Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review.
I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost.
If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad.
Totally agree with you on the comments that you made. The iPad Pro may be a great machine but the new iPad is great for the price.
when you add in the Pencil, Keyboard, and USB charger you have a laptop price product. I'm waiting for mouse/trackpad support in iOS . That will probably be 4 years away. I expect this product to sell well in the first year and then fall off in the second year.
In term of hardware, 4K+ OLED screens would be a nice upgrade in 2 years. At least add multiUser support to iOS for the Pro . Multiple user support (family accounts) need to extend across all of Apple's products including voice recognition on the upcomimg HomePods for Siri (as Google Home does.
WWDC was great . Lots of product coming out because they put Titan on hold. WWDC tag line should be "Desperately seeking Siri" as Apple tries to show they aren't falling behind everyone else.
As Soli mentioned, I think it is ludicrous that Apple's "Pro" iPad (and top phone model!) will not connect or charge out of the box to its "Pro" laptop. This, from a company that has a history and reputation for aggressively adopting (or dropping) I/O standards.
Having just bought a MacBook Pro, I won't replace my original retina iPad until it has USB-C.
Apple, please get your laptop and iOS hardware teams together and sort this out!!
There's nothing to sort out. Get the cable you need:
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
"To get the most out of you would have to spend..." That statement doesn't really make sense. I assume you're referring to keyboard and pencil, which are purely optional. As in, options. As in, not everybody needs or wants. To "get the most out of" any computer you can spend 1000s extra on accessories, but you've never suggested adding the cost of a Wacom tablet to a PC, have you? Same thing. Doesn't make sense. I plan on getting the Pro, but will not be getting all the accessories.
The Pro is $150 more than last year's normal iPad, and with that comes high-end features like 1) 64gb storage, 2) TrueTone display, 3) 120Hz refresh rate, 3) brighter screen, 4) P3 color gamut, 5) faster processor, etc.. In short -- you get stuff. Is the stuff you get worth the "$150 more" than the old flagship cost? That depends on your budget of course, but I certainly think so, especially since it's less than my iPhone and is going to last me a lot longer.
Cheaper than iPhone. Lasts longer. More stuff than ever. Come on.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
"To get the most out of you would have to spend..." That statement doesn't really make sense. I assume you're referring to keyboard and pencil, which are purely optional. As in, options. As in, not everybody needs or wants. To "get the most out of" any computer you can spend 1000s extra on accessories, but you've never suggested adding the cost of a Wacom tablet to a PC, have you? Same thing. Doesn't make sense.
The Pro is $150 more than last year's normal iPad, and with that comes high-end features like 1) 64gb storage, 2) TrueTone display, 3) 120Hz refresh rate, 3) brighter screen, 4) P3 color gamut, 5) faster processor, etc.. In short -- you get stuff. Is the stuff you get worth the "$150 more" than the old flagship cost? That depends on your budget of course, but I certainly think so, especially since it's less than my iPhone and is going to last me a lot longer.
Cheaper than iPhone. Lasts longer. More stuff than ever. Come on.
Don't forget the digitizer. That's still a pricey component.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review.
I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost.
If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad.
It's not really a question of 'taking an issue' though, is it? Your use of the phrase 'cut corner' is clearly wrong. I don't think anyone is saying that these issues shouldn't be highlighted; what folk are saying is that they should be described correctly.
I read the article twice and came away thinking, 'So where the hell were all these cut corners then?'
The lack of third party support for the smart connect is not a cut corner. A hike in price is not a cut corner. The only thing mentioned here that could be described as a cut corner is the low power charger, which as shortcomings go gets a 'meh, whatever' from me.
Accuracy is important, whether you're a blogger or a journalist. A few folk here feel the same way, which is why they pointed this out.
I maintain that most buyers will be well served by the $330 iPad for years to come.
Are most buyers in need of the high-end model? Of anything? Probably not, so I really don't know why you're banging that drum. Review the product that's offered for who it's offered... It's like you were reviewing a Mercedes and complaining that it costs more than a Toyota. Wuuut? Not the market, man.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review.
I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost.
If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad.
It's not really a question of 'taking an issue' though, is it? Your use of the phrase 'cut corner' is clearly wrong. I don't think anyone is saying that these issues shouldn't be highlighted; what folk are saying is that they should be described correctly.
I read the article twice and came away thinking, 'So where the hell were all these cut corners then?'
The lack of third party support for the smart connect is not a cut corner. A hike in price is not a cut corner. The only thing mentioned here that could be described as a cut corner is the low power charger, which as shortcomings go gets a 'meh, whatever' from me.
Accuracy is important, whether you're a blogger or a journalist. A few folk here feel the same way, which is why they pointed this out.
I will concede that, in hindsight, I could have used a better figure of speech to summarize my feelings about the product in the opening paragraph. That said, I stand by the content of the review, and take issue with your suggestion that it is lacking in "accuracy."
But, for someone like me (and, dare I say, a few others on this forum) looking for a Pro model with higher capabilities, it's really an apples and oranges comparison and kind of irrelevant when you are reviewing the higher end model. Case in point, I am getting the $329 iPad for my aged parents and the 10.5" iPad Pro for myself as my primary work computer as I am always on the go. So, it's not as if your readers are unaware of the relative merits and capabilities of each product.
Bingo, exactly. Getting my mom the $350 model, and the Pro for me, because I have more demanding use cases than my mother. Different products, different use cases, different prices. This is normal.
I can't agree about the comments about the pricing. First of all, going to 64GB during a time when NAND costs are rising, is a good thing. Secondly, RAM is still expensive. Doubling that adds to the cost. Then there are the four speakers, rather than two. The extra costs involved in the larger display alone warrants a higher price.
i swear, doesn't anyone understand costs and pricing? When I was manufacturing electronics, I had, along with my engineers and accountants, to consider every penny of increased costs. $649 happens to be a very good price for what we're getting here, and some other writers have acknowledged that.
i'd also like to say that the new Surface Pro models no longer include the stylus, and the stylus now has angular support and 4,096 levels. It also also,costs $100, the same as the Pencil (with just 256 levels, come on Apple, that's no longer acceptable), as opposed to last year's replacement price of $60. So people can no longer complain that the Pencil is so much more than others.
Microsoft is now claiming a 20ms lag as well, so Apple can't say theirs is the least. But, I've found, with my new iPad Pro 12.9", that in practical use, the difference between my 2015 model and this isn't so vast that it seriously affects my use. It looks great in demos, but you very quickly get used to the little lag the older model has. Possibly, once lag gets down to 5ms, we'll no longer notice it at all, and maybe that will make a difference. The screen does have a tiny amount of drag though, and for those to whom that matters, that will make them happy.
i see that Apple is shipping the 10.5 model to reviewers, and I suppose that's because it's the really new model, and as it's smaller, and cheaper, possibly they think it will sell better. Possibly, they also find that certain performance factors on the 10.5 are better, and more impressive. I've spoken to my guys at Apple, and have been told that the GPU on both is exactly the same, as is the speed at which they run. That accounts for the fact that on the 10.5, ProMotion is more fluid when scrolling than it is on my 12.9, where text does blur, though not as much as it does on my 2015 unit. There are a lot more pixels to push around, and screen refresh rates aren't the only factor in this. Don't get me wrong, it's definitely better though. It will take the A11x next year to make the 12.9 as silky smooth as the 10.5 is today.
i find that the power of the model is very much in evidence in software that needs it. AutoCAD is very noticeably faster. But then, AutoDesk has always been good at taking advantage of whatever power the iPad offers. I bought Affinity, the photo editing app shown on stage. This is surprisingly complete in features. It works very well, and shows why all this extra power is needed. They just came out with an update that kills a lot of little bugs, and increases stability, major complaints from users. I haven't noticed any real problems so far, and can easily recommend this app. It's $19.95, and if that frightens people off, I can just say to get over it, that's damn cheap for a full featured app.
a number of other drawing, painting and editing apps have all benefitted from the new power here, and that's from my own experience using them for almost a week now (mine arrived last Tuesday).
while, from the front, you can't tell the difference between this one and last year's, you can from the back, because of the new camera, flash and tiny microphone placement differences. But also, if you have the LTE version, the plastic window over the transmitter antennas now matches the color of the aluminum case. It's no longer black. It matches pretty perfectly, and looks very good. This model of the 12.9 is actually a little bit lighter, though it's almost impossible to tell. Since there's a bigger battery, I'll take any weight reduction I can get. My first iPad, bought in May, 2010, the first day it came out, with LTE weighed 1.75 pounds. That this 12.9 model, with LTE weighs 1.5 pounds is incredible.
even though I've only played with the 10.5 at my Apple Store near me for about 30 minutes, I highly recommend either. And despite what I read here, the pricing is more than fair. There are professional models. If they are too expensive for someone, then perhaps that person doesn't need them. But if you do, this is the only way to go. Professionals will find that their accountants can depreciate them over three years, taking much of the sting out of the price, which, really, for a professional computer, actually isn't that much.
i'd also like to say that the new Surface Pro models no longer include the stylus, and the stylus now has angular support and 4,096 levels. It also also,costs $100, the same as the Pencil (with just 256 levels, come on Apple, that's no longer acceptable), as opposed to last year's replacement price of $60. So people can no longer complain that the Pencil is so much more than others.
I don't think Apple has ever given a "levels of sensitivity" number for the Apple Pencil, but there's no way it's only 256. Most of the 3rd party stylus that were available for standard iPads prior to the release of the Pencil and iPad Pro were already claiming 2,048, which was in line with the older Wacom Cintiq pressure sensitive screens. 256 would be 1/8th of that and would be horrendous in comparison to those older stylus. Instead, Apple Pencil blows them away.
i'd also like to say that the new Surface Pro models no longer include the stylus, and the stylus now has angular support and 4,096 levels. It also also,costs $100, the same as the Pencil (with just 256 levels, come on Apple, that's no longer acceptable), as opposed to last year's replacement price of $60. So people can no longer complain that the Pencil is so much more than others.
I don't think Apple has ever given a "levels of sensitivity" number for the Apple Pencil, but there's no way it's only 256. Most of the 3rd party stylus that were available for standard iPads prior to the release of the Pencil and iPad Pro were already claiming 2,048, which was in line with the older Wacom Cintiq pressure sensitive screens. 256 would be 1/8th of that and would be horrendous in comparison to those older stylus. Instead, Apple Pencil blows them away.
I'm pretty sure it's 256. In the old days, all we had with Wacom was 256. Guess what? It worked. Personally, I think anything over 1024 is just marketing. There's no evidence that it's visible on any media.
I don't see the Pencil "blowing them away". I like the Pencil, and it works very well.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review.
I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost.
If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad.
It's not really a question of 'taking an issue' though, is it? Your use of the phrase 'cut corner' is clearly wrong. I don't think anyone is saying that these issues shouldn't be highlighted; what folk are saying is that they should be described correctly.
I read the article twice and came away thinking, 'So where the hell were all these cut corners then?'
The lack of third party support for the smart connect is not a cut corner. A hike in price is not a cut corner. The only thing mentioned here that could be described as a cut corner is the low power charger, which as shortcomings go gets a 'meh, whatever' from me.
Accuracy is important, whether you're a blogger or a journalist. A few folk here feel the same way, which is why they pointed this out.
I will concede that, in hindsight, I could have used a better figure of speech to summarize my feelings about the product in the opening paragraph. That said, I stand by the content of the review, and take issue with your suggestion that it is lacking in "accuracy."
I think you are simply getting more defensive. Your expression that Apple cut corners with this product was clearly inaccurate, for the reasons pointed out by many readers. To be honest, the constant references in the article to imagined corners cut came across as unnecessary sour grapes - except for the 29W charger, which does seem like Apple cutting corners, the other points were not valid, imho.
That the 2017 iPad provides better value is your personal opinion and you are certainly entitled to that. But, for someone like me (and, dare I say, a few others on this forum) looking for a Pro model with higher capabilities, it's really an apples and oranges comparison and kind of irrelevant when you are reviewing the higher end model. Case in point, I am getting the $329 iPad for my aged parents and the 10.5" iPad Pro for myself as my primary work computer as I am always on the go. So, it's not as if your readers are unaware of the relative merits and capabilities of each product.
Not getting defensive. Just engaging with readers and answering questions/concerns about my review.
As for the "relative merits and capabilities of each product" -- no, most of my readers are not necessarily aware of those. Commenters are, sure. And commenters are also likely the type of people who made up their mind about this product as soon as it was announced. The vast majority of AI readers are not commenters, and I would guess that the majority of people looking for buying advice from my review are not as well versed on the differences between the $330 iPad and $650 iPad Pro as commenters are.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review.
I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost.
If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad.
It's not really a question of 'taking an issue' though, is it? Your use of the phrase 'cut corner' is clearly wrong. I don't think anyone is saying that these issues shouldn't be highlighted; what folk are saying is that they should be described correctly.
I read the article twice and came away thinking, 'So where the hell were all these cut corners then?'
The lack of third party support for the smart connect is not a cut corner. A hike in price is not a cut corner. The only thing mentioned here that could be described as a cut corner is the low power charger, which as shortcomings go gets a 'meh, whatever' from me.
Accuracy is important, whether you're a blogger or a journalist. A few folk here feel the same way, which is why they pointed this out.
I will concede that, in hindsight, I could have used a better figure of speech to summarize my feelings about the product in the opening paragraph. That said, I stand by the content of the review, and take issue with your suggestion that it is lacking in "accuracy."
I think you are simply getting more defensive. Your expression that Apple cut corners with this product was clearly inaccurate, for the reasons pointed out by many readers. To be honest, the constant references in the article to imagined corners cut came across as unnecessary sour grapes - except for the 29W charger, which does seem like Apple cutting corners, the other points were not valid, imho.
That the 2017 iPad provides better value is your personal opinion and you are certainly entitled to that. But, for someone like me (and, dare I say, a few others on this forum) looking for a Pro model with higher capabilities, it's really an apples and oranges comparison and kind of irrelevant when you are reviewing the higher end model. Case in point, I am getting the $329 iPad for my aged parents and the 10.5" iPad Pro for myself as my primary work computer as I am always on the go. So, it's not as if your readers are unaware of the relative merits and capabilities of each product.
Not getting defensive. Just engaging with readers and answering questions/concerns about my review.
As for the "relative merits and capabilities of each product" -- no, most of my readers are not necessarily aware of those. Commenters are, sure. And commenters are also likely the type of people who made up their mind about this product as soon as it was announced. The vast majority of AI readers are not commenters, and I would guess that the majority of people looking for buying advice from my review are not as well versed on the differences between the $330 iPad and $650 iPad Pro as commenters are.
You certainly are right . Most people don't really understand the differences. I find myself explaining things all the time.
about the charger, something I was going to comment on in my post, but forgot. While I don't think that Apple should include a $49 charger, and a more expensive cable, because that would bring the price higher, I do have an idea for that. What I've been thinking since I bought mine last year, and did buy that charger and cable, is that Apple should charge for the standard versions, but not include them in the box. For say, $29 more, you could select the 29 watt charger and the USB C cable instead. Otherwise the standard model would be included.I know that would seem to complicate shipping. But I have a design for the box that would allow an accessory box to be slipped inside.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
"To get the most out of you would have to spend..." That statement doesn't really make sense. I assume you're referring to keyboard and pencil, which are purely optional. As in, options. As in, not everybody needs or wants. To "get the most out of" any computer you can spend 1000s extra on accessories, but you've never suggested adding the cost of a Wacom tablet to a PC, have you? Same thing. Doesn't make sense. I plan on getting the Pro, but will not be getting all the accessories.
The Pro is $150 more than last year's normal iPad, and with that comes high-end features like 1) 64gb storage, 2) TrueTone display, 3) 120Hz refresh rate, 3) brighter screen, 4) P3 color gamut, 5) faster processor, etc.. In short -- you get stuff. Is the stuff you get worth the "$150 more" than the old flagship cost? That depends on your budget of course, but I certainly think so, especially since it's less than my iPhone and is going to last me a lot longer.
Cheaper than iPhone. Lasts longer. More stuff than ever. Come on.
If you're not interested in the Smart Keyboard or Apple Pencil, you shouldn't buy the iPad Pro. That's kind of the point of my review. The $330 model is a much better option ($430 for 128GB) if you don't plan on tacking on those accessories.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review.
I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost.
If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad.
It's not really a question of 'taking an issue' though, is it? Your use of the phrase 'cut corner' is clearly wrong. I don't think anyone is saying that these issues shouldn't be highlighted; what folk are saying is that they should be described correctly.
I read the article twice and came away thinking, 'So where the hell were all these cut corners then?'
The lack of third party support for the smart connect is not a cut corner. A hike in price is not a cut corner. The only thing mentioned here that could be described as a cut corner is the low power charger, which as shortcomings go gets a 'meh, whatever' from me.
Accuracy is important, whether you're a blogger or a journalist. A few folk here feel the same way, which is why they pointed this out.
I will concede that, in hindsight, I could have used a better figure of speech to summarize my feelings about the product in the opening paragraph. That said, I stand by the content of the review, and take issue with your suggestion that it is lacking in "accuracy."
I think you are simply getting more defensive. Your expression that Apple cut corners with this product was clearly inaccurate, for the reasons pointed out by many readers. To be honest, the constant references in the article to imagined corners cut came across as unnecessary sour grapes - except for the 29W charger, which does seem like Apple cutting corners, the other points were not valid, imho.
That the 2017 iPad provides better value is your personal opinion and you are certainly entitled to that. But, for someone like me (and, dare I say, a few others on this forum) looking for a Pro model with higher capabilities, it's really an apples and oranges comparison and kind of irrelevant when you are reviewing the higher end model. Case in point, I am getting the $329 iPad for my aged parents and the 10.5" iPad Pro for myself as my primary work computer as I am always on the go. So, it's not as if your readers are unaware of the relative merits and capabilities of each product.
Not getting defensive. Just engaging with readers and answering questions/concerns about my review.
As for the "relative merits and capabilities of each product" -- no, most of my readers are not necessarily aware of those. Commenters are, sure. And commenters are also likely the type of people who made up their mind about this product as soon as it was announced. The vast majority of AI readers are not commenters, and I would guess that the majority of people looking for buying advice from my review are not as well versed on the differences between the $330 iPad and $650 iPad Pro as commenters are.
You certainly are right . Most people don't really understand the differences. I find myself explaining things all the time.
about the charger, something I was going to comment on in my post, but forgot. While I don't think that Apple should include a $49 charger, and a more expensive cable, because that would bring the price higher, I do have an idea for that. What I've been thinking since I bought mine last year, and did buy that charger and cable, is that Apple should charge for the standard versions, but not include them in the box. For say, $29 more, you could select the 29 watt charger and the USB C cable instead. Otherwise the standard model would be included.I know that would seem to complicate shipping. But I have a design for the box that would allow an accessory box to be slipped inside.
While it goes somewhat against Apple's simplicity, I like your idea — and it's not without precedent. Apple offers the option to choose between a Magic Trackpad and Magic Mouse upon checkout with an iMac, you don't have to buy both.
This is why I was disappointed when Apple stopped letting users mix and match watch bands with new Apple Watch purchases. Sure, it makes logistics easier, but if I'm buying a new watch and I already have a sport band for my old one, I don't want to get another sport band. It would be nice to expand my band collection and not have duplicates.
Lol. Interesting the bizarre disparity of opinion...
I read this blurb on 9to5: “The new iPad Pro, however, concedes nothing to price. It’s an all-in product that cuts no corners”
Buuuuut, on this site:
“with a $649 starting price, Apple cuts just a few too many corners for our liking”
I own one & love it (though, I’m straining to try to see the display differences that these reviewers call “obvious”).... so I was REALLY curious what corners they felt were cut- after reading like 30 paragraphs of praise, I finally came across the note that they thought Apple should’ve included the faster charger. Thats the “few too many corners” AI is talking about I guess.
sheesh..... talk about nit-picking!
You left out the parts where I note that the $650 entry price is $150 more than the new flagship iPad cost for years. Or where I say the $329 iPad offers more value to consumers (a product we rated higher at 4.5/5 stars). Or where I said that to get the most out of this iPad you would have to spend closer to $981. Or where I say that Smart Connector support is lacking and Apple should push third parties to create more options, since only Logitech is making devices for it.
4 out of 5 is an excellent score for an excellent product. But there are clear, simple ways Apple could improve the product without the need for a theoretical A11X chip or 16MP camera or iOS 12. Hence the score, and the comment about cut corners.
None of your points, except the charger, seem to fit the definition of a cut corner.
A higher price is not a corner cut.
The fact another product offers better value is not a corner cut.
Separetly priced accessories, which are needed only by a portion of the market, is not a corner cut.
Lack of third-party support for the Smart connector is not a corner cut. The smart connector still does what it does, offers the capability it was designed to offer, regardless of whether many third parties have taken advantage of it. If in six months a pile of third parties have created accessories that connect to it, will you say that Apple has now tacked that corner back on, when the functionality of the connector has not changed at all? Makes no sense to call this a cut corner.
Call them whatever you want -- cut corners, shortcomings, flaws, etc. We're focusing on one phrase used in one paragraph of a lengthy (and by the way, extremely positive) review.
I wanted to get across in the opening paragraph that there were simple things Apple could have done to improve the product out of the box. The lede serves to summarize the piece in a simple and concise way. Obviously when you boil thousands of words down into two sentences, some meaning is lost.
If issue is taken with my use of the words "cut corners," so be it. I was just attempting to explain that the $650 price is steep, and many customers will be equally served by the $330 iPad.
It's not really a question of 'taking an issue' though, is it? Your use of the phrase 'cut corner' is clearly wrong. I don't think anyone is saying that these issues shouldn't be highlighted; what folk are saying is that they should be described correctly.
I read the article twice and came away thinking, 'So where the hell were all these cut corners then?'
The lack of third party support for the smart connect is not a cut corner. A hike in price is not a cut corner. The only thing mentioned here that could be described as a cut corner is the low power charger, which as shortcomings go gets a 'meh, whatever' from me.
Accuracy is important, whether you're a blogger or a journalist. A few folk here feel the same way, which is why they pointed this out.
I will concede that, in hindsight, I could have used a better figure of speech to summarize my feelings about the product in the opening paragraph. That said, I stand by the content of the review, and take issue with your suggestion that it is lacking in "accuracy."
I think you are simply getting more defensive. Your expression that Apple cut corners with this product was clearly inaccurate, for the reasons pointed out by many readers. To be honest, the constant references in the article to imagined corners cut came across as unnecessary sour grapes - except for the 29W charger, which does seem like Apple cutting corners, the other points were not valid, imho.
That the 2017 iPad provides better value is your personal opinion and you are certainly entitled to that. But, for someone like me (and, dare I say, a few others on this forum) looking for a Pro model with higher capabilities, it's really an apples and oranges comparison and kind of irrelevant when you are reviewing the higher end model. Case in point, I am getting the $329 iPad for my aged parents and the 10.5" iPad Pro for myself as my primary work computer as I am always on the go. So, it's not as if your readers are unaware of the relative merits and capabilities of each product.
Not getting defensive. Just engaging with readers and answering questions/concerns about my review.
As for the "relative merits and capabilities of each product" -- no, most of my readers are not necessarily aware of those. Commenters are, sure. And commenters are also likely the type of people who made up their mind about this product as soon as it was announced. The vast majority of AI readers are not commenters, and I would guess that the majority of people looking for buying advice from my review are not as well versed on the differences between the $330 iPad and $650 iPad Pro as commenters are.
You certainly are right . Most people don't really understand the differences. I find myself explaining things all the time.
about the charger, something I was going to comment on in my post, but forgot. While I don't think that Apple should include a $49 charger, and a more expensive cable, because that would bring the price higher, I do have an idea for that. What I've been thinking since I bought mine last year, and did buy that charger and cable, is that Apple should charge for the standard versions, but not include them in the box. For say, $29 more, you could select the 29 watt charger and the USB C cable instead. Otherwise the standard model would be included.I know that would seem to complicate shipping. But I have a design for the box that would allow an accessory box to be slipped inside.
While it goes somewhat against Apple's simplicity, I like your idea — and it's not without precedent. Apple offers the option to choose between a Magic Trackpad and Magic Mouse upon checkout with an iMac, you don't have to buy both.
This is why I was disappointed when Apple stopped letting users mix and match watch bands with new Apple Watch purchases. Sure, it makes logistics easier, but if I'm buying a new watch and I already have a sport band for my old one, I don't want to get another sport band. It would be nice to expand my band collection and not have duplicates.
I totally agree about the bands. I bought the black SS model with the SS bracelet. One reason was because it's almost impossible to buy it otherwise, as it's almost always out of stock. In fact, most of the bands are almost always out of stock. That's got to change. I've got several bands from them, and some bands from other vendors. They're all nice. But I just am really annoyed when I go in and want to buy a band, and they don't have it.
ordinarily, Apple has this stuff covered. But I just don't see them really understanding the concept of selling watch/jewelry items. They need to give a choice of bands. If necessary, someone should be able to put that band on the watch for people. It's not rocket science!
I have the Series 2. It's not likely I'll buy another one this year, assuming there's a new model, but possibly, depending on what Apple does, next year. I don't want another black SS band, so I'll keep mine, and do something with the older watch with a different band, possibly give it away. But what bands would come with the new one? Hopefully, not only ones I don't like. Fortunately, I can afford to throw a $50 band in the draw if I don't like it, but I know that's an issue for many people.
While I don't think 'cut corners' accurately reflects the content in the body of the article, I understood what the controversial line was meant to express nonetheless. I try not to let sometimes imprecise language rankle me if I understand it in context, but I understand people taking issue with it. None of these suggested alternative expressions are exactly equivalent, most perhaps too general, and their only benefit might be that they don't refer to 'cut corners':
But with a $649 starting price, there remain a few areas Apple could improve upon, especially when compared to the value proposition of the recently released $329 9.7-inch iPad.
But with a $649 starting price, there are a few features Apple could include, especially when compared to the value proposition of the recently released $329 9.7-inch iPad.
But with a $649 starting price, we take issue with what is included, especially when compared to the value proposition of the recently released $329 9.7-inch iPad.
But with a $649 starting price, we question whether it is a great value, especially when compared to the recently released $329 9.7-inch iPad.
But with a $649 starting price, we think there are a few actions Apple could take to make it a better value, especially when compared to the recently released $329 9.7-inch iPad.
But with a $649 starting price, when compared to the recently released $329 9.7-inch iPad, Apple should include a 29-watt power adapter to make it a better value.
I agree with others that iPad Pro and iPad are targeted to different markets. Whether one device is of greater value than the other depends on the needs and resources of the individual and any attempt at direct objective comparisons I think misses the point. As a pro device I think the iPad Pro offers great value, with the iPad a great choice for those on a budget. Both the iPad Pro and iPad will only increase in value with the release of iOS 11. Apart from any price/value argument, the 29-watt power adapter is a better fit for a pro device.
My biggest concern regarding price has nothing to do with Apple but concerns the strength of the U.S. dollar compared to international currencies. For instance, comparing the three Wi-Fi 10.5 inch and 12.9 inch storage tiers for the U.S. and Canada without accessories:
This has been the best reviewed, and most universally praised Apple product I've seen in a while. Literally every single review I've read or watched has concluded it's a product that's "essentially perfect". Not bad.
As Soli mentioned, I think it is ludicrous that Apple's "Pro" iPad (and top phone model!) will not connect or charge out of the box to its "Pro" laptop. This, from a company that has a history and reputation for aggressively adopting (or dropping) I/O standards.
Having just bought a MacBook Pro, I won't replace my original retina iPad until it has USB-C.
Apple, please get your laptop and iOS hardware teams together and sort this out!!
Apple wouldn't want to deprive you of the joy of going to an Apple Store to buy that Lightning to USB-C cord.
My biggest concern regarding price has nothing to do with Apple but concerns the strength of the U.S. dollar compared to international currencies. For instance, comparing the three Wi-Fi 10.5 inch and 12.9 inch storage tiers for the U.S. and Canada without accessories:
10.5 inch U.S.: $649, $749, $949
10.5 inch CAN: $869, $999, $1259
12.9 inch U.S.: $799, $899, $1099
12.9 inch CAN: $1049, $1179, $1439
On average, that's a north of 30% increase.
If you convert the currency the pricing is fair.
10.5": $657.39, $755.73, $952.48, which is slightly more than the US price. 12.9": $793.555, $891.89, $1,088.59, which is slightly less than the US price.
Comments
when you add in the Pencil, Keyboard, and USB charger you have a laptop price product. I'm waiting for mouse/trackpad support in iOS . That will probably be 4 years away. I expect this product to sell well in the first year and then fall off in the second year.
In term of hardware, 4K+ OLED screens would be a nice upgrade in 2 years. At least add multiUser support to iOS for the Pro . Multiple user support (family accounts) need to extend across all of Apple's products including voice recognition on the upcomimg HomePods for Siri (as Google Home does.
WWDC was great . Lots of product coming out because they put Titan on hold. WWDC tag line should be "Desperately seeking Siri" as Apple tries to show they aren't falling behind everyone else.
The Pro is $150 more than last year's normal iPad, and with that comes high-end features like 1) 64gb storage, 2) TrueTone display, 3) 120Hz refresh rate, 3) brighter screen, 4) P3 color gamut, 5) faster processor, etc.. In short -- you get stuff. Is the stuff you get worth the "$150 more" than the old flagship cost? That depends on your budget of course, but I certainly think so, especially since it's less than my iPhone and is going to last me a lot longer.
Cheaper than iPhone. Lasts longer. More stuff than ever. Come on.
Bravo! Well said.
Are most buyers in need of the high-end model? Of anything? Probably not, so I really don't know why you're banging that drum. Review the product that's offered for who it's offered... It's like you were reviewing a Mercedes and complaining that it costs more than a Toyota. Wuuut? Not the market, man.
Bingo, exactly. Getting my mom the $350 model, and the Pro for me, because I have more demanding use cases than my mother. Different products, different use cases, different prices. This is normal.
i swear, doesn't anyone understand costs and pricing? When I was manufacturing electronics, I had, along with my engineers and accountants, to consider every penny of increased costs. $649 happens to be a very good price for what we're getting here, and some other writers have acknowledged that.
i'd also like to say that the new Surface Pro models no longer include the stylus, and the stylus now has angular support and 4,096 levels. It also also,costs $100, the same as the Pencil (with just 256 levels, come on Apple, that's no longer acceptable), as opposed to last year's replacement price of $60. So people can no longer complain that the Pencil is so much more than others.
Microsoft is now claiming a 20ms lag as well, so Apple can't say theirs is the least. But, I've found, with my new iPad Pro 12.9", that in practical use, the difference between my 2015 model and this isn't so vast that it seriously affects my use. It looks great in demos, but you very quickly get used to the little lag the older model has. Possibly, once lag gets down to 5ms, we'll no longer notice it at all, and maybe that will make a difference. The screen does have a tiny amount of drag though, and for those to whom that matters, that will make them happy.
i see that Apple is shipping the 10.5 model to reviewers, and I suppose that's because it's the really new model, and as it's smaller, and cheaper, possibly they think it will sell better. Possibly, they also find that certain performance factors on the 10.5 are better, and more impressive. I've spoken to my guys at Apple, and have been told that the GPU on both is exactly the same, as is the speed at which they run. That accounts for the fact that on the 10.5, ProMotion is more fluid when scrolling than it is on my 12.9, where text does blur, though not as much as it does on my 2015 unit. There are a lot more pixels to push around, and screen refresh rates aren't the only factor in this. Don't get me wrong, it's definitely better though. It will take the A11x next year to make the 12.9 as silky smooth as the 10.5 is today.
i find that the power of the model is very much in evidence in software that needs it. AutoCAD is very noticeably faster. But then, AutoDesk has always been good at taking advantage of whatever power the iPad offers. I bought Affinity, the photo editing app shown on stage. This is surprisingly complete in features. It works very well, and shows why all this extra power is needed. They just came out with an update that kills a lot of little bugs, and increases stability, major complaints from users. I haven't noticed any real problems so far, and can easily recommend this app. It's $19.95, and if that frightens people off, I can just say to get over it, that's damn cheap for a full featured app.
a number of other drawing, painting and editing apps have all benefitted from the new power here, and that's from my own experience using them for almost a week now (mine arrived last Tuesday).
while, from the front, you can't tell the difference between this one and last year's, you can from the back, because of the new camera, flash and tiny microphone placement differences. But also, if you have the LTE version, the plastic window over the transmitter antennas now matches the color of the aluminum case. It's no longer black. It matches pretty perfectly, and looks very good. This model of the 12.9 is actually a little bit lighter, though it's almost impossible to tell. Since there's a bigger battery, I'll take any weight reduction I can get. My first iPad, bought in May, 2010, the first day it came out, with LTE weighed 1.75 pounds. That this 12.9 model, with LTE weighs 1.5 pounds is incredible.
even though I've only played with the 10.5 at my Apple Store near me for about 30 minutes, I highly recommend either. And despite what I read here, the pricing is more than fair. There are professional models. If they are too expensive for someone, then perhaps that person doesn't need them. But if you do, this is the only way to go. Professionals will find that their accountants can depreciate them over three years, taking much of the sting out of the price, which, really, for a professional computer, actually isn't that much.
I don't see the Pencil "blowing them away". I like the Pencil, and it works very well.
As for the "relative merits and capabilities of each product" -- no, most of my readers are not necessarily aware of those. Commenters are, sure. And commenters are also likely the type of people who made up their mind about this product as soon as it was announced. The vast majority of AI readers are not commenters, and I would guess that the majority of people looking for buying advice from my review are not as well versed on the differences between the $330 iPad and $650 iPad Pro as commenters are.
about the charger, something I was going to comment on in my post, but forgot. While I don't think that Apple should include a $49 charger, and a more expensive cable, because that would bring the price higher, I do have an idea for that. What I've been thinking since I bought mine last year, and did buy that charger and cable, is that Apple should charge for the standard versions, but not include them in the box. For say, $29 more, you could select the 29 watt charger and the USB C cable instead. Otherwise the standard model would be included.I know that would seem to complicate shipping. But I have a design for the box that would allow an accessory box to be slipped inside.
While it goes somewhat against Apple's simplicity, I like your idea — and it's not without precedent. Apple offers the option to choose between a Magic Trackpad and Magic Mouse upon checkout with an iMac, you don't have to buy both.
This is why I was disappointed when Apple stopped letting users mix and match watch bands with new Apple Watch purchases. Sure, it makes logistics easier, but if I'm buying a new watch and I already have a sport band for my old one, I don't want to get another sport band. It would be nice to expand my band collection and not have duplicates.
ordinarily, Apple has this stuff covered. But I just don't see them really understanding the concept of selling watch/jewelry items. They need to give a choice of bands. If necessary, someone should be able to put that band on the watch for people. It's not rocket science!
I have the Series 2. It's not likely I'll buy another one this year, assuming there's a new model, but possibly, depending on what Apple does, next year. I don't want another black SS band, so I'll keep mine, and do something with the older watch with a different band, possibly give it away. But what bands would come with the new one? Hopefully, not only ones I don't like. Fortunately, I can afford to throw a $50 band in the draw if I don't like it, but I know that's an issue for many people.
My biggest concern regarding price has nothing to do with Apple but concerns the strength of the U.S. dollar compared to international currencies. For instance, comparing the three Wi-Fi 10.5 inch and 12.9 inch storage tiers for the U.S. and Canada without accessories:
Thanks Neil for the review.
10.5": $657.39, $755.73, $952.48, which is slightly more than the US price.
12.9": $793.555, $891.89, $1,088.59, which is slightly less than the US price.