I bought my wife the original iPad and the Apple case. It wasn't super thin, but it certainly felt like you were holding something when you had it in hand. It's survied very nicely and gets a lot of use from our kids. Every time I handled an iPad 2 in stores, it always felt too thin. I was actually glad to see the iPad 3 felt a bit more substantial. I like the current body and while I'm sure Apple will tweak things and try to go thinner, I think maintaining for the next go round and making more efficient use of the space internally will be better. The trick is figuring out how to have lighter batteries.
Completely disagree. Then again, people whining about the weight of a product that weighs under 1 1/2 pounds...I've carried around and regularly read heavier books.
Eventually, all tablets will weigh much less, and be as thin as the mechanical needs for sturdiness allows.
I do a lot of reading on mine, and I've noticed the differences in weight between the models. Normally, I would agree with you about weight. But it's when I'm lying in bed, holding this up that the weight becomes a problem. Then I'm constantly shifting it around. Otherwise it bites into my hand if I hold in the same position for too long.
So I'm thinking about buying a Mini (assuming there will be such a thing) mostly for reading while in bed. Though, when having to stand in a crowded subway car it would also be an improvement.
I think it'll use A5, like the iPod Touch, for cost reasons but will use 32nm lithography for power efficiency reasons.
The Mini doesn't solve any such problem because it won't be pushing 3,145,728 pixels, only 786,432 pixels. That's 1/4 the number of pixels which means a lot less processing power, a lot less power for the display elements, and a much, much smaller battery.
The only way to have kept the iPad 3 as thin and lightweight as the iPad 2 and still be usable was to simply not used the Retina display. I'm quite happy with a slightly heavier device that has the Retina display as opposed to one that is slightly lighter with only 1024x768. In no way is the iPad 3 a "badly put together machine".
We might see the A6. As long as Apple isn't having manufacturing issues, this would make the A6 cheaper in the long run. If they want to simplify their manufacturing, the A6 gives them advantages.
thataveragejoe: What has getting information on how a competitor's cpu work have to do with turning exynos into a copy from Apple?! The two has nothing to do with each other.
Knowing how a competitor's chip works: Priceless Designing your own chip while knowing the performance profile of your competitor: Also priceless.
can someone explain me what a manual chip layout means and how those people could have come to that conclusion?
The programs they use for designing chips work very well. But they aren't the most efficient at laying out wires, or parts. I use similar programs to design circuit boards. Sometimes the program routs wires all around the board, which is not good.
You can allow the program to place components on the board as well, though you do have to come up with a general placement yourself first for major items. But again, it's not as efficient as when you do it.
It's is so complex that it can boggle the mind when dealing with six, eight, and boards with even more layers, so that you need a program to do most of the work. The same with a very complex chip that isn't regular in design such as memory chips.
It's like a town. If its set up in a perfect rectangle, with streets at exactly 90° to each other, then it's easy to route. But if everything's at odd angles, and need to go around ponds, lakes rivers, hills, etc, then it gets harder. Think about doing that on five or six levels, with streets connecting through the levels, and you get some idea of the problem. Programs will connect everything, but not always in the most efficient way. If you have to take a longer road, you use more gas a more direct route sill save that, as well as get you there sooner.
Since we know how a program is going to place, and route in a circuit, we can tell by looking at the circuit whether its been done manually, or by computer. Now, when they say its been done manually, they don't mean completely manually, because that would be impossible these days.
We might see the A6. As long as Apple isn't having manufacturing issues, this would make the A6 cheaper in the long run. If they want to simplify their manufacturing, the A6 gives them advantages.
it's certainly possible and with a lower clock rate would would likely be more power efficient at the same performance rating. Still, I'm heavily leaning toward an A5 because the Touch has it and I bet that device will sell in less quantity than the rumoured iPad Mini.
I think the reverse is true in this case. If ever there was a clunky, heavy Apple product it is the iPad 3. As soon as it's not on sale anymore even the tech press will be able to admit what a kludge this particular model was.
If the mythical mini ever appears it might solve the problem, but it seems that even then, the iPad 3 could really benefit from a much thinner, lighter form factor.
"Kludge"? Because it's like a fraction of a mm thicker (imperceptive to almost everyone), to drive a 4X higher density deisplay, much more powerful videocard, more RAM, much better camera, etc...Jesus Christ. Some of you really have no perspective. Yes, the new iPad will likely be a bit lighter/thinner. But that doesn't mean the current one is a "Kludge". What they managed to fit into that enclosure is no small feat, and it's still an engineering marvel with the Retina display and performance.
Yeah, this kind of teardown is so helpful for consumers (very sophisticated analysis), but I'm guessing Apple hates it. The telecommunications industry for years and years and years has been incredibly secretive about hardware specs, presumably on the basis that it slows down competitors.
Apple will probably have done similar to other companies processors, and will expect and accept it being done to theirs. TSMC, for example, won't use this teardown report to analyze the A6, they will already be doing one of their own, in a lot more detail, looking at specific materials used for thinks like the interconnects and dielectrics, just in case Samsung (the manufacturer of the A6) have come up with some sort of funky manufacturing technique that TSMC haven't thought of.
Everyone who makes chips has the ability to do this sort of analysis, since they often need to do it on their own devices to track down yield problems. I never stopped being amazed by the ability of the analysis guys to come back with one specific defect that they could conclusively link to my machines.
it's certainly possible and with a lower clock rate would would likely be more power efficient at the same performance rating. Still, I'm heavily leaning toward an A5 because the Touch has it and I bet that device will sell in less quantity than the rumoured iPad Mini.
It's always possible. But the Touch has no real competition,as Samsung isn't advertising their competitor. The mini will be entering a crowded market, and will need to at least equal the Nexus 7 and surpass the new Fire.
It's always possible. But the Touch has no real competition,as Samsung isn't advertising their competitor. The mini will be entering a crowded market, and will need to at least equal the Nexus 7 and surpass the new Fire.
I think it's a toss up. I'd prefer to see the A6.
It will surpass the Nexus 7 either way. I own it. Even t hough it's one of the smoother ones, the thing is still sluggish and laggy. My 4S does a better job loading webpages. I have no doubt a potential iPad mini will demolish it in responsiveness.
It will be very interesting to see if Samsung tries to copy the design. A violation of that sort would be far beyond simply copying a style or an icon and could land them in serious criminal trouble. It would be more in the line of industrial espionage and people would be going to jail.
with apple having manually designing the cpu, your design is now producted in a manner that does not allow you to claim "i did not know it was a copy...the computer just spit it out" ...
not only that, they would be the pariah of the foundry business... no would use them because they steal peoples work...
but then because you need an arm licence to use and a licence to design the cpu... my guess is if samsung was caught stealing apple's cpu design they would lose the licence to manufacture... design... and any samsung product that has an ARM processor. it would be unsellable.
tsmc, gf, and charter all strictly, and seriously protect the ip of others (i am guessing here but if they did not, i can not see how they would remain in business).
...all pure speculation on my part, but i certainly hope these foundarys have the honor to Segregate their customers designs and IP.
I disagree with you here (as usual). I do want longer battery life but portability is also very important. I think the weight and, by association, thickness need to be and will reduced for the next gen iPad.
I try to use the suffix -esque and -like to indicate that these aren't ARM's specific designs for A9 or A15 but custom designs built from more basic reference designs from ARM. While the A6 looks much like Krait in its A9 with A15 features I wouldn't be surprised if the next iPad is much further toward the A15 envelope.I wish there was a marketing name to refer to base designs from ARM.
This is extremely useful to have the hardware divide.
It also means that in the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S code can be more quickly made obsolete. I'm not sure if compiler changes would also allow the iPhone 3GS to be made obsolete before the other two.
Hopefully not as it would mean removal of the 3GS compiler code next year. Removing 320X480 support is maybe another way they can do it.
Comments
Eventually, all tablets will weigh much less, and be as thin as the mechanical needs for sturdiness allows.
I do a lot of reading on mine, and I've noticed the differences in weight between the models. Normally, I would agree with you about weight. But it's when I'm lying in bed, holding this up that the weight becomes a problem. Then I'm constantly shifting it around. Otherwise it bites into my hand if I hold in the same position for too long.
So I'm thinking about buying a Mini (assuming there will be such a thing) mostly for reading while in bed. Though, when having to stand in a crowded subway car it would also be an improvement.
We might see the A6. As long as Apple isn't having manufacturing issues, this would make the A6 cheaper in the long run. If they want to simplify their manufacturing, the A6 gives them advantages.
Knowing how a competitor's chip works: Priceless
Designing your own chip while knowing the performance profile of your competitor: Also priceless.
The programs they use for designing chips work very well. But they aren't the most efficient at laying out wires, or parts. I use similar programs to design circuit boards. Sometimes the program routs wires all around the board, which is not good.
You can allow the program to place components on the board as well, though you do have to come up with a general placement yourself first for major items. But again, it's not as efficient as when you do it.
It's is so complex that it can boggle the mind when dealing with six, eight, and boards with even more layers, so that you need a program to do most of the work. The same with a very complex chip that isn't regular in design such as memory chips.
It's like a town. If its set up in a perfect rectangle, with streets at exactly 90° to each other, then it's easy to route. But if everything's at odd angles, and need to go around ponds, lakes rivers, hills, etc, then it gets harder. Think about doing that on five or six levels, with streets connecting through the levels, and you get some idea of the problem. Programs will connect everything, but not always in the most efficient way. If you have to take a longer road, you use more gas a more direct route sill save that, as well as get you there sooner.
Since we know how a program is going to place, and route in a circuit, we can tell by looking at the circuit whether its been done manually, or by computer. Now, when they say its been done manually, they don't mean completely manually, because that would be impossible these days.
That's the concept.
it's certainly possible and with a lower clock rate would would likely be more power efficient at the same performance rating. Still, I'm heavily leaning toward an A5 because the Touch has it and I bet that device will sell in less quantity than the rumoured iPad Mini.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I think the reverse is true in this case. If ever there was a clunky, heavy Apple product it is the iPad 3. As soon as it's not on sale anymore even the tech press will be able to admit what a kludge this particular model was.
If the mythical mini ever appears it might solve the problem, but it seems that even then, the iPad 3 could really benefit from a much thinner, lighter form factor.
"Kludge"? Because it's like a fraction of a mm thicker (imperceptive to almost everyone), to drive a 4X higher density deisplay, much more powerful videocard, more RAM, much better camera, etc...Jesus Christ. Some of you really have no perspective. Yes, the new iPad will likely be a bit lighter/thinner. But that doesn't mean the current one is a "Kludge". What they managed to fit into that enclosure is no small feat, and it's still an engineering marvel with the Retina display and performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregquinn
Yeah, this kind of teardown is so helpful for consumers (very sophisticated analysis), but I'm guessing Apple hates it. The telecommunications industry for years and years and years has been incredibly secretive about hardware specs, presumably on the basis that it slows down competitors.
Apple will probably have done similar to other companies processors, and will expect and accept it being done to theirs. TSMC, for example, won't use this teardown report to analyze the A6, they will already be doing one of their own, in a lot more detail, looking at specific materials used for thinks like the interconnects and dielectrics, just in case Samsung (the manufacturer of the A6) have come up with some sort of funky manufacturing technique that TSMC haven't thought of.
Everyone who makes chips has the ability to do this sort of analysis, since they often need to do it on their own devices to track down yield problems. I never stopped being amazed by the ability of the analysis guys to come back with one specific defect that they could conclusively link to my machines.
It's always possible. But the Touch has no real competition,as Samsung isn't advertising their competitor. The mini will be entering a crowded market, and will need to at least equal the Nexus 7 and surpass the new Fire.
I think it's a toss up. I'd prefer to see the A6.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
It's always possible. But the Touch has no real competition,as Samsung isn't advertising their competitor. The mini will be entering a crowded market, and will need to at least equal the Nexus 7 and surpass the new Fire.
I think it's a toss up. I'd prefer to see the A6.
It will surpass the Nexus 7 either way. I own it. Even t hough it's one of the smoother ones, the thing is still sluggish and laggy. My 4S does a better job loading webpages. I have no doubt a potential iPad mini will demolish it in responsiveness.
with apple having manually designing the cpu, your design is now producted in a manner that does not allow you to claim "i did not know it was a copy...the computer just spit it out" ...
not only that, they would be the pariah of the foundry business... no would use them because they steal peoples work...
but then because you need an arm licence to use and a licence to design the cpu... my guess is if samsung was caught stealing apple's cpu design they would lose the licence to manufacture... design... and any samsung product that has an ARM processor. it would be unsellable.
tsmc, gf, and charter all strictly, and seriously protect the ip of others (i am guessing here but if they did not, i can not see how they would remain in business).
...all pure speculation on my part, but i certainly hope these foundarys have the honor to Segregate their customers designs and IP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I disagree with you here (as usual). I do want longer battery life but portability is also very important. I think the weight and, by association, thickness need to be and will reduced for the next gen iPad.
I try to use the suffix -esque and -like to indicate that these aren't ARM's specific designs for A9 or A15 but custom designs built from more basic reference designs from ARM. While the A6 looks much like Krait in its A9 with A15 features I wouldn't be surprised if the next iPad is much further toward the A15 envelope.I wish there was a marketing name to refer to base designs from ARM.
"ARM-y"
Cheers
So what country is this 'son of a chip' made?
It also means that in the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S code can be more quickly made obsolete.
I'm not sure if compiler changes would also allow the iPhone 3GS to be made obsolete before the other two.
Hopefully not as it would mean removal of the 3GS compiler code next year. Removing 320X480 support is maybe another way they can do it.
SO screen resolution changes might be the better route when discontinuing future xcode support.
The USA.
Earth. What part of your brain do thoughts come from?
Correction, Texas.
Actually, a Korean colony in Texas.
Well, sometimes I wish Texas weren't part of the USA, but it still is.