If you need to update your knowledge on the term "Retina HD", here it is: Retina HD refers NOT to resolution, but pixel property which is called "Dual Domain" pixel to allow better angle visibility and more color saturation. Does iPhone 6 have higher pixel density? No, it still has 326 ppi in its Retina HD screen.
1) Mea culpa. I see now that the iPhone 6 is also Retina HD.
No. It will not because the Air 2 is mid-term refresh, not full-term redesign. When was last time that Apple upgraded
If you need to update your knowledge on the term "Retina HD", here it is: Retina HD refers NOT to resolution, but pixel property which is called "Dual Domain" pixel to allow better angle visibility and more color saturation. Does iPhone 6 have higher pixel density? No, it still has 326 ppi in its Retina HD screen.
Right now both the iPhone 6 (326ppi) and 6 Plus (401ppi) have Retina HD screens. I wouldn't be surprised if the iPad mini (326ppi) and iPad Air (401ppi?) follow suit. Hence the need for an A8X and 2GB of RAM in the updated iPad Air. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt we will see a bigger (12.9") iPad on Thursday.
Right now both the iPhone 6 (326ppi) and 6 Plus (401ppi) have Retina HD screens. I wouldn't be surprised if the iPad mini (326ppi) and iPad Air (401ppi?) follow suit. Hence the need for an A8X and 2GB of RAM in the updated iPad Air. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt we will see a bigger (12.9") iPad on Thursday.
1) Does that scale properly with the 2x and 3x designation Apple has for their iOS UI points?
2) With the iPhone 6 the 401 PPI made sense because going to 461 PPI with 2208x1242 isn't feasible today.
No, this means it'd take more processing power to run the dual domain pixels "Retina HD" and maybe some new multitasking job likes split screens?
BTW, it seems that Retina Mini won't be updated and will drop the price to $299, Mini to $199 and eventually phased out after next year...
MacRumors is running a story about the iPad mini getting a refresh on Thursday as well. Of course these are just rumors so who knows. But I suspect there's a greater than 50% chance it gets updated. The question is will it get everything the Air does. I just hope we don't see any price increases in either product. With iPad sales growth basically flat to negative raising prices isn't the way to go.
MacRumors is running a story about the iPad mini getting a refresh on Thursday as well. Of course these are just rumors so who knows. But I suspect there's a greater than 50% chance it gets updated. The question is will it get everything the Air does. I just hope we don't see any price increases in either product. With iPad sales growth basically flat to negative raising prices isn't the way to go.
if the iPad mini does get updated, no way it gets everything the Air does, mainly to differentiate it. Just like the iPhone 6 doesn't get everything the iPhone 6 Plus does.
My guess is that with an A8 , 2Gbs Ram and fingerprint sensor many people will still not upgrade and iPad sales will continue to dissapoint. Afterall many people only use iPads to read content beit emails, texts, Safari. Magazines and Newspapers and there isn't any need for any speed upgrade when it come to those.
My guess is that with an A8 , 2Gbs Ram and fingerprint sensor many people will still not upgrade and iPad sales will continue to dissapoint.
Afterall many people only use iPads to read content beit emails, texts, Safari. Magazines and Newspapers and there isn't any need for any speed upgrade when it come to those.
Where’s the white ‘/s’ that is supposed to be hidden at the end?
if the iPad mini does get updated, no way it gets everything the Air does, mainly to differentiate it. Just like the iPhone 6 doesn't get everything the iPhone 6 Plus does.
Ok then, why were the retina mini and Air basically the same last year? Why would Apple create parity only to throw it out the next year? As far as I'm concerned screen size IS the differentiator.
At current resolutions and size, a 3X resolution would give the iPad Air the following;
3072 x 2304 (396ppi). Not exactly 401ppi but close enough, I guess.
That would mean Apple will change the size of the elements if they are going to deviate from their point system. My guess is they won't do that if they are keeping the display the same size. Now this mythical 12.9" iPad which could do side-by-side ?7.9" windows is a different story, but the current rumour is that won't launch this year.
Ok then, why were the retina mini and Air basically the same last year? Why would Apple create parity only to throw it out the next year?
Doesn't qualifying "the same" with "basically" not work to his point? The iPhone 6 basically has the same stuff as the iPhone 6 Plus, which is to say that most of the specs are the same with some minor deviation.
If Apple makes a 5.5 inch iPod touch then I won't need another iPad. Which makes me fear they will opt against that idea...
Or they cancel the iPad mini line. I don't think they'll ever increase the pixels on the Mini, and eventually they will on on the 10" iPad.
making a 5.5 iPod allows for a lot (all but the radios and antennas) of reuse between iPhone and the iPod. That's gotta be a price benefit, compared to having a completely different supply chain for the iPad Mini.
3.5 (still supported)
4"
4.7"
5.5"
8"
10"
(12?)
That's a lot of sizes. I see 3.5 deprecating next year, but I think the 4" will live at least 4 more years. So I see the 8" the likely next size to go.
My guess is that with an A8 , 2Gbs Ram and fingerprint sensor many people will still not upgrade and iPad sales will continue to dissapoint.
Afterall many people only use iPads to read content beit emails, texts, Safari. Magazines and Newspapers and there isn't any need for any speed upgrade when it come to those.
You must live in a cave if you think that's all that people use iPads for.
This is saddening if it's 2 gb vs iphone 1 gb, they should have done 2 GB iPhone and 3 GB IPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
They should have had parity.
If you believe the supply chain reports (and I do) Apple may not have been able to get enough DRAM to upgrade the iPhones to 2GB. Apple already sucks down 16.5% of the market, and next year that figure will climb to a whopping 25% of the market. There are already shortages of server and desktop class RAM, and Apple's consumption will only make things worse (I suspect it'll even begin to affect mobile DRAM for less important customers) Micron alone is going to dedicate about 75% of total production exclusively to Apple.
When you look at that data, as well as the fact that Foxconn and Quanta can't build the iPhones fast enough as is, I think they went with 1GB as a compromise, since the chips were likely more readily available.
In reality, the DRAM guys need to increase production capacity, but like any business they're loathe to do that unless they have to (Samsung and SK Hynix are adding production lines next year...for Apple use only)
Comments
1) Mea culpa. I see now that the iPhone 6 is also Retina HD.
2) Links are helpful.
No. It will not because the Air 2 is mid-term refresh, not full-term redesign. When was last time that Apple upgraded
If you need to update your knowledge on the term "Retina HD", here it is: Retina HD refers NOT to resolution, but pixel property which is called "Dual Domain" pixel to allow better angle visibility and more color saturation. Does iPhone 6 have higher pixel density? No, it still has 326 ppi in its Retina HD screen.
Right now both the iPhone 6 (326ppi) and 6 Plus (401ppi) have Retina HD screens. I wouldn't be surprised if the iPad mini (326ppi) and iPad Air (401ppi?) follow suit. Hence the need for an A8X and 2GB of RAM in the updated iPad Air. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt we will see a bigger (12.9") iPad on Thursday.
I think it's time to upgrade. My iPad 3 feels pretty sluggish running iOS 8![:\](/resources/emoji/confused.png ":\")
1) Does that scale properly with the 2x and 3x designation Apple has for their iOS UI points?
2) With the iPhone 6 the 401 PPI made sense because going to 461 PPI with 2208x1242 isn't feasible today.
I suppose this means that you'll be able to have more Safari tabs open without them reloading.
Why does Apple have to give us what we want?
Never fear, you will find something else to bitch about.
1) Does that scale properly with the 2x and 3x designation Apple has for their iOS UI points?
2) With the iPhone 6 the 401 PPI made sense because going to 461 PPI with 2208x1242 isn't feasible today.
2208x1242 is 3x, so it scales properly. The iPhone scales down to 1920x1080.
That's my point.
1) Does that scale properly with the 2x and 3x designation Apple has for their iOS UI points?
2) With the iPhone 6 the 401 PPI made sense because going to 461 PPI with 2208x1242 isn't feasible today.
At current resolutions and size, a 3X resolution would give the iPad Air the following;
3072 x 2304 (396ppi). Not exactly 401ppi but close enough, I guess.
MacRumors is running a story about the iPad mini getting a refresh on Thursday as well. Of course these are just rumors so who knows. But I suspect there's a greater than 50% chance it gets updated. The question is will it get everything the Air does. I just hope we don't see any price increases in either product. With iPad sales growth basically flat to negative raising prices isn't the way to go.
if the iPad mini does get updated, no way it gets everything the Air does, mainly to differentiate it. Just like the iPhone 6 doesn't get everything the iPhone 6 Plus does.
Afterall many people only use iPads to read content beit emails, texts, Safari. Magazines and Newspapers and there isn't any need for any speed upgrade when it come to those.
Afterall many people only use iPads to read content beit emails, texts, Safari. Magazines and Newspapers and there isn't any need for any speed upgrade when it come to those.
Where’s the white ‘/s’ that is supposed to be hidden at the end?
That would mean Apple will change the size of the elements if they are going to deviate from their point system. My guess is they won't do that if they are keeping the display the same size. Now this mythical 12.9" iPad which could do side-by-side ?7.9" windows is a different story, but the current rumour is that won't launch this year.
Doesn't qualifying "the same" with "basically" not work to his point? The iPhone 6 basically has the same stuff as the iPhone 6 Plus, which is to say that most of the specs are the same with some minor deviation.
They should have had parity.
If Apple makes a 5.5 inch iPod touch then I won't need another iPad. Which makes me fear they will opt against that idea...
Or they cancel the iPad mini line. I don't think they'll ever increase the pixels on the Mini, and eventually they will on on the 10" iPad.
making a 5.5 iPod allows for a lot (all but the radios and antennas) of reuse between iPhone and the iPod. That's gotta be a price benefit, compared to having a completely different supply chain for the iPad Mini.
3.5 (still supported)
4"
4.7"
5.5"
8"
10"
(12?)
That's a lot of sizes. I see 3.5 deprecating next year, but I think the 4" will live at least 4 more years. So I see the 8" the likely next size to go.
My guess is that with an A8 , 2Gbs Ram and fingerprint sensor many people will still not upgrade and iPad sales will continue to dissapoint.
Afterall many people only use iPads to read content beit emails, texts, Safari. Magazines and Newspapers and there isn't any need for any speed upgrade when it come to those.
You must live in a cave if you think that's all that people use iPads for.
This is saddening if it's 2 gb vs iphone 1 gb, they should have done 2 GB iPhone and 3 GB IPad.
They should have had parity.
If you believe the supply chain reports (and I do) Apple may not have been able to get enough DRAM to upgrade the iPhones to 2GB. Apple already sucks down 16.5% of the market, and next year that figure will climb to a whopping 25% of the market. There are already shortages of server and desktop class RAM, and Apple's consumption will only make things worse (I suspect it'll even begin to affect mobile DRAM for less important customers) Micron alone is going to dedicate about 75% of total production exclusively to Apple.
When you look at that data, as well as the fact that Foxconn and Quanta can't build the iPhones fast enough as is, I think they went with 1GB as a compromise, since the chips were likely more readily available.
In reality, the DRAM guys need to increase production capacity, but like any business they're loathe to do that unless they have to (Samsung and SK Hynix are adding production lines next year...for Apple use only)