tewha

wizard69 said:

They have literally taken cue from the video card makers and given us a new model with nothing of real value added.  

You don't have to upgrade from a 2018 iPad Pro. This gives those upgrading from previous models (or even purchasing their first iPad) a model that will probably have a longer useful life for them.

Not everything is for you.

ylon said:

From a technical side and OS design standpoint, this is not necessary.

No, because Apple did something smart. Back in Mac OS X 10.5 with Objective-C 2.0 they used the 32-to-64 bit transition to hide some big changes to the OS — most noticeably, the ability to make changes to classes under applications: Classes are no longer fragile. Rather than introduce a second version of 32-bit and make developers pick which to target, they just left it alone and moved on with 64-bit code. This meant that maintaining those classes was going to be a pain. Either they didn't update them at all, they came up with ways to update them just for 64-bit, or they came up with a way to patch in 32-bit support.

None of that is a big deal in the short term, but there comes a point where that game has to end and you need to move on. The new runtime went public in late 2007. 10 years is a long time to drag that legacy runtime behind.

dws-2 said:

The trouble with Consumer Reports is that they believe adding up all the numbers for a bunch of discrete tests actually tells you how good a product is. They don't have any Apple bias, except that Apple products tend to be more about the experience than the specifications.

Consumer Reports seems to think transparency in how bad their testing is means that scientifically accurate tests of real world scenarios are not required. Who using debugging tools to disable cache and calls that a real world scenario? Great on them for admitting they did that (eventually), but it's still not a real scenario.