We're almost exactly the same there, but I vacillated since 2002. Sorry about that ever since, but I really can't complain, particularly since dividends began pouring in. I had no idea that it would ever get this high, or that Apple would get this big. Really, who did back then. When Apple reached $36, my broker called me and said I should sell since I had made so much. When I refusrd, he asked; "What, you think it will go to $40?". I think I said; "Uh, yeah.".
Haha, they tried to convince me to sell after the first stock split, I just told them to forget that I owned the stock, no my exact words were, put in a sell order at 1,000, I actually got excited right before the 1 for 7 split, I was looking forward to the conversation where I would tell my broker to to remove the sell order for 1,000 and put another one in for 2,000. I do most of my own trading now, mostly currencies and commodities, the blue chip stuff is still handled by my bank and would love to get my hands on some actual trading certificates for Apple. There's just something about actually having something tangible to hold. I have some Swiss Bearerbonds that look pretty awesome and are actually worth a good penny now that the Swiss Frank is so strong.
Apple HAS caused disruptions. But once a technology settles in, price begins to become the most important factor in a purchasing decision for most people. So Apple's market share drops from 100% to the mid 20's.
The problem, as I've said several times here, and at other times, is that for most people, their products become less relevant. Why spend $500, when something else does what they want for $250? If Apple wants to keep those price points, then performance isn't enough, and neither is TouchID. I have to admit that I don't know what Apple would need to do that's disruptive, other than to keep well ahead in a number of areas. But we've seen numerous patents from them that could do it.
Incorporating solar cells in the screen. Incorporating a camera in the screen. Those are two patented areas from Apple from several years ago. Are they working on them or not? Are they practical?
How about this—Apple uses an LED backlight that uses several LEDs on the edge of the screen. OLEDs can illuminate individual pixels for notifications that use very little power. LCDs have traditionally illuminated the entire panel at once. With large backlighting from panels behind the screen, nothing could be done about that. But with LED backlighting, it can. Apple could illuminate just one LED to have notifications, live, when the phone is off, just the way some Android phones do. It would illuminate a part of the screen, enough for messages, time, temperature, etc., while using much less power than turning all the LEDs on at once. There are several of them. How about Apple doing that?
There are a number of ideas I have that Apple could be doing. Cameras, touch controls, and other areas, are ones in which Apple could be doing more work on. For example, Apple could lay out a camera that uses a mirror, preferably an aspheric mirror, that would allow the sensor to sit 90 degrees from the lens, eliminating camera thickness as a problem. This would allow a bigger sensor, and even an optical zoom, for which there are several promising technologies. This isn't a technology that hasn't been used in bigger cameras, as it has been. How would people react to a 16MP camera with a 3:1 optical zoom, with low noise? Would the module cost more? Sure. Would the extra sale make it worthwhile? Sure.
You seem to forget that the value of Apple devices is in how they all integrate together to create an organic whole. PRicing of each individual pieces don't cover the added value of this. All of Apple's devices together (and its ecosystem) produce a super-device made of those building blocks. None of their competitors right now have the resources to follow Apple in that direction.
Apple is also pushing hard in making sure it has differentiating factors everywhere. Some have little impact on the customer (but has impact on its margins).
Its push into SOC and possibly designing GPU and com chips enables an extreme degree of systems integration. If Apple would be able to design its own GPS/comm circuits and also integrate them, that would enable them to have a total control of a computer's design from hardware to software. I'm not sure that anyone would have had this level of control in design ever in the history of computing.
Regardless the other advantages, from a cost perspective that would be tremendous if they're able to keep up technologically. With pressure from the competition increasing, if they're able to keep up their margins even as their prices come down, they'll stay on top.
This is what protects Apple's margins somewhat from the competition. I see Apple being even more aggressive in that direction in the near future.
I think the A8X (and tablet acceptance) will come into it's own in at least these ways:
increased sales of iPad Air 2 to consumers
increased sales of a new AppleTV/Home Hub/Server/Game Controller
new use of iPads as personal TVs and gaming devices
enterprise/institutional use of iPads including the new iPad Pro 12"
professional use of iPads including the new iPad Pro 12"
Some [much?] of the acceptance will be a result of the Apple/IBM partnership ... and as people, increasingly, use iPads in their work -- the will tend to purchase similar devices for their personal use!
The quick recharge always has an impact on battery life (how long the battery will last). This isn't an issue if you can actually replace the battery life some Android phones. You can charge a Iphone 6 with an Ipad charger and it will take half the time. But, your going to impact your battery significantly. Since Apple would need to make it possible to change the battery themselves to enable this right now and that have a major impact on their devices' size. I don't think we'll see it. In laptops it could be used though.
I use a 12w charger to charge both my iPhone and iPad. Am I negatively impacting my iPhone's battery life by doing so?
and as people, increasingly, use iPads in their work -- the will tend to purchase similar devices for their personal use!
This was one of the biggest helper for PC's in general back in the day. For many people, learning one OS is enough work. So if they had an IBM PS/2 at work, their IT guy told them the clone to buy and which software to load, they could use the same thing at home. Since Macs were never really big in the enterprise, this didn't help Apple.
Then there's the effect of "wow, computers can do that?", except this time it'll be "wow, iPads can do all that?".
The A7 was a bit of a departure for Apple, since they chose not to make a more powerful A7X version of that chip, which meant that there was no significant power advantage for the iPad Air vs the iPhone that year.
There was an A5X, an A6X, and an A8X. A7 is the odd man out.
Since I have these tablets, I'm aware of that. But no matter, as the performance of the Air was much better than the 4 of the previous year, and somewhat better than that of the iPhone, because, as usual, they ran it slightly faster than in the iPhone.
Many developers praised the A7, and came out with much more advanced apps for it. AutoDesk was thrilled, because AutoCAD 360, which I use, was a much better app with the 64 bit A7. But, so what? Of all the purchasers of iPads, what percentage uses them for advanced apps? I've asked this before, and I'm still waiting for an answer. If it's 25%, then these improved tablets will be appreciated by that 25%. But the other 75% might not appreciate it as much. How about Android users? Will they appreciate it?
If iPad sales are down again this quarter, you will have to admit that the higher specs aren't making much of an impression to most tablet buyers. Even if they are up by a slight amount, it might have little to do with the SoC.
Look at iPhone sale instead. Apple finally caught up with what many consumers of higher end phones do seem to want, a bigger screen. That, and probably Apple Pay, to a lesser extent, are responsible for those higher sales we're seeing.
There's nothing comparable for the iPad. The same sizes. TouchID doesn't have the same impact, though I find it useful.
Wish Apple would spend more time explaining how the average iPad user benefits from these technology improvements. Lately with iPads they've basically just been reading specs off a keynote slide. Is there a special place in the app store that showcases apps taking advantage of the A8X? I think iPad is a product that Apple just doesn't know what to do with. This past keynote when Tim asked the question of what could you do to make the iPad better and then proceeds to show a video of it getting 18% thinner really crystallized for me that their loss with what to do with this product. And as we can see with the increase in Mac sales and decrease in iPad growth we are not in a post-PC world at all. During the last earnings call Tim Cook said it doesn't bother him at all if someone chooses an iPhone or Mac over an iPad. Okay I get that because at the end of the day they're still buying an Apple product. But wouldn't he want to know why people are choosing those devices over an iPad? IMO if the iPad doesn't get a major shake up the sales decline will continue.
The problem, as I see it, is that those of us who do benefit from an iPad, are buying them. But what is the percentage of people buying tablets who would benefit from those enhanced specs? Is it 75%, 50%, 25%, less?
That's the problem Apple is faced with these days. When much cheaper tablets are "good enough" for most people's needs, then an Apple tablet loses its allure for an actual purchase, even if someone would rather have one. I use apps for which ever better performance is needed. But how many people use those apps? How many are available on Android in the first place? How many Android users even know such apps are available on the iPad? How many care?
For example, I use an app called Audio Tools. This is a professional app for audio use. The basic price is $19.95, pretty cheap. But you can add modules, and eventually end up with a couple of hundred in cost. But using my iPad, and sometimes my iPhone, which this is also for, and their adapter box that fits the Apple connector (the old connector, but works on Lightning with Apple's adapter), I can do sophisticated audio measurements that I used to have over $20 thousand in equipment for. You can get this for Android, as an app, but not the box, which allows all of those other measurements. And for Android, as with all other measurement apps, it's not calibrated, because there are too many Android devices out there, and many have low specs for microphones, etc. So while the basic Android app "works" without the box and an external measurement mic, which I sometimes use, the measurements that it can do are really just for "entertainment only". You can calibrate the Android device, if you have access to the hundreds of $$$ of calibration tools required.
But again, even though I know guys who have these apps for Android, they neither know nor care that they are inaccurate.
So this is where things are at. Most people don't do this work where an iPad is needed. So they don't need an iPad, and so they buy a much cheaper Android model that does do what they need. And so Apple is caught in a spiral.
I believe that now that the iPad has been out since mid 2010, it needs a rethink. Possibly iPhones too. I do believe that, in their labs, they are looking at more advanced models, and by that, I don't mean just newer chips. We can look at all those patents Apple has gotten over the years that are very innovative. The question is how many of them are practical in an actual device, or depend on technologies to implement that are still some years away?
Let's look at one thing that's been bothering me. Recharging devices has become a chore when running down, and more time is needed. Motorola has just come out with a phone that allows a super charge with a time in just a few minutes, at most. Is Apple incapable of doing the same? Is Motorola's technology lab so much better than Apple's? Or is Apple blasé about this? Does Apple care about long recharge times? This is something that Apple should have come out with, several years ago. It's obviously not that hard to do.
The technology to supercharge batteries is many years old. The problem is that you knacker the battery, so in the long-term, you will have to replace the battery too quickly. No doubt, Apple have experimented with this technology, and if it becomes commercially viable, they will implement it.
Stop saying "he". Relic is not a he. She also knows more than most people here, including you.
I already corrected that above.
And no, she does not know more than me considering she refuses to get into any in-depth processor architecture discussions and continues to diminish the significance of Apple's processors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
This argument is flawed, because, for example, the new Tegra has better performance per core than the A8x, an argument that has been used for Apple's chips over the years, but since it only has two cores, poorer multi core performance, another argument around Apple's chips over the years. The graphics performance of the latest Tegra is also pretty good.
Please. It's only faster because it's clocked a full 1.0GHz higher. 66% faster clock than the A8X and only 5% faster. This despite Nvidias constant hyping of the Denver K1 and the fact it's supposed to be more efficient and do more work per clock cycle than other ARM processors (Nvidias words, not mine).
There are a number of ideas I have that Apple could be doing. Cameras, touch controls, and other areas, are ones in which Apple could be doing more work on. For example, Apple could lay out a camera that uses a mirror, preferably an aspheric mirror, that would allow the sensor to sit 90 degrees from the lens, eliminating camera thickness as a problem. This would allow a bigger sensor, and even an optical zoom, for which there are several promising technologies. This isn't a technology that hasn't been used in bigger cameras, as it has been. How would people react to a 16MP camera with a 3:1 optical zoom, with low noise? Would the module cost more? Sure. Would the extra sale make it worthwhile? Sure.
A while back, I suggested using a lens/mirror concept for light -- similar to what a folded horn does for sound ... for a super-flat camera in an iPhone.
I did some surfing and there had been research in that area -- but most of it was over 10 years ago.
I use a 12w charger to charge both my iPhone and iPad. Am I negatively impacting my iPhone's battery life by doing so?
Your definitively impacting the Iphone's battery. But, its not a big issue if you don't mind changing it later and prefer the quicker charge time.
Changing the battery is not in Apple's philosophy and that's why they give the smaller charger to the Iphone (not just money, the price for each is about the same).
And no, she does not know more than me considering she refuses to get into any in-depth processor architecture discussions and continues to diminish the significance of Apple's processors.
Please. It's only faster because it's clocked a full 1.0GHz higher. 66% faster clock than the A8X and only 5% faster. This despite Nvidias constant hyping of the Denver K1 and the fact it's supposed to be more efficient and do more work per clock cycle than other ARM processors (Nvidias words, not mine).
There's also the fact that in using REAL GENERAL CODE, and not test code, the K1 seems to be a dog. Look up the reviews on the Nexus 9 to see how well NVDIA actually did with their "super chip"... Seems benchmark truly don't tell the whole story.
and as people, increasingly, use iPads in their work -- the will tend to purchase similar devices for their personal use!
This was one of the biggest helper for PC's in general back in the day. For many people, learning one OS is enough work. So if they had an IBM PS/2 at work, their IT guy told them the clone to buy and which software to load, they could use the same thing at home. Since Macs were never really big in the enterprise, this didn't help Apple.
Then there's the effect of "wow, computers can do that?", except this time it'll be "wow, iPads can do all that?".
Your definitively impacting the Iphone's battery. But, its not a big issue if you don't mind changing it later and prefer the quicker charge time.
Changing the battery is not in Apple's philosophy and that's why they give the smaller charger to the Iphone (not just money, the price for each is about the same).
If Apple was worried about battery damage, they wouldn't have developed the 6 and 6+ to actually use the 12W...
Even though the performance of A8X comes with a bit of surprise, it is still quite far off compared to Intel Broadwell.
Next year 2015 will be 10 years since Apple announced to switch to Intel. ( If you think about it and the state of Apple were then, compared to what they are now.... ), and 2016 they started to ship Mac with Intel CPU.
I guess a better IPC, Quad Core with 16 cluster of PowerVR7 A9X should work out fine next year.
At the same clock speed and the same number of cores (with proper ventilation), it is not that far off. Considering the A8X is inside a 6mm frame and not really heating up, it is obvious it has quite a bit of thermal room left. The GPU is even more underclocked.
My estimation right now is that Apple would be 1 generation behind Intel at the same clockspeed if they adjusted their processors for the desktop (or a laptop). Considering Apple was nowhere in 2009, that's pretty impressive.
Not necessarily correct. There is speculation that every Apple iPad sold may be a x86-64 PC not sold. Please provide reliable evidence that Apple iPad market share is continually falling.
Do you have any evidence that decreased sales have any correlation to Apple Ax; perhaps Apple iPad would have far fewer sales if not for Apple Ax.
You have limited your definition of "tablet" to the ridiculous Google Android and Microsoft Surface narrative.
... is it going to have people spend $100 more to get an Apple tablet - Yes. Some consumers will see the value.
This is the single most absurd comment ever posted on this website.
You really are screwed up!
Not necessarily correct? But I may be correct? I am correct. You haven't shown otherwise anywhere.
There is speculation that an iPad sale is directly correlated to a PC not sold? And you say that I haven't proof? You really need to show that that statement is correct, because it's most definately not. True, iPad purchases are resulting in fewer pc purchases. Is it a one to one affair? Of course not. If it were, we would see the numbers of pcs sold drop by the number of iPads sold, and the numbers, which are well known, don't match that at all.
There is reliable evidence that iPad market share is falling. What? You think that Apple still has 100% of the tablet market? Seriously? Where are you from, if you believe that? Remember that even App,e quotes IDG's numbers at their financial calls, and during their presentations. Do you think they would if they thought those numbers were too far off?
Where did I say that the decreasing iPad sales, which is something I do hope you aren't also denying, is DUE to the A8x? I never said that. I did say that the A8x isn't likely to add to iPad sales by itself. And that remains true.
Yes, I have limited my statements to what Apple considers to be the tablet market. That ridiculous Android, iOS, Windows tablet market. Why! Because THAT IS THE TABLET MARKET!!!
Yes, just as you say SOME people will pay $100 more for an iPad. I never said otherwise. But as tablet sales continue to rise, iPad sales are falling off. I hope you aren't going to deny that. And if you don't, then you have to rethink your denial that iPad market share is shrinking. Even if you include pc sales in that, iPad marketshare is shrinking, because of sales are slowing by about 3% now, not the previous 10%, and tablet sales are rising by about 15% a year.
You may not have respect for those who disagree with you but unless they say things that are obviously silly, I do. Relic has shown that she has an understanding of technology that is greater than most people here, as she actually works with it. I believe her rather than those who pretend to know things that some here don't actually know. Look inward.
The A7 was a bit of a departure for Apple, since they chose not to make a more powerful A7X version of that chip, which meant that there was no significant power advantage for the iPad Air vs the iPhone that year.
There was an A5X, an A6X, and an A8X. A7 is the odd man out.
Since I have these tablets, I'm aware of that. But no matter, as the performance of the Air was much better than the 4 of the previous year, and somewhat better than that of the iPhone, because, as usual, they ran it slightly faster than in the iPhone.
Many developers praised the A7, and came out with much more advanced apps for it. AutoDesk was thrilled, because AutoCAD 360, which I use, was a much better app with the 64 bit A7. But, so what? Of all the purchasers of iPads, what percentage uses them for advanced apps? I've asked this before, and I'm still waiting for an answer. If it's 25%, then these improved tablets will be appreciated by that 25%. But the other 75% might not appreciate it as much. How about Android users? Will they appreciate it?
If iPad sales are down again this quarter, you will have to admit that the higher specs aren't making much of an impression to most tablet buyers. Even if they are up by a slight amount, it might have little to do with the SoC.
Look at iPhone sale instead. Apple finally caught up with what many consumers of higher end phones do seem to want, a bigger screen. That, and probably Apple Pay, to a lesser extent, are responsible for those higher sales we're seeing.
There's nothing comparable for the iPad. The same sizes. TouchID doesn't have the same impact, though I find it useful.
The last iPad I bought was the iPad 4 -- didn't have the need for an iPad Air last year, and planned to wait for the iPad Pro early next year.
We all (5 in family) have iPad 2s or later (and some iPad 1s as backup). Last week my youngest grandson's iPad 2 acted up -- and I can't turn of FindMyPhone to reset it ...
The older grandson wants a Mac laptop in addition to his iMac and iPad 2 ...
Then I saw an add for a new Logitech iDevice KB ... I bought 3 of them, Ordered an iPad Air 2 for myself, the grandsons will get iPad 4 and iPad 3 replacements -- and I'll donate the older iPads to charity for things like Proloquotogo.
If Apple was worried about battery damage, they wouldn't have developed the 6 and 6+ to actually use the 12W...
Battery is "damaged" when you charge it. It is just a question of terminology. If they didn't worry at all they would have shipped with the larger charger...
Like I said, there's nothing wrong with using the larger charger, your battery will just last less time. How much less depends on how often you charge it. If your a heavy user that needs 1 charge per day, then the effect will be more pronounced.
Another reason that the Ipad can be charged with the larger charger is that you tend to use your Ipad less and the batter will last longer, so even a quick charge would be less damaging since it is done less often. So, for both those reasons it is less of an issue for an Ipad. How many people have had to replace their Ipad battery?
Your phone's battery could last even longer if you connect it to under powered USB ports, but that doesn't mean I encourage you to do so except in absolute necessity.
Comments
Haha, they tried to convince me to sell after the first stock split, I just told them to forget that I owned the stock, no my exact words were, put in a sell order at 1,000, I actually got excited right before the 1 for 7 split, I was looking forward to the conversation where I would tell my broker to to remove the sell order for 1,000 and put another one in for 2,000. I do most of my own trading now, mostly currencies and commodities, the blue chip stuff is still handled by my bank and would love to get my hands on some actual trading certificates for Apple. There's just something about actually having something tangible to hold. I have some Swiss Bearerbonds that look pretty awesome and are actually worth a good penny now that the Swiss Frank is so strong.
Apple HAS caused disruptions. But once a technology settles in, price begins to become the most important factor in a purchasing decision for most people. So Apple's market share drops from 100% to the mid 20's.
The problem, as I've said several times here, and at other times, is that for most people, their products become less relevant. Why spend $500, when something else does what they want for $250? If Apple wants to keep those price points, then performance isn't enough, and neither is TouchID. I have to admit that I don't know what Apple would need to do that's disruptive, other than to keep well ahead in a number of areas. But we've seen numerous patents from them that could do it.
Incorporating solar cells in the screen. Incorporating a camera in the screen. Those are two patented areas from Apple from several years ago. Are they working on them or not? Are they practical?
How about this—Apple uses an LED backlight that uses several LEDs on the edge of the screen. OLEDs can illuminate individual pixels for notifications that use very little power. LCDs have traditionally illuminated the entire panel at once. With large backlighting from panels behind the screen, nothing could be done about that. But with LED backlighting, it can. Apple could illuminate just one LED to have notifications, live, when the phone is off, just the way some Android phones do. It would illuminate a part of the screen, enough for messages, time, temperature, etc., while using much less power than turning all the LEDs on at once. There are several of them. How about Apple doing that?
There are a number of ideas I have that Apple could be doing. Cameras, touch controls, and other areas, are ones in which Apple could be doing more work on. For example, Apple could lay out a camera that uses a mirror, preferably an aspheric mirror, that would allow the sensor to sit 90 degrees from the lens, eliminating camera thickness as a problem. This would allow a bigger sensor, and even an optical zoom, for which there are several promising technologies. This isn't a technology that hasn't been used in bigger cameras, as it has been. How would people react to a 16MP camera with a 3:1 optical zoom, with low noise? Would the module cost more? Sure. Would the extra sale make it worthwhile? Sure.
You seem to forget that the value of Apple devices is in how they all integrate together to create an organic whole. PRicing of each individual pieces don't cover the added value of this. All of Apple's devices together (and its ecosystem) produce a super-device made of those building blocks. None of their competitors right now have the resources to follow Apple in that direction.
Apple is also pushing hard in making sure it has differentiating factors everywhere. Some have little impact on the customer (but has impact on its margins).
Its push into SOC and possibly designing GPU and com chips enables an extreme degree of systems integration. If Apple would be able to design its own GPS/comm circuits and also integrate them, that would enable them to have a total control of a computer's design from hardware to software. I'm not sure that anyone would have had this level of control in design ever in the history of computing.
Regardless the other advantages, from a cost perspective that would be tremendous if they're able to keep up technologically. With pressure from the competition increasing, if they're able to keep up their margins even as their prices come down, they'll stay on top.
This is what protects Apple's margins somewhat from the competition. I see Apple being even more aggressive in that direction in the near future.
Is number two in your list just fantasy?
I use a 12w charger to charge both my iPhone and iPad. Am I negatively impacting my iPhone's battery life by doing so?
and as people, increasingly, use iPads in their work -- the will tend to purchase similar devices for their personal use!
This was one of the biggest helper for PC's in general back in the day. For many people, learning one OS is enough work. So if they had an IBM PS/2 at work, their IT guy told them the clone to buy and which software to load, they could use the same thing at home. Since Macs were never really big in the enterprise, this didn't help Apple.
Then there's the effect of "wow, computers can do that?", except this time it'll be "wow, iPads can do all that?".
Tim's studied his history well.
I use a 12w charger to charge both my iPhone and iPad. Am I negatively impacting my iPhone's battery life by doing so?
Nope. iPhone 6 and 6+ are designed to use the full 12W, all other iPhones only pull 5W. They'll be fine.
Since I have these tablets, I'm aware of that. But no matter, as the performance of the Air was much better than the 4 of the previous year, and somewhat better than that of the iPhone, because, as usual, they ran it slightly faster than in the iPhone.
Many developers praised the A7, and came out with much more advanced apps for it. AutoDesk was thrilled, because AutoCAD 360, which I use, was a much better app with the 64 bit A7. But, so what? Of all the purchasers of iPads, what percentage uses them for advanced apps? I've asked this before, and I'm still waiting for an answer. If it's 25%, then these improved tablets will be appreciated by that 25%. But the other 75% might not appreciate it as much. How about Android users? Will they appreciate it?
If iPad sales are down again this quarter, you will have to admit that the higher specs aren't making much of an impression to most tablet buyers. Even if they are up by a slight amount, it might have little to do with the SoC.
Look at iPhone sale instead. Apple finally caught up with what many consumers of higher end phones do seem to want, a bigger screen. That, and probably Apple Pay, to a lesser extent, are responsible for those higher sales we're seeing.
There's nothing comparable for the iPad. The same sizes. TouchID doesn't have the same impact, though I find it useful.
Wish Apple would spend more time explaining how the average iPad user benefits from these technology improvements. Lately with iPads they've basically just been reading specs off a keynote slide. Is there a special place in the app store that showcases apps taking advantage of the A8X? I think iPad is a product that Apple just doesn't know what to do with. This past keynote when Tim asked the question of what could you do to make the iPad better and then proceeds to show a video of it getting 18% thinner really crystallized for me that their loss with what to do with this product. And as we can see with the increase in Mac sales and decrease in iPad growth we are not in a post-PC world at all. During the last earnings call Tim Cook said it doesn't bother him at all if someone chooses an iPhone or Mac over an iPad. Okay I get that because at the end of the day they're still buying an Apple product. But wouldn't he want to know why people are choosing those devices over an iPad? IMO if the iPad doesn't get a major shake up the sales decline will continue.
The problem, as I see it, is that those of us who do benefit from an iPad, are buying them. But what is the percentage of people buying tablets who would benefit from those enhanced specs? Is it 75%, 50%, 25%, less?
That's the problem Apple is faced with these days. When much cheaper tablets are "good enough" for most people's needs, then an Apple tablet loses its allure for an actual purchase, even if someone would rather have one. I use apps for which ever better performance is needed. But how many people use those apps? How many are available on Android in the first place? How many Android users even know such apps are available on the iPad? How many care?
For example, I use an app called Audio Tools. This is a professional app for audio use. The basic price is $19.95, pretty cheap. But you can add modules, and eventually end up with a couple of hundred in cost. But using my iPad, and sometimes my iPhone, which this is also for, and their adapter box that fits the Apple connector (the old connector, but works on Lightning with Apple's adapter), I can do sophisticated audio measurements that I used to have over $20 thousand in equipment for. You can get this for Android, as an app, but not the box, which allows all of those other measurements. And for Android, as with all other measurement apps, it's not calibrated, because there are too many Android devices out there, and many have low specs for microphones, etc. So while the basic Android app "works" without the box and an external measurement mic, which I sometimes use, the measurements that it can do are really just for "entertainment only". You can calibrate the Android device, if you have access to the hundreds of $$$ of calibration tools required.
But again, even though I know guys who have these apps for Android, they neither know nor care that they are inaccurate.
So this is where things are at. Most people don't do this work where an iPad is needed. So they don't need an iPad, and so they buy a much cheaper Android model that does do what they need. And so Apple is caught in a spiral.
I believe that now that the iPad has been out since mid 2010, it needs a rethink. Possibly iPhones too. I do believe that, in their labs, they are looking at more advanced models, and by that, I don't mean just newer chips. We can look at all those patents Apple has gotten over the years that are very innovative. The question is how many of them are practical in an actual device, or depend on technologies to implement that are still some years away?
Let's look at one thing that's been bothering me. Recharging devices has become a chore when running down, and more time is needed. Motorola has just come out with a phone that allows a super charge with a time in just a few minutes, at most. Is Apple incapable of doing the same? Is Motorola's technology lab so much better than Apple's? Or is Apple blasé about this? Does Apple care about long recharge times? This is something that Apple should have come out with, several years ago. It's obviously not that hard to do.
The technology to supercharge batteries is many years old. The problem is that you knacker the battery, so in the long-term, you will have to replace the battery too quickly. No doubt, Apple have experimented with this technology, and if it becomes commercially viable, they will implement it.
Stop saying "he". Relic is not a he. She also knows more than most people here, including you.
I already corrected that above.
And no, she does not know more than me considering she refuses to get into any in-depth processor architecture discussions and continues to diminish the significance of Apple's processors.
This argument is flawed, because, for example, the new Tegra has better performance per core than the A8x, an argument that has been used for Apple's chips over the years, but since it only has two cores, poorer multi core performance, another argument around Apple's chips over the years. The graphics performance of the latest Tegra is also pretty good.
Please. It's only faster because it's clocked a full 1.0GHz higher. 66% faster clock than the A8X and only 5% faster. This despite Nvidias constant hyping of the Denver K1 and the fact it's supposed to be more efficient and do more work per clock cycle than other ARM processors (Nvidias words, not mine).
A while back, I suggested using a lens/mirror concept for light -- similar to what a folded horn does for sound ... for a super-flat camera in an iPhone.
I did some surfing and there had been research in that area -- but most of it was over 10 years ago.
I use a 12w charger to charge both my iPhone and iPad. Am I negatively impacting my iPhone's battery life by doing so?
Your definitively impacting the Iphone's battery. But, its not a big issue if you don't mind changing it later and prefer the quicker charge time.
Changing the battery is not in Apple's philosophy and that's why they give the smaller charger to the Iphone (not just money, the price for each is about the same).
I already corrected that above.
And no, she does not know more than me considering she refuses to get into any in-depth processor architecture discussions and continues to diminish the significance of Apple's processors.
Please. It's only faster because it's clocked a full 1.0GHz higher. 66% faster clock than the A8X and only 5% faster. This despite Nvidias constant hyping of the Denver K1 and the fact it's supposed to be more efficient and do more work per clock cycle than other ARM processors (Nvidias words, not mine).
There's also the fact that in using REAL GENERAL CODE, and not test code, the K1 seems to be a dog. Look up the reviews on the Nexus 9 to see how well NVDIA actually did with their "super chip"... Seems benchmark truly don't tell the whole story.
Exactly!
And Tim has a background at IBM and Compaq
Your definitively impacting the Iphone's battery. But, its not a big issue if you don't mind changing it later and prefer the quicker charge time.
Changing the battery is not in Apple's philosophy and that's why they give the smaller charger to the Iphone (not just money, the price for each is about the same).
If Apple was worried about battery damage, they wouldn't have developed the 6 and 6+ to actually use the 12W...
Even though the performance of A8X comes with a bit of surprise, it is still quite far off compared to Intel Broadwell.
Next year 2015 will be 10 years since Apple announced to switch to Intel. ( If you think about it and the state of Apple were then, compared to what they are now.... ), and 2016 they started to ship Mac with Intel CPU.
I guess a better IPC, Quad Core with 16 cluster of PowerVR7 A9X should work out fine next year.
At the same clock speed and the same number of cores (with proper ventilation), it is not that far off. Considering the A8X is inside a 6mm frame and not really heating up, it is obvious it has quite a bit of thermal room left. The GPU is even more underclocked.
My estimation right now is that Apple would be 1 generation behind Intel at the same clockspeed if they adjusted their processors for the desktop (or a laptop). Considering Apple was nowhere in 2009, that's pretty impressive.
You really are screwed up!
Not necessarily correct? But I may be correct? I am correct. You haven't shown otherwise anywhere.
There is speculation that an iPad sale is directly correlated to a PC not sold? And you say that I haven't proof? You really need to show that that statement is correct, because it's most definately not. True, iPad purchases are resulting in fewer pc purchases. Is it a one to one affair? Of course not. If it were, we would see the numbers of pcs sold drop by the number of iPads sold, and the numbers, which are well known, don't match that at all.
There is reliable evidence that iPad market share is falling. What? You think that Apple still has 100% of the tablet market? Seriously? Where are you from, if you believe that? Remember that even App,e quotes IDG's numbers at their financial calls, and during their presentations. Do you think they would if they thought those numbers were too far off?
Where did I say that the decreasing iPad sales, which is something I do hope you aren't also denying, is DUE to the A8x? I never said that. I did say that the A8x isn't likely to add to iPad sales by itself. And that remains true.
Yes, I have limited my statements to what Apple considers to be the tablet market. That ridiculous Android, iOS, Windows tablet market. Why! Because THAT IS THE TABLET MARKET!!!
Yes, just as you say SOME people will pay $100 more for an iPad. I never said otherwise. But as tablet sales continue to rise, iPad sales are falling off. I hope you aren't going to deny that. And if you don't, then you have to rethink your denial that iPad market share is shrinking. Even if you include pc sales in that, iPad marketshare is shrinking, because of sales are slowing by about 3% now, not the previous 10%, and tablet sales are rising by about 15% a year.
You may not have respect for those who disagree with you but unless they say things that are obviously silly, I do. Relic has shown that she has an understanding of technology that is greater than most people here, as she actually works with it. I believe her rather than those who pretend to know things that some here don't actually know. Look inward.
The last iPad I bought was the iPad 4 -- didn't have the need for an iPad Air last year, and planned to wait for the iPad Pro early next year.
We all (5 in family) have iPad 2s or later (and some iPad 1s as backup). Last week my youngest grandson's iPad 2 acted up -- and I can't turn of FindMyPhone to reset it ...
The older grandson wants a Mac laptop in addition to his iMac and iPad 2 ...
Then I saw an add for a new Logitech iDevice KB ... I bought 3 of them, Ordered an iPad Air 2 for myself, the grandsons will get iPad 4 and iPad 3 replacements -- and I'll donate the older iPads to charity for things like Proloquotogo.
If Apple was worried about battery damage, they wouldn't have developed the 6 and 6+ to actually use the 12W...
Battery is "damaged" when you charge it. It is just a question of terminology. If they didn't worry at all they would have shipped with the larger charger...
Like I said, there's nothing wrong with using the larger charger, your battery will just last less time. How much less depends on how often you charge it. If your a heavy user that needs 1 charge per day, then the effect will be more pronounced.
Another reason that the Ipad can be charged with the larger charger is that you tend to use your Ipad less and the batter will last longer, so even a quick charge would be less damaging since it is done less often. So, for both those reasons it is less of an issue for an Ipad. How many people have had to replace their Ipad battery?
Your phone's battery could last even longer if you connect it to under powered USB ports, but that doesn't mean I encourage you to do so except in absolute necessity.
So, basically, do whatever you want...