I will be interested to see how iPhoto works with getting existing photos to and from the iPad. I just do not see myself using the iPad to take pictures. Perhaps taking a picture on iPhone and editing it on the iPad, or sending photos from my Mac to edit on the iPad, but the transfer process needs to be on par with the rest of the Apple experience. It is just too hard now.
No reason in a post-iCloud world that photos are not (nearly) instantaneously available on my iPad when I take them on my iPhone or import them to my Macbook. I should be able to browse the thumbnails on iCloud and download the photo I need to work on.
Apple does not need to add an SD port, but they do need to make their cloud features work as they should.
Seriously, is 'being a complete shithead to random strangers' a requirement to be a fan of Apple products or something?
Why is it one asshole after another responds to me like they are some delicate genius and I'm just some moron who doesn't get it?
The comment I was responding to was along the lines of "they can't keep them on the shelves." Grow up, learn some fucking manners. You could have easily responded to me and made your IRRELEVANT point without the snobbish douchbaggery.
Well I must have mistaken your tone. Usually I don't think people ending their post with a comment like, "Again, what is wrong with you?" are being polite. It seems pretty aggressive.
Too soon to start talking about what we expect for the 2013 iPad? I'm hoping for a digitizer and some really great APIs, longer battery life, thinner, better cameras, and full Siri support.
I will be interested to see how iPhoto works with getting existing photos to and from the iPad. I just do not see myself using the iPad to take pictures. Perhaps taking a picture on iPhone and editing it on the iPad, or sending photos from my Mac to edit on the iPad, but the transfer process needs to be on par with the rest of the Apple experience. It is just too hard now.
No reason in a post-iCloud world that photos are not (nearly) instantaneously available on my iPad when I take them on my iPhone or import them to my Macbook. I should be able to browse the thumbnails on iCloud and download the photo I need to work on.
Apple does not need to add an SD port, but they do need to make their cloud features work as they should.
I recall something during the presentation that said (or implied) there was the ability to do over-the-air sync with other Apple devices? Anyone else recall? If so, it would be phenomenal if it could be done with the Mac as well.
You mean SGX543MP4. The "+" refers to extensions to the GPU that were co-developed by Sony and are exclusive to the Vita. It also has dedicated VRAM, probably on a separate bus. I doubt Apple actually care enough about game performance to bother with optimizations. Graphically the Vita should remain competitive with tablets for the next two years by virtue of being a dedicated game device.
Who cares both resolutions are incredible, geesh I think anything 720p and above is amazing on 10 inch screen.
Above 1080p for me(yay new Apple TV) and I'm in no hurry to dump my iPad2 either...Samsung is supposedly/allegedly/rumored to be working on WQXGA 2560x1600 @10.1 for some time this year which would be 299ppi. Madness. Madness!
no I'm serious. Given where other tablets are, I thought Apple would raise the bar that high, but it's all good because the ipad 3 is still a great tablet. I guess I just revealed how highly I actually think of Apple.
Anyone claiming to be disappointed with the new iPad is crazy. It's like the iPhone 4S. Virtually everything is improved except the case. It's a great improvement - especially considering that the price doesn't change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
I don't think he was complaining about the iPad's battery life.
To me he was saying that LTE sucks the death out of batteries.
Please explain how the new iPad is 10 hours on 3G and 9 hours on LTE if LTE sucks the life out of batteries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb
When the 2012 iPad gets replaced by a newer one in 2013, what are they going to call the 2012 model? They can't refer to it as "the new iPad" anymore.
Do you routinely call your laptop a MacBook Pro 7.1? Or an iMac 5.2? No. You call it an MacBook Pro or an iPad. If you need to distinguish, you specify the date (early 2011 or late 2006) or the CPU (core2 duo 2.33). Same thing on the iPad. This one will be referred to as the iPad and if you need to distinguish it, it will be the 2012 model (or early 2012 if they were to release another one later this year - which doesn't seem likely).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
Yep memory is still at 512mb. Confirmed again by the Apple guys in the lobby. I think we should wait for confirmation though I can't believe Apple would only put 512mb in here. Then again I was surprised to here 512mb for the iPad 2.
Then why did Apple say it had more RAM than other devices that are known to have 512 MB?
I can't see any way that it's 512. Could be 768 or 1024 MB, but it's not 512.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler
Not wrong at all. Resolution is routinely expressed in one or two dimensions. To be non-ambiguous though, either way requires more than just numeric characters.
Ironically, other people here were arguing that "resolution" can only refer to density per area. That just goes to show that language can be imprecise and that it is pointless to try and deny that words are used in multiple ways.
Resolution is almost always expressed in pixels (dots, lines, etc) per inch. Apple reported it as 264 pixels per inch. That's a linear measurement. If Apple had reported it as 69,696 pixels per square inch, then you could consider it an area measurement.
In the few cases where resolution is used to describe area, it is specifically spelled out to make it clear (640x480, for example). Other than that, it's a linear measurement, expressed in pixels per inch.
Not necessarily. It is "shipped" for sure, but whether it is "sold" or not (at the end of the year) will depend on Apple's terms for returns with the retailer.
I guess maybe I don't know the specifics of how Apple works with retailers. Usually though, merchandise that is on the shelves is recorded as a sale to the supplier/manufacturer.
If Apple has a unique arrangement and relationship with resellers, then I apologize for my comments.
So what's your beef then? They didn't give you 15?
There's no beef with anyone, particularly Apple. I'd be fine with 9hrs (no plans upping my 2 anytime soon). Once again for the 8th or so time now my point is, hoping SOMEONE (Qualcomm?) finds a better way to optimize the darn LTE thing. I mean at 42.5w you're at near laptop battery size now.
You people are literally insane. Go remove that giant stick from your ass.
I'm done here. There's no conversation to be had on Apple products here unless you're absolutely praising them. Can't possibly ever post what you hoped to see, no no. Your hopes are determined by what Apple tells you! YAY SHEEPLE!
Go to Mac Rumors instead. It's been overrun by anti-Apple trolls who have difficulty with seeing the painfully obvious.
Your question is irrelevant. LTE as a technology is still bad on battery period. It doesn't matter what the competition or anyone else is doing. Look it's great Apple continues to set the bar, but Apple doesn't deserve a pat on the back for getting to 9hrs because they used a 42.5w battery. And if your question is really 'devices', the RAZR MAXX (phone) certainly does it on LTE. Apple didn't do anything magical, they just put enough battery to hit the 9hr number they already established (on their tests...I'll wait for real world but should be close.)
If I recall correctly, Apple stated that it also gets 10 hours of battery life on wifi. 10 hours on wifi vs. 9 hours on 4G LTE is quite impressive. At this stage it means that the new chipset is either that efficient, that iOS is that power efficient working with 4G LTE, or a combination of both. (If they had simply used the battery to make up for terrible battery life on 4G LTE using their chipset there would be a bigger discrepancy between the two values). I haven't verified it, but I'm writing under the assumption that this is Qualcomm's new chipset, so we should see soon enough how this plays out in other various devices.
As for the RAZR MAXX, advertising that it is the 4G LTE phone that will get you through the day of regular use is not the most impressive thing I have ever read. I guess frequent recharging or battery swapping doesn't bother some people so maybe it's a non issue for many previous 4G LTE buyers.
Comments
No reason in a post-iCloud world that photos are not (nearly) instantaneously available on my iPad when I take them on my iPhone or import them to my Macbook. I should be able to browse the thumbnails on iCloud and download the photo I need to work on.
Apple does not need to add an SD port, but they do need to make their cloud features work as they should.
Apple didn't do anything magical, they just put enough battery to hit the 9hr number they already established ...
So what's your beef then? They didn't give you 15?
I have never seen such a closed OS and ecosystem that did so well....
Obviously, a great deal of the world must feel differently about this issue than you do, which is why Apple's mobile devices are doing so well?
Why are you disparaging that just because it doesn't suit your tastes or needs?
Seriously, is 'being a complete shithead to random strangers' a requirement to be a fan of Apple products or something?
Why is it one asshole after another responds to me like they are some delicate genius and I'm just some moron who doesn't get it?
The comment I was responding to was along the lines of "they can't keep them on the shelves." Grow up, learn some fucking manners. You could have easily responded to me and made your IRRELEVANT point without the snobbish douchbaggery.
Well I must have mistaken your tone. Usually I don't think people ending their post with a comment like, "Again, what is wrong with you?" are being polite. It seems pretty aggressive.
But that's just me.
I will be interested to see how iPhoto works with getting existing photos to and from the iPad. I just do not see myself using the iPad to take pictures. Perhaps taking a picture on iPhone and editing it on the iPad, or sending photos from my Mac to edit on the iPad, but the transfer process needs to be on par with the rest of the Apple experience. It is just too hard now.
No reason in a post-iCloud world that photos are not (nearly) instantaneously available on my iPad when I take them on my iPhone or import them to my Macbook. I should be able to browse the thumbnails on iCloud and download the photo I need to work on.
Apple does not need to add an SD port, but they do need to make their cloud features work as they should.
I recall something during the presentation that said (or implied) there was the ability to do over-the-air sync with other Apple devices? Anyone else recall? If so, it would be phenomenal if it could be done with the Mac as well.
GPU: SGX543MP4+, same as PS Vita.
You mean SGX543MP4. The "+" refers to extensions to the GPU that were co-developed by Sony and are exclusive to the Vita. It also has dedicated VRAM, probably on a separate bus. I doubt Apple actually care enough about game performance to bother with optimizations. Graphically the Vita should remain competitive with tablets for the next two years by virtue of being a dedicated game device.
Who cares both resolutions are incredible, geesh I think anything 720p and above is amazing on 10 inch screen.
Above 1080p for me(yay new Apple TV) and I'm in no hurry to dump my iPad2 either...Samsung is supposedly/allegedly/rumored to be working on WQXGA 2560x1600 @10.1 for some time this year which would be 299ppi. Madness. Madness!
So what's your beef then? They didn't give you 15?
20 is the next magic number come on its the year 2013 where are my nuclear batteries.
"Ohh! I'm sure that in 1985, plutonium is available at every corner drug store, but in 1955 it's a little hard to come by."
APPLE'S TABLET COMPETITION:
Still.
I beg to differ! These tablets look awesomely tasty!
no I'm serious. Given where other tablets are, I thought Apple would raise the bar that high, but it's all good because the ipad 3 is still a great tablet. I guess I just revealed how highly I actually think of Apple.
Anyone claiming to be disappointed with the new iPad is crazy. It's like the iPhone 4S. Virtually everything is improved except the case. It's a great improvement - especially considering that the price doesn't change.
I don't think he was complaining about the iPad's battery life.
To me he was saying that LTE sucks the death out of batteries.
Please explain how the new iPad is 10 hours on 3G and 9 hours on LTE if LTE sucks the life out of batteries.
When the 2012 iPad gets replaced by a newer one in 2013, what are they going to call the 2012 model? They can't refer to it as "the new iPad" anymore.
Do you routinely call your laptop a MacBook Pro 7.1? Or an iMac 5.2? No. You call it an MacBook Pro or an iPad. If you need to distinguish, you specify the date (early 2011 or late 2006) or the CPU (core2 duo 2.33). Same thing on the iPad. This one will be referred to as the iPad and if you need to distinguish it, it will be the 2012 model (or early 2012 if they were to release another one later this year - which doesn't seem likely).
Yep memory is still at 512mb. Confirmed again by the Apple guys in the lobby. I think we should wait for confirmation though I can't believe Apple would only put 512mb in here. Then again I was surprised to here 512mb for the iPad 2.
Then why did Apple say it had more RAM than other devices that are known to have 512 MB?
I can't see any way that it's 512. Could be 768 or 1024 MB, but it's not 512.
Not wrong at all. Resolution is routinely expressed in one or two dimensions. To be non-ambiguous though, either way requires more than just numeric characters.
Ironically, other people here were arguing that "resolution" can only refer to density per area. That just goes to show that language can be imprecise and that it is pointless to try and deny that words are used in multiple ways.
Resolution is almost always expressed in pixels (dots, lines, etc) per inch. Apple reported it as 264 pixels per inch. That's a linear measurement. If Apple had reported it as 69,696 pixels per square inch, then you could consider it an area measurement.
In the few cases where resolution is used to describe area, it is specifically spelled out to make it clear (640x480, for example). Other than that, it's a linear measurement, expressed in pixels per inch.
Not necessarily. It is "shipped" for sure, but whether it is "sold" or not (at the end of the year) will depend on Apple's terms for returns with the retailer.
I guess maybe I don't know the specifics of how Apple works with retailers. Usually though, merchandise that is on the shelves is recorded as a sale to the supplier/manufacturer.
If Apple has a unique arrangement and relationship with resellers, then I apologize for my comments.
So what's your beef then? They didn't give you 15?
There's no beef with anyone, particularly Apple. I'd be fine with 9hrs (no plans upping my 2 anytime soon). Once again for the 8th or so time now my point is, hoping SOMEONE (Qualcomm?) finds a better way to optimize the darn LTE thing. I mean at 42.5w you're at near laptop battery size now.
Has anyone else been able to Pre-order yet? The store is still timing out for me.
Last time I check the store still said, "We'll be back soon"
You people are literally insane. Go remove that giant stick from your ass.
I'm done here. There's no conversation to be had on Apple products here unless you're absolutely praising them. Can't possibly ever post what you hoped to see, no no. Your hopes are determined by what Apple tells you! YAY SHEEPLE!
Go to Mac Rumors instead. It's been overrun by anti-Apple trolls who have difficulty with seeing the painfully obvious.
You'll feel right at home there.
Has anyone else been able to Pre-order yet? The store is still timing out for me.
I just got an order in for two 32GB wifi iPads.... I used this link to get there.
http://store.apple.com/us/browse/hom...ad/select_ipad
Your question is irrelevant. LTE as a technology is still bad on battery period. It doesn't matter what the competition or anyone else is doing. Look it's great Apple continues to set the bar, but Apple doesn't deserve a pat on the back for getting to 9hrs because they used a 42.5w battery. And if your question is really 'devices', the RAZR MAXX (phone) certainly does it on LTE. Apple didn't do anything magical, they just put enough battery to hit the 9hr number they already established (on their tests...I'll wait for real world but should be close.)
If I recall correctly, Apple stated that it also gets 10 hours of battery life on wifi. 10 hours on wifi vs. 9 hours on 4G LTE is quite impressive. At this stage it means that the new chipset is either that efficient, that iOS is that power efficient working with 4G LTE, or a combination of both. (If they had simply used the battery to make up for terrible battery life on 4G LTE using their chipset there would be a bigger discrepancy between the two values). I haven't verified it, but I'm writing under the assumption that this is Qualcomm's new chipset, so we should see soon enough how this plays out in other various devices.
As for the RAZR MAXX, advertising that it is the 4G LTE phone that will get you through the day of regular use is not the most impressive thing I have ever read. I guess frequent recharging or battery swapping doesn't bother some people so maybe it's a non issue for many previous 4G LTE buyers.
I wasn't expecting a revolution but this is a very easy pass, underwhelmed.
"Mom! I built a REAL rocket based on the macaroni prototype!!"
.
.
.
.
.
.
"eh."