD drive on the iMac has put me off upgrading.
The new iPad really does need better forward facing speakers, oh, and 2 of them please.
It needs something. It's actually the iPads weakest point. Next up is heft, but it looks like they will be address that point.
I read your ideas, they are horrendous. Now quit spamming links to your website on this forum. Your first post and you link it to your site. How rude.
Here are some better ideas:
New batch of icons and a cleaner design throughout the OS.
Up-to-date app icons (not ‘live’) for weather, clock and calendar apps; default, and third party.
A dedicated dictionary app.
A dedicated weather app on iPad.
A dedicated calculator app on iPad.
Quick access to brightness on iPhone. (shortcuts menu)
Quick reply for texts.
Scrollable folders (one big gaming folder, woo!)
More reliable iMessage sending and syncing infrastructure.
Clear all button in NC.
Per-app password (on/off option).
OS settings Siri commands (e.g. “turn off WiFi and Bluetooth”).
B&W edit option in photos app.
Ability to copy part of a text message.
Ability to cancel outgoing text before progress bar reaches the end.
Ability to cancel a-yet-to-read “Delivered” iMessage.
Automatic up-to-date unread badges on e-mail app icon. (the lack of this wrecks my head)
Quote:
Don't mention speakers, you'll be attacked around here. For whatever oddball reason some folks on this forum are very defensive when it comes to speaker criticism of Apple's products.
I won't attack you for disliking the speakers because I'm something of an audiophile myself, but having said that I never expect mass market products like phones, tablets, and computers to have quality speakers.
You can't violate the laws of physics. If you want good sound, you have to push air. The smaller the speaker and the smaller the amp power, the worse the sound. The smaller the cabinet, the less the bass.
Modern TVs have the same problem because the cabinets are so thin. TVs had better sound in 1954 than they have today.
It's a miracle Apple's products sound as good as they do. But when they prioritize "thinness" over every other aspect, there are going to be sacrifices and good native sound is one of them. IMO, Apple's obsession with thin is one of their faults.