iFixit's iPad teardown finds huge dual battery, 256MB of RAM in A4

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 97
    rhyderhyde Posts: 294member
    [QUOTE=fyngyrz;1604270]The news about the light sensor... bad news. That means it wasn't ready for a camera, perhaps not shipping now because of production or supply problems, but instead that the design was actually so flawed as to not include one at all. Impossible to understand how they could be so short-sighted.

    [/quote/

    Did you not read the interview where Apple claimed they were most proud of what they left out?



    They could have added the camera, the USB slots, the flash slots, ad naseum, and then everyone would be bitching about the fact that it cost $1,000.



    Given that most people wouldn't actually use the front facing camera (hey, I have one on my MBP and other than early on when it was gimmicky, I never use it), I think Apple should be rightly proud of what they left out. I'd rather have an $839 product that doesn't have a lot of hardware I would never use than a $1,500 product with lots of hardware I would never use.



    Quote:

    There's a huge legion of apps that would be enabled by front-facing cameras; another equally large set by a rear-facing camera;



    Really?

    Video conferencing might be a "killer app" to some people, but I grew tired of that after using it four or five times on my MBP.



    Besides, look at the history of the iPhone. Apple always leaves off "important" hardware so they can sell us another copy of the hardware next year. The good news is: we don't have to wait for a two-year contract to expire in order to get the new hardware.



    Quote:

    then there was the leaving off of an IR emitter... completely crazy for a device Jobs envisioned as "coffee table resident."



    You do realize you can buy this today for the iPhone, right? It's a tiny dongle that plugs into the headphone jack. I don't see any reason it won't work on the iPad. It costs $50. For those who absolutely need the IR transmitter, they can spend the $50 extra to get it without forcing the millions of people who don't care to pay for it as well.





    Quote:

    It's almost as if they had a meeting and someone said "let's cut down the utility here... we'll need an upgrade path."



    Absolutely. I'm sure they meeting went like this: "if we cut out this hardware, we can blow everyone away with a $500 price and take over the market. Then we can add these new features down the road when the iPad concept is proven and people won't balk at a $1,000 price tag.



    Quote:

    And then there is this weird insistence upon sticking *only* with AT&T for 3G; a demonstrated provider of low-ball networking, with consistent performance and coverage problems, not to mention exorbitant fees.



    I don't know about you, but $15 and $30/month, no contract, pay as you need it, doesn't seem exorbitant to me. Seems like a great deal in fact. Gee, a good number of hotels I've been to want to charge me half that for *one* day of wifi access.



    Quote:

    Oh well.



    On the up side, there are lots of other pads coming out. Android has had an impressive start, and no doubt there will be tablets that can use it, and its apps, with cameras, IR emitters, GPS and more. Maybe we'll even see full 1280x720 resolution, instead of the iPad's utterly ridiculous 1024xblah. Another huge fail.



    Competition is good. I'd be concerned if there weren't Android and other tablets coming out. That'll guarantee that in two years, when it's time to replace an iPad, it will have some really great features because Apple will always have to move forward to keep ahead of everyone else.



    It's easy to be envious of Apple's success, especially after so many others have failed in this product space before them, but Apple is clearly doing something right here. And I think that leaving the camera, IR transmitter, USB ports, etc., off the iPad is the right thing to do. Sure, some people will use their absence as an excuse not to buy an iPad; but from the posts I've seen around here, those same people would have found some other excuse (e.g., "flash") if Apple had provided all of those things.



    Me? I'd rather have the $500 price point.
  • Reply 22 of 97
    OBVIOUSLY they should have consulted with you before they went ahead and built this thing.



    It probably won't sell much with this flaw.

    Hopefully, Steve J and Co. are reading your input so they can hopefully get this thing right. ....hopefully.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fyngyrz View Post


    The news about the light sensor... bad news. That means it wasn't ready for a camera, perhaps not shipping now because of production or supply problems, but instead that the design was actually so flawed as to not include one at all. Impossible to understand how they could be so short-sighted.



    There's a huge legion of apps that would be enabled by front-facing cameras; another equally large set by a rear-facing camera; then there was the leaving off of an IR emitter... completely crazy for a device Jobs envisioned as "coffee table resident." It's almost as if they had a meeting and someone said "let's cut down the utility here... we'll need an upgrade path."



    And then there is this weird insistence upon sticking *only* with AT&T for 3G; a demonstrated provider of low-ball networking, with consistent performance and coverage problems, not to mention exorbitant fees.



    Oh well.



    On the up side, there are lots of other pads coming out. Android has had an impressive start, and no doubt there will be tablets that can use it, and its apps, with cameras, IR emitters, GPS and more. Maybe we'll even see full 1280x720 resolution, instead of the iPad's utterly ridiculous 1024xblah. Another huge fail.



  • Reply 23 of 97
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by neilw View Post


    Interesting about the 512 MB RAM; other sites are reporting (via benchmarking and such) that it only has 256 MB. Though 512 MB sounds more reasonable to me...



    Yup, iFixit actually updated their article to state:

    "Decoding the part number shows there is 2Gb of memory inside. This translates into ~128MB of memory per die, for 256 MB total. (NOT 512MB, as we previously reported.)"
  • Reply 24 of 97
    patsfan83patsfan83 Posts: 156member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nautilus. View Post


    I like how the Wi-Fi chip is housed behind the plastic logo for better reception.



    Yeah it's genius.
  • Reply 25 of 97
    patsfan83patsfan83 Posts: 156member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Headrush69 View Post


    You can charge through the USB, just faster with the AC plug.



    I think it will charge with low power USB, however if you have the screen on (which is the biggest draw of power), it won't charge.



    Think of trying to charge a netbook over USB and using it at the same time. This isn't an iPhone or iPod we are talking about...
  • Reply 26 of 97
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Headrush69 View Post


    Link added to post above already.



    You didn't answer my question.
  • Reply 27 of 97
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Fernando View Post


    Yup, iFixit actually updated their article to state:

    "Decoding the part number shows there is 2Gb of memory inside. This translates into ~128MB of memory per die, for 256 MB total. (NOT 512MB, as we previously reported.)"



    Well that's kind of disappointing. There is still the possibility that the part number and 2Gb spec refers to a single DRAM chip of which there are 2 for 512MB total rather than referring to both DRAM chips together for 256MB. But 256MB would sadly be consistent with developer reports that the available free memory on the iPad seems unchanged from the iPhone 3GS.
  • Reply 28 of 97
    abster2coreabster2core Posts: 2,501member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PatsFan83 View Post


    I think it will charge with low power USB, however if you have the screen on (which is the biggest draw of power), it won't charge.



    Think of trying to charge a netbook over USB and using it at the same time. This isn't an iPhone or iPod we are talking about...



    Macworld explains it quite clearly. http://www.macworld.com/article/1503...dcharging.html
  • Reply 29 of 97
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,397member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fyngyrz View Post


    The news about the light sensor... bad news. That means it wasn't ready for a camera, perhaps not shipping now because of production or supply problems, but instead that the design was actually so flawed as to not include one at all. Impossible to understand how they could be so short-sighted.



    There's a huge legion of apps that would be enabled by front-facing cameras; another equally large set by a rear-facing camera; then there was the leaving off of an IR emitter... completely crazy for a device Jobs envisioned as "coffee table resident." It's almost as if they had a meeting and someone said "let's cut down the utility here... we'll need an upgrade path."



    And then there is this weird insistence upon sticking *only* with AT&T for 3G; a demonstrated provider of low-ball networking, with consistent performance and coverage problems, not to mention exorbitant fees.



    Oh well.



    On the up side, there are lots of other pads coming out. Android has had an impressive start, and no doubt there will be tablets that can use it, and its apps, with cameras, IR emitters, GPS and more. Maybe we'll even see full 1280x720 resolution, instead of the iPad's utterly ridiculous 1024xblah. Another huge fail.



    No geiger counter, ham radio or food processor either! Count me out!
  • Reply 30 of 97
    zunxzunx Posts: 620member
    Thanks for the RAM information. I wish it had at last 1GB, thus being prepared for future multitasking via firmware update.
  • Reply 31 of 97
    So far (nothing "official"), the iPad seems to have 256 MB RAM, the same as the iPhone 3GS. I must assume the A4's GPU is powerful enough that it is not an issue handling the larger screen.
  • Reply 32 of 97
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by scmartinez View Post


    Hi-power USB will charge it, not regular USB



    See here



    the quote below from the << link HERE >>

    your iPad isn?t charging properly via USB cable, try changing the port you?ve got it plugged in to. Turns out iPad requires more power to charge than iPhone or iPod touch, and not all USB ports are powered equally (some are branched off, like hubs). This is especially true of laptops, including MacBooks. Could be front vs. back, left vs. right side, just keep trying until you find a high-power USB port that does the job.

    (This is also why the iPad included a different, 10 watt power adapter from the one included with the iPhone and iPod touch). Apple has a knowledge base article up with a variety of other iPad charging related information, so be sure to check that out.

    just keep trying until you find a high-power USB port that does the job.???



    i wonder how many high powered usb ports are floating around these day ??



    insted take your old ipod usb to wall socket plug and try that .
  • Reply 33 of 97
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    And what is your saurce?



    <<put on your 3d glasses to see answer >>>



    >♨♨RAGU♨♨<
  • Reply 34 of 97
    Macbook, Macbook... was that not the old Paradigm of how were they called... "Notebooks" Before the tablets came out ?

    ...



    just kidding - I am desperately waiting for my MBP myself :-)

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Moloch View Post


    Let's have the new Macbook Pro's, please. Or I'm going to abandon Apple.



  • Reply 35 of 97
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,255member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rhyde View Post


    Really?

    Video conferencing might be a "killer app" to some people, but I grew tired of that after using it four or five times on my MBP.



    I totally agree. I used the video camera on my MBP for maybe a couple of months of goofing around (literally "look mom, we can see each other over the Internet! It's like Star Trek!", and then it just became tedious.



    I think the iPad would be even worse in this regard. Exactly how are you supposed to hold the thing when video conferencing? I don't think it's realistic to grab it by both hands and hold it out in front of your face for half an hour. And I don't want to be staring up somebody's nose because they've got it in their lap.



    As for taking video, the iPhone is a much more convenient form factor for that.



    So I chalk this up to another case of people being focused on inputs rather than outputs. People know that a video camera is something that could be in the device, it's not there, so they complain. But they aren't thinking about whether it really makes sense to have it. Having said that, I know that there are a ton of very creative developers out there, so perhaps one day somebody will come up with a great practical idea for using the camera. But until I hear about an actual example of such an idea that isn't targeted at a very narrow niche market, I'm going to conclude that Apple made the right call here.
  • Reply 36 of 97
    molochmoloch Posts: 46member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post


    The K4X2G643GE RAM part number also infers that iPad is now using a 64-bit memory bus compared to the 32-bit memory bus used in the iPhone and other smartphones. The doubling of memory bandwidth is useful for the CPU, but even more important for the GPU since it shares system memory and bandwidth.



    It may double the rate, or not. The ARM chips have some strange memory bandwidth characteristics.
  • Reply 37 of 97
    think of a back-faced camera on an iPad for business puposes.

    I could imagine really stunning augmented reality apps for field engineers - overlaying the live pic of the Engine, Windmill, whatever with a blueprint in realtime. Something like this would be a killerapp or sure.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


    I totally agree. I used the video camera on my MBP for maybe a couple of months of goofing around (literally "look mom, we can see each other over the Internet! It's like Star Trek!", and then it just became tedious.



    I think the iPad would be even worse in this regard. Exactly how are you supposed to hold the thing when video conferencing? I don't think it's realistic to grab it by both hands and hold it out in front of your face for half an hour. And I don't want to be staring up somebody's nose because they've got it in their lap.



    As for taking video, the iPhone is a much more convenient form factor for that.



    So I chalk this up to another case of people being focused on inputs rather than outputs. People know that a video camera is something that could be in the device, it's not there, so they complain. But they aren't thinking about whether it really makes sense to have it. Having said that, I know that there are a ton of very creative developers out there, so perhaps one day somebody will come up with a great practical idea for using the camera. But until I hear about an actual example of such an idea that isn't targeted at a very narrow niche market, I'm going to conclude that Apple made the right call here.



  • Reply 38 of 97
    boogabooga Posts: 1,082member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


    I totally agree. I used the video camera on my MBP for maybe a couple of months of goofing around (literally "look mom, we can see each other over the Internet! It's like Star Trek!", and then it just became tedious.



    I think the iPad would be even worse in this regard. Exactly how are you supposed to hold the thing when video conferencing? I don't think it's realistic to grab it by both hands and hold it out in front of your face for half an hour. And I don't want to be staring up somebody's nose because they've got it in their lap.



    As for taking video, the iPhone is a much more convenient form factor for that.



    So I chalk this up to another case of people being focused on inputs rather than outputs. People know that a video camera is something that could be in the device, it's not there, so they complain. But they aren't thinking about whether it really makes sense to have it. Having said that, I know that there are a ton of very creative developers out there, so perhaps one day somebody will come up with a great practical idea for using the camera. But until I hear about an actual example of such an idea that isn't targeted at a very narrow niche market, I'm going to conclude that Apple made the right call here.



    The reason I want it is that it's the only reason I could think of for wanting to bring a laptop instead of an iPad on a business trip as my personal laptop. My company won't allow anything personal onto the work laptop, necessitating a personal laptop for personal email, web browsing (Facebook et al is blocked), and yes, video conferencing with the kids back home.



    If the iPad had video conferencing, I could leave the second laptop home entirely and just travel with the work laptop and the iPad.
  • Reply 39 of 97
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    It's 256, not 512. How long before AI fixes this ridiculous mistake...doesn't anyone who write for this site have one? All you have to do is install Memory Info and bring it up to see what's available. I knew this thing has 256 mb at 930 yesterday morning.
  • Reply 40 of 97
    gotapplegotapple Posts: 115member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloodstains View Post


    I'm a little confused. I was able to charge my iPad through my mac's USB port without issue. I was very surprised to see these reports that it requires it's AC adapter to charge.



    Actually, every time you want to charge your iPad you must send $5 to Steve Jobs in an envelope.
Sign In or Register to comment.