here are the "money quotes" from tonight's reviews:
"Yet once again, Apple has -- with a minimum of effort -- lapped the field."
"The new iPad is the most functional, easy-to-use and beautiful tablet that any company has ever produced."
"For the same price as before, you can now get an updated iPad that’s still better-looking, better integrated and more consistently designed than any of its rivals."
"Since it launched in 2010, the iPad has been the best tablet on the planet. With the new, third-generation model, it still holds that crown."
"Apple doesn’t need another revolution, it has already started one, and the new iPad brings a fresh degree of refinement to a segment in which it is undoubtedly the king."
"Technology is amazing, and this new iPad is amazing. Also amazing: the only company competing with Apple right now in this particular space is Apple."
"Nobody in the market today can touch the Apple experience."
"Seriously, what are you waiting for?"
"Overall, the new iPad is a stunning example of just how far ahead of the competition Apple is."
"it's the best that money can buy."
actually, i think this is the most enthusiastic group of reviews for any Apple product, without all the usual nit-picking about what it doesn't do. the overall message from them all is: "Wow!"
I know I am getting old but I can't see a difference in the iPad 2 vs "New iPad" screen based on that closeup. Also if you have to blow it up to tell the difference then I am not sure it has any real world use for most users. Its nice that the screen has a better resolution but I think the iPad 2 screen is pretty damn good.
I am sure LTE is awesome.
I said that the same thing about the original iPad and the Retina display on the iPhone 4 when it came out after looking online. Then I went to the store and compared them, and it was night and day. The video of a video does not do it justice by any means.
... sounds great, but given that I rarely ever even get 3G speeds on this iPad 2 (AT&T) here, it's really not a selling point. I am sure the display is spectacular, but I don't even appreciate the retina display on my iPhone 4s compared to earlier iPhones, so it's not for me. I hope Apple can keep up their sales momentum, because while the update from iPad 1 to 2 was a slam dunk for me, this seems a little more questionable. Added weight (albeit small) and some reduction in battery life are not helping either.
Isn't it interesting that a company so obsessed with thinness would neglect that obsession for the sake of battery life? To me, this proves Apple cares about user experience and lays to rest the idea that Apple chooses form over function.
Many others would have chosen thinness at the cost of battery life.
Damit, I'm still trying to to tell my self I'm happy with my first gen that I got on day one, but it seems like the text looks blurrier every time I read one of these articles! Is it just me?!…
FaceTime still only works on wifi... I want it to work on LTE, too. Am I unreasonable?
Gotta love carriers.
I think most people gave up on FaceTime over cellular. Apple screwed up here. They should have enabled that few months after they released FaceTime. My family call me using Tango. I prefer FaceTime over Tango but that damn thing only works over WiFi. Tango quality (app and service) is average.
I think most people gave up on FaceTime over cellular. Apple screwed up here. They should have enabled that few months after they released FaceTime. My family call me using Tango. I prefer FaceTime over Tango but that damn thing only works over WiFi. Tango quality (app and service) is average.
... sounds great, but given that I rarely ever even get 3G speeds on this iPad 2 (AT&T) here, it's really not a selling point. I am sure the display is spectacular, but I don't even appreciate the retina display on my iPhone 4s compared to earlier iPhones, so it's not for me. I hope Apple can keep up their sales momentum, because while the update from iPad 1 to 2 was a slam dunk for me, this seems a little more questionable. Added weight (albeit small) and some reduction in battery life are not helping either.
I've looked over all the reviews (and there are lots) and I have come to one conclusion:
Apple must have spent a fortune to be able to bribe every journalist to say the same thing - that the Retina Display is incredible and the iPad is still the tablet to beat.
The best compliment Anand gave it was "Performance is still not quite up to par with the iPad 2, but if we look at GLBenchmark's Egypt test Tegra 3 doesn't do too bad. The gap grows in more texture bound tests but in a heavier shader environment Tegra 3 isn't too shabby." Not exactly a glowing mark, especially considering that is from December 2011.
I'm not sure if Apple got lucky with their investment of Img Tech or really did their homework, but whatever it is it's paying off big time. Best thing is that if Nvidia or Intel ever gets their act together in mobile GPUs and CPUs, respectively, Apple can easily make the switch.
"8 percent more weight and 7 percent more thickness"
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
"8 percent more weight and 7 percent more thickness"
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
1) That would be impossible to keep getting 1mm thinner every time.
2) Since it's defined by its 9.7mm display that's even more impossible to conceive of an iPad behind your ear.
3) Adding weight and thickness isn't a great thing, but the Retina Display is, as well as not having any loss of battery for having it. When you weigh the pros and cons I think it's an obvious choice.
4) Note that the iPhone has gotten heavier and thicker with some YoY updates so it's not unprecedented.
Josh: I can say that the device pretty much lives up to Apple's ambitious claims.On Wi-Fi I nabbed almost exactly 9 hours of constant browsing, and on LTE, my number was closer to 8 hours and 15 minutes. That's not exactly where Apple pegs it, but that's because our testing methods are slightly different. (Apple sets their displays to 50 percent brightness, we use 65 percent)
---
In the ballpark, maybe, 'confirmed' not really.
Mossberg confirms it with one metric. "Apple claims up to 10 hours of battery life between charges, and up to nine hours if you are relying strictly on cellular connectivity. In my standard battery test, where I play videos back to back with both cellular and Wi-Fi on, and the screen at 75% brightness, the new iPad logged 9 hours and 58 minutes, compared with 10 hours and 9 minutes for the iPad 2. Other tablets died hours sooner in the same test. In more normal use, the new iPad lasted more than a full day, though not as long as the iPad 2 did."
"8 percent more weight and 7 percent more thickness"
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
There is a certain point that you can't keep making things thinner otherwise the device becomes too brittle. There has to be enough tensile strength that people can poke at the screen without cracking the glass, the LCD,backlight, or even the batteries. The iPad likely can't be made any thinner without making it unbalanced. Like if you make the screen "flexible", you'd have to move the PCB (which isn't flexible) and batteries to a thicker part of the unit, when then the device is no longer a balanced weight, and can easily be dropped, and can't be used in both portrait and landscape.
Josh: I can say that the device pretty much lives up to Apple's ambitious claims.On Wi-Fi I nabbed almost exactly 9 hours of constant browsing, and on LTE, my number was closer to 8 hours and 15 minutes. That's not exactly where Apple pegs it, but that's because our testing methods are slightly different. (Apple sets their displays to 50 percent brightness, we use 65 percent)
---
In the ballpark, maybe, 'confirmed' not really.
There are many different use cases, Apple usually states averages. Some may get less, some may get more. This is especially true when it comes to wireless radios which may have to boost power to make a connection depending on how crappy the signal strength is. All in all I've been pleasantly surprised with how long my original iPad still holds up after two years of use.
"8 percent more weight and 7 percent more thickness"
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
We would end up in let's say 10 years with an iPad thikness of exactly..... Uh, Oh. Ummmh, Oh well, never mind.
Comments
"Yet once again, Apple has -- with a minimum of effort -- lapped the field."
"The new iPad is the most functional, easy-to-use and beautiful tablet that any company has ever produced."
"For the same price as before, you can now get an updated iPad that’s still better-looking, better integrated and more consistently designed than any of its rivals."
"Since it launched in 2010, the iPad has been the best tablet on the planet. With the new, third-generation model, it still holds that crown."
"Apple doesn’t need another revolution, it has already started one, and the new iPad brings a fresh degree of refinement to a segment in which it is undoubtedly the king."
"Technology is amazing, and this new iPad is amazing. Also amazing: the only company competing with Apple right now in this particular space is Apple."
"Nobody in the market today can touch the Apple experience."
"Seriously, what are you waiting for?"
"Overall, the new iPad is a stunning example of just how far ahead of the competition Apple is."
"it's the best that money can buy."
actually, i think this is the most enthusiastic group of reviews for any Apple product, without all the usual nit-picking about what it doesn't do. the overall message from them all is: "Wow!"
PS: the competition is smoked.
here are the "money quotes" from tonight's reviews:
"Yet once again, Apple has -- with a minimum of effort -- lapped the field."
I can't say I agree with that. Everything points to this display being a huge undertaking, especially that it keeps the same price point.
I know I am getting old but I can't see a difference in the iPad 2 vs "New iPad" screen based on that closeup. Also if you have to blow it up to tell the difference then I am not sure it has any real world use for most users. Its nice that the screen has a better resolution but I think the iPad 2 screen is pretty damn good.
I am sure LTE is awesome.
I said that the same thing about the original iPad and the Retina display on the iPhone 4 when it came out after looking online. Then I went to the store and compared them, and it was night and day. The video of a video does not do it justice by any means.
Sent via AT&T Edge
Many others would have chosen thinness at the cost of battery life.
Think different.
FaceTime still only works on wifi... I want it to work on LTE, too. Am I unreasonable?
Gotta love carriers.
I think most people gave up on FaceTime over cellular. Apple screwed up here. They should have enabled that few months after they released FaceTime. My family call me using Tango. I prefer FaceTime over Tango but that damn thing only works over WiFi. Tango quality (app and service) is average.
I think most people gave up on FaceTime over cellular. Apple screwed up here. They should have enabled that few months after they released FaceTime. My family call me using Tango. I prefer FaceTime over Tango but that damn thing only works over WiFi. Tango quality (app and service) is average.
It's restricted by the carriers...
... sounds great, but given that I rarely ever even get 3G speeds on this iPad 2 (AT&T) here, it's really not a selling point. I am sure the display is spectacular, but I don't even appreciate the retina display on my iPhone 4s compared to earlier iPhones, so it's not for me. I hope Apple can keep up their sales momentum, because while the update from iPad 1 to 2 was a slam dunk for me, this seems a little more questionable. Added weight (albeit small) and some reduction in battery life are not helping either.
Sent via AT&T Edge
Your kiddin'...right??!!!!!!!!
Apple must have spent a fortune to be able to bribe every journalist to say the same thing - that the Retina Display is incredible and the iPad is still the tablet to beat.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/7/285...apple-a5x-test
We saw what happened with the iPad 2:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5163/a...gra-3-review/3
I'm ready to hear Nvidia's review of the new iPad... They claimed that they are eager to test Apple's claims:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/7/285...apple-a5x-test
We saw what happened with the iPad 2:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5163/a...gra-3-review/3
The best compliment Anand gave it was "Performance is still not quite up to par with the iPad 2, but if we look at GLBenchmark's Egypt test Tegra 3 doesn't do too bad. The gap grows in more texture bound tests but in a heavier shader environment Tegra 3 isn't too shabby." Not exactly a glowing mark, especially considering that is from December 2011.
I'm not sure if Apple got lucky with their investment of Img Tech or really did their homework, but whatever it is it's paying off big time. Best thing is that if Nvidia or Intel ever gets their act together in mobile GPUs and CPUs, respectively, Apple can easily make the switch.
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
"8 percent more weight and 7 percent more thickness"
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
1) That would be impossible to keep getting 1mm thinner every time.
2) Since it's defined by its 9.7mm display that's even more impossible to conceive of an iPad behind your ear.
3) Adding weight and thickness isn't a great thing, but the Retina Display is, as well as not having any loss of battery for having it. When you weigh the pros and cons I think it's an obvious choice.
4) Note that the iPhone has gotten heavier and thicker with some YoY updates so it's not unprecedented.
O rly?
Josh: I can say that the device pretty much lives up to Apple's ambitious claims.On Wi-Fi I nabbed almost exactly 9 hours of constant browsing, and on LTE, my number was closer to 8 hours and 15 minutes. That's not exactly where Apple pegs it, but that's because our testing methods are slightly different. (Apple sets their displays to 50 percent brightness, we use 65 percent)
---
In the ballpark, maybe, 'confirmed' not really.
Mossberg confirms it with one metric. "Apple claims up to 10 hours of battery life between charges, and up to nine hours if you are relying strictly on cellular connectivity. In my standard battery test, where I play videos back to back with both cellular and Wi-Fi on, and the screen at 75% brightness, the new iPad logged 9 hours and 58 minutes, compared with 10 hours and 9 minutes for the iPad 2. Other tablets died hours sooner in the same test. In more normal use, the new iPad lasted more than a full day, though not as long as the iPad 2 did."
"8 percent more weight and 7 percent more thickness"
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
There is a certain point that you can't keep making things thinner otherwise the device becomes too brittle. There has to be enough tensile strength that people can poke at the screen without cracking the glass, the LCD,backlight, or even the batteries. The iPad likely can't be made any thinner without making it unbalanced. Like if you make the screen "flexible", you'd have to move the PCB (which isn't flexible) and batteries to a thicker part of the unit, when then the device is no longer a balanced weight, and can easily be dropped, and can't be used in both portrait and landscape.
O rly?
Josh: I can say that the device pretty much lives up to Apple's ambitious claims.On Wi-Fi I nabbed almost exactly 9 hours of constant browsing, and on LTE, my number was closer to 8 hours and 15 minutes. That's not exactly where Apple pegs it, but that's because our testing methods are slightly different. (Apple sets their displays to 50 percent brightness, we use 65 percent)
---
In the ballpark, maybe, 'confirmed' not really.
There are many different use cases, Apple usually states averages. Some may get less, some may get more. This is especially true when it comes to wireless radios which may have to boost power to make a connection depending on how crappy the signal strength is. All in all I've been pleasantly surprised with how long my original iPad still holds up after two years of use.
"8 percent more weight and 7 percent more thickness"
This was a mistake on Apple's part. They should be thinking long-term, to when you iDevice is like a tiny attachment that sits behind your ear. And they should want to be the first there. So everything device needs to be thinner and lighter than the last, even if only by 1mm each time.
We would end up in let's say 10 years with an iPad thikness of exactly..... Uh, Oh. Ummmh, Oh well, never mind.