Besides the nonsense mentioned above, the ambient light sensor on the back makes no sense at all. It would be blocked almost all the time. This was probably a disinformation "leak" to find out who can be trusted.
Considering the lack of room mini USB may be used. There are limits that can be placed in such a thin device. Also they balance their products to keep them relevant. I just wish you could turn on the iPad out of the box instead of activating through iTunes. That's th only things other tablets have over the iPad. : / really that's one of the biggest changes I want to see.
it's amazing that there are so many ipad savants around. apple should just fire their tech people and read the blogs for ideas. boy, could they save money and everybody would be happy.
it's amazing that there are so many ipad savants around. apple should just fire their tech people and read the blogs for ideas. boy, could they save money and everybody would be happy.
No, that would be obscenely horrible. Design by committee is inherently bad design. You may not like Apple's method for designing products, but it is the most efficient, least troublesome, and most accessible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven1
You're right.
He's wrong. Think about why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by laytech
iPad needs an SD Slot, more memory and ideally the retina display but that's stretching it.
Not really. Doesn't need an SD card slot because it isn't a real computer. You're going to be syncing any SD card content from your computer anyway, and Apple is NOT in the expandable storage game, nor has been since they started this a decade ago.
I'm not sure I agree but I'm not really sure which internals you are talking about.
Personally, I'd be happy to see the same iPad, but lighter, not made of metal, and a tad thinner. More memory would be good which I guess is an "internal."
I am mostly disappointed with the software as I use mine for writing and there just isn't much in the way of decent writing software, nor is there anything really good in terms of getting documents onto and off of the thing (at least not without buying into some third party syncing solution).
I'm also a bit disappointed about the "improved" speaker in that I don't personally need a speaker at all on the iPad at all really and it seems like it's is going to be terribly ugly and possibly cause problems in bad weather.
I couldn't disagree more with wanting a non-metal iPad. The build quality of the iPad is one of its very strongest attributes.
I think more memory is a given. The iPhone 4 has twice the memory of the iPad already so I think that'll be in there.
I think you need to investigate further with your software. I adore Pages and with a bluetooth keyboard/keyboard dock the iPad would be a nice writing device for those not wanting to invest in a MacBook. Can the documents not be easily transferred with iTunes? Does Pages not use the drop box feature in iTunes that the likes of VLC Player use? Surely PDF's are usually sufficient as exports?
If it is made of metal then I wonder whether the case will be milled or using the technology from Liquid Metal, for which they got an exclusive. BTW I can't imagine Apple going back to plastic at this point, since it would cheapen the appearance of the product, IMHO.
Well well well. Looks like Apple Insider deleted the posts which expose their shoddy "jounalism". They think they can censor what their posters want to see? Here's the post that AI deleted:
I have an idea. Since your account is just a throwaway designed only for the purpose of "exposing" AppleInsider as pointless, here's an idea for what you can do instead.
Leave our website, never come back, and shut up. Choose the order.
Really? I am quite happy with the speed of the unit. I do not care how much ram, how many cores or what mhz the unit is operating at. The iPad is not running inefficient Windows, it is running iOS.
The Ipad's battery life is amazing so do not need a change there.
I love my iPad as is. Agree the battery life is amazing. I would appreciate a bit more storage. Don't care about cameras - don't want someone face timing me early at inopportune times.
Software changes would be great....more airplay. Steaming TO the iPad. Integration with apple tv.
I also want it to make me waffles on Sunday morning.
You would think after being singled out as a leak, case vendors would be careful about this sort of thing. I can't see a reason why Apple would want these leaks, seems like it might hurt holiday sales.
Kinda late to really hurt holiday sales. Most of the ipads bought for Xmas are neatly wrapped and under a tree right about now and the people buying them today aren't reading AI for some last minute leaks.
Kinda late to really hurt holiday sales. Most of the ipads bought for Xmas are neatly wrapped and under a tree right about now and the people buying them today aren't reading AI for some last minute leaks.
And as the second iPad won't be announced/out until April, it doesn't really matter.
Have a drop down latch with an sd card slot and or micro USB.
Um. There's no way Apple's gonna put hinged/movable parts on the iPad 2. The original MBA had a hinged door for ports, but they abandoned that idea with the 2010 MBA. An SD slot would be very nice?eliminate the need for at least one interface adapter, since most of us have digital cameras now. It would be nice to be able to take the card out of the camera, slip it into the iPad 2 (without any camera adapter) and start editing photos on the road.
I really don't see a need for a USB port of any flavour. The iPad was conceived and designed as an "appliance" not a computer/host device, into which you would plug appliances/peripherals. Running any peripherals off of the iPad 2 will kill battery life.
Yes, Windows and Android tablets will boast USB ports as a "feature". But then they'll also boast AC power as a "feature" as well?they'll have to, because all the external HDDs, mobile phones, Zunes (!!!) that users will want to plug into their tablets will make AC power necessary. What users will end up with is a "netbook without a keyboard". That never was, and never will be, Apple's goal for any iteration of the iPad.
Retina display for the iPad 2 certainly sounds nice, but it's overkill. It makes perfect sense on small screens like the iPhone and iPod touch. But, putting a 1600x1200 (or higher) display on the iPad's 9.7" screen makes no sense to me. Plus, it would be prohibitively expensive. It makes more sense to keep the resolution as is, and further evolve the graphics bandwidth/processing capabilities. Think about it: our eyes are actually pretty low resolution input devices. But, the fact that we're constantly scanning our field of view, and that our brains are doing high-bandwidth image processing, makes the resultant image appear to be much higher resolution than what our eyes are actually taking in at any given moment.
Personally, I'd be happy to see the same iPad, but lighter, not made of metal, and a tad thinner. More memory would be good which I guess is an "internal."
I know nothing of materials science, so, i'm hoping that someone can educate me. CNC-milled aluminum seems pretty sturdy: my 13" aluminum unibody MacBook feels practically indestructible?though I'm reluctant to "test it to destruction"! Would carbon fiber, or some kinda LiquidMetal alloy have superior durability-/stiffness-to-weight ratio?
Of course, once we get carbon nanotube-based manufacturing processes into the mainstream, we'll have 3-mm thick iPads that weigh 100 grams but have the durability of a 50-ton slab of solid aluminum! Can't wait!
Perhaps the back bevels to become all flat in the middle?
I thought that was clear from the outset. The speaker will be on the bevel so it is not in contact with any surface the iPad may be laying against. The design cue is from the iPod touch not the iPhone 4.
To put it bluntly iPad needs vastly overhauled electronics to be a worthwhile in 2011. So what we really need is leaks on the internals.
To put it bluntly, it will have vastly overhauled electronics. I'd be surprised if there was anything but an Apple branded version of a dual core Arm Cortex A9 in there.
Apple's mobile offerings have always been on par with the latest and greatest mobile devices at launch time anyway, so I'm not sure what you're concerned about. Nine months later, there still isn't a (released) tablet that knocks the socks off the the current iPad specs wise, it's not like Apple's fallen behind or something. The Samsung Galaxy tab runs on an A8 just like the iPad, and the iPhone 4 (which launched after the iPad, but before the galaxy tab) has just as much ram. The only thing that would blow the iPad away (specs wise) would be the Blackberry PlayBook running an A9 processor with a gig of ram. Interestingly enough, it probably won't launch until April (if it stays on schedule), within the same time frame as the iPad. RIM clearly expects A9 processors to be ready for prime time by then, so why wouldn't Apple use them in the next iPad?
The Palm Pre had some great specs when they announced it 6 months in advance too. Far better specs than the 3G. Then the 3GS launched within a week of the Pre, and the Pre didn't look so hot anymore. The A9 will become the new standard in 2011, just like the A8 has been for the last year and a bit. You can bet on almost every new mobile device to be running a variant of it, including the iPad. So better specs are virtually a given...
To put it bluntly, it will have vastly overhauled electronics. I'd be surprised if there was anything but an Apple branded version of a dual core Arm Cortex A9 in there.
Apple's mobile offerings have always been on par with the latest and greatest mobile devices at launch time anyway, so I'm not sure what you're concerned about. Nine months later, there still isn't a (released) tablet that knocks the socks off the the current iPad specs wise, it's not like Apple's fallen behind or something. The Samsung Galaxy tab runs on an A8 just like the iPad, and the iPhone 4 (which launched after the iPad, but before the galaxy tab) has just as much ram. The only thing that would blow the iPad away (specs wise) would be the Blackberry PlayBook running an A9 processor with a gig of ram. Interestingly enough, it probably won't launch until April (if it stays on schedule), within the same time frame as the iPad. RIM clearly expects A9 processors to be ready for prime time by then, so why wouldn't Apple use them in the next iPad?
The Palm Pre had some great specs when they announced it 6 months in advance too. Far better specs than the 3G. Then the 3GS launched within a week of the Pre, and the Pre didn't look so hot anymore. The A9 will become the new standard in 2011, just like the A8 has been for the last year and a bit. You can bet on almost every new mobile device to be running a variant of it, including the iPad. So better specs are virtually a given...
I wonder if RiM does expect dual-core Cortex-A9s to be ready when they are or if it’s just part of their marketing ploy to get those most interested in RiM’s products to hold off on buying a competitor’s tablet. Is there an exact date for the PlayBook or dual-core Cortex-A9s?
When we’re discussing these devices we obviously can’t look at the CPU and RAM to determine which is the fastest device since they use different OSes. I think it’s possible the PlayBook needs the A9 and 1GB RAM to be useable because of the UI RiM has chosen for it. Is Adobe AIR in any way as efficient as the UI used in other mobile devices?
Comments
it's amazing that there are so many ipad savants around. apple should just fire their tech people and read the blogs for ideas. boy, could they save money and everybody would be happy.
No, that would be obscenely horrible. Design by committee is inherently bad design. You may not like Apple's method for designing products, but it is the most efficient, least troublesome, and most accessible.
You're right.
He's wrong. Think about why.
iPad needs an SD Slot, more memory and ideally the retina display but that's stretching it.
Not really. Doesn't need an SD card slot because it isn't a real computer. You're going to be syncing any SD card content from your computer anyway, and Apple is NOT in the expandable storage game, nor has been since they started this a decade ago.
I'm not sure I agree but I'm not really sure which internals you are talking about.
Personally, I'd be happy to see the same iPad, but lighter, not made of metal, and a tad thinner. More memory would be good which I guess is an "internal."
I am mostly disappointed with the software as I use mine for writing and there just isn't much in the way of decent writing software, nor is there anything really good in terms of getting documents onto and off of the thing (at least not without buying into some third party syncing solution).
I'm also a bit disappointed about the "improved" speaker in that I don't personally need a speaker at all on the iPad at all really and it seems like it's is going to be terribly ugly and possibly cause problems in bad weather.
I couldn't disagree more with wanting a non-metal iPad. The build quality of the iPad is one of its very strongest attributes.
I think more memory is a given. The iPhone 4 has twice the memory of the iPad already so I think that'll be in there.
I think you need to investigate further with your software. I adore Pages and with a bluetooth keyboard/keyboard dock the iPad would be a nice writing device for those not wanting to invest in a MacBook. Can the documents not be easily transferred with iTunes? Does Pages not use the drop box feature in iTunes that the likes of VLC Player use? Surely PDF's are usually sufficient as exports?
Well well well. Looks like Apple Insider deleted the posts which expose their shoddy "jounalism". They think they can censor what their posters want to see? Here's the post that AI deleted:
I have an idea. Since your account is just a throwaway designed only for the purpose of "exposing" AppleInsider as pointless, here's an idea for what you can do instead.
Leave our website, never come back, and shut up. Choose the order.
Really? I am quite happy with the speed of the unit. I do not care how much ram, how many cores or what mhz the unit is operating at. The iPad is not running inefficient Windows, it is running iOS.
The Ipad's battery life is amazing so do not need a change there.
I love my iPad as is. Agree the battery life is amazing. I would appreciate a bit more storage. Don't care about cameras - don't want someone face timing me early at inopportune times.
Software changes would be great....more airplay. Steaming TO the iPad. Integration with apple tv.
I also want it to make me waffles on Sunday morning.
You would think after being singled out as a leak, case vendors would be careful about this sort of thing. I can't see a reason why Apple would want these leaks, seems like it might hurt holiday sales.
Kinda late to really hurt holiday sales. Most of the ipads bought for Xmas are neatly wrapped and under a tree right about now and the people buying them today aren't reading AI for some last minute leaks.
Kinda late to really hurt holiday sales. Most of the ipads bought for Xmas are neatly wrapped and under a tree right about now and the people buying them today aren't reading AI for some last minute leaks.
And as the second iPad won't be announced/out until April, it doesn't really matter.
Have a drop down latch with an sd card slot and or micro USB.
Um. There's no way Apple's gonna put hinged/movable parts on the iPad 2. The original MBA had a hinged door for ports, but they abandoned that idea with the 2010 MBA. An SD slot would be very nice?eliminate the need for at least one interface adapter, since most of us have digital cameras now. It would be nice to be able to take the card out of the camera, slip it into the iPad 2 (without any camera adapter) and start editing photos on the road.
I really don't see a need for a USB port of any flavour. The iPad was conceived and designed as an "appliance" not a computer/host device, into which you would plug appliances/peripherals. Running any peripherals off of the iPad 2 will kill battery life.
Yes, Windows and Android tablets will boast USB ports as a "feature". But then they'll also boast AC power as a "feature" as well?they'll have to, because all the external HDDs, mobile phones, Zunes (!!!) that users will want to plug into their tablets will make AC power necessary. What users will end up with is a "netbook without a keyboard". That never was, and never will be, Apple's goal for any iteration of the iPad.
Retina display for the iPad 2 certainly sounds nice, but it's overkill. It makes perfect sense on small screens like the iPhone and iPod touch. But, putting a 1600x1200 (or higher) display on the iPad's 9.7" screen makes no sense to me. Plus, it would be prohibitively expensive. It makes more sense to keep the resolution as is, and further evolve the graphics bandwidth/processing capabilities. Think about it: our eyes are actually pretty low resolution input devices. But, the fact that we're constantly scanning our field of view, and that our brains are doing high-bandwidth image processing, makes the resultant image appear to be much higher resolution than what our eyes are actually taking in at any given moment.
Personally, I'd be happy to see the same iPad, but lighter, not made of metal, and a tad thinner. More memory would be good which I guess is an "internal."
I know nothing of materials science, so, i'm hoping that someone can educate me. CNC-milled aluminum seems pretty sturdy: my 13" aluminum unibody MacBook feels practically indestructible?though I'm reluctant to "test it to destruction"! Would carbon fiber, or some kinda LiquidMetal alloy have superior durability-/stiffness-to-weight ratio?
Of course, once we get carbon nanotube-based manufacturing processes into the mainstream, we'll have 3-mm thick iPads that weigh 100 grams but have the durability of a 50-ton slab of solid aluminum!
Perhaps the back bevels to become all flat in the middle?
I thought that was clear from the outset. The speaker will be on the bevel so it is not in contact with any surface the iPad may be laying against. The design cue is from the iPod touch not the iPhone 4.
PS- Merry Christmas!
To put it bluntly iPad needs vastly overhauled electronics to be a worthwhile in 2011. So what we really need is leaks on the internals.
To put it bluntly, it will have vastly overhauled electronics. I'd be surprised if there was anything but an Apple branded version of a dual core Arm Cortex A9 in there.
Apple's mobile offerings have always been on par with the latest and greatest mobile devices at launch time anyway, so I'm not sure what you're concerned about. Nine months later, there still isn't a (released) tablet that knocks the socks off the the current iPad specs wise, it's not like Apple's fallen behind or something. The Samsung Galaxy tab runs on an A8 just like the iPad, and the iPhone 4 (which launched after the iPad, but before the galaxy tab) has just as much ram. The only thing that would blow the iPad away (specs wise) would be the Blackberry PlayBook running an A9 processor with a gig of ram. Interestingly enough, it probably won't launch until April (if it stays on schedule), within the same time frame as the iPad. RIM clearly expects A9 processors to be ready for prime time by then, so why wouldn't Apple use them in the next iPad?
The Palm Pre had some great specs when they announced it 6 months in advance too. Far better specs than the 3G. Then the 3GS launched within a week of the Pre, and the Pre didn't look so hot anymore. The A9 will become the new standard in 2011, just like the A8 has been for the last year and a bit. You can bet on almost every new mobile device to be running a variant of it, including the iPad. So better specs are virtually a given...
To put it bluntly, it will have vastly overhauled electronics. I'd be surprised if there was anything but an Apple branded version of a dual core Arm Cortex A9 in there.
Apple's mobile offerings have always been on par with the latest and greatest mobile devices at launch time anyway, so I'm not sure what you're concerned about. Nine months later, there still isn't a (released) tablet that knocks the socks off the the current iPad specs wise, it's not like Apple's fallen behind or something. The Samsung Galaxy tab runs on an A8 just like the iPad, and the iPhone 4 (which launched after the iPad, but before the galaxy tab) has just as much ram. The only thing that would blow the iPad away (specs wise) would be the Blackberry PlayBook running an A9 processor with a gig of ram. Interestingly enough, it probably won't launch until April (if it stays on schedule), within the same time frame as the iPad. RIM clearly expects A9 processors to be ready for prime time by then, so why wouldn't Apple use them in the next iPad?
The Palm Pre had some great specs when they announced it 6 months in advance too. Far better specs than the 3G. Then the 3GS launched within a week of the Pre, and the Pre didn't look so hot anymore. The A9 will become the new standard in 2011, just like the A8 has been for the last year and a bit. You can bet on almost every new mobile device to be running a variant of it, including the iPad. So better specs are virtually a given...
I wonder if RiM does expect dual-core Cortex-A9s to be ready when they are or if it’s just part of their marketing ploy to get those most interested in RiM’s products to hold off on buying a competitor’s tablet. Is there an exact date for the PlayBook or dual-core Cortex-A9s?
When we’re discussing these devices we obviously can’t look at the CPU and RAM to determine which is the fastest device since they use different OSes. I think it’s possible the PlayBook needs the A9 and 1GB RAM to be useable because of the UI RiM has chosen for it. Is Adobe AIR in any way as efficient as the UI used in other mobile devices?