disneylandman

Soli said:

ike17055 said:

Crazy. I love having a small ipod for working out, power walking etc. why do they keep killing off pieces of the I pod family? I have no intention of using an iphone for workouts.  

Have you considered an Apple Watch? It's even smaller and lighter, and you can use BT headphones, so by the time you're ready to replace your iPod you'll probably already have BT headphones, which also have a benefit of no cord flopping around.

$69 Shuffle compared to a $299+ Apple Watch and $150 Bluetooth headphones?   The watch is not smaller or lighter than a Shuffle.  Lame comparison.  No one will spend $450 to listen to music at the gym.  

iPad Pro 9.7” 256 GB.  When I bought my iPad Pro during black Friday last November, I was surprised it still had the original OS installed, iOS 9.3.  So I took screenshots of before and after from 9.3 to 10.1.1 when I first turned it on.

iOS 9.3 capacity 232 GB and 226 GB available.  Stock configuration out of the box with 6 Apple apps installed.

iOS 10.1.1 capacity 248 GB and 240.36 GB available.  Same 6 apps and 1 photo for the screenshot under iOS 9.3

iOS 10.3 capacity 252.56 GB.  Now my iPad is loaded up so I cannot give you an available capacity because I am not going to wipe it. 

The capacity from 9.3 to 10.3 has increased from 232 GB to 252.56 GB.  So the file system and other features have improved the efficiency of flash memory space.  My iPhone 7 Plus 256GB reports a capacity of 252.19 GB after upgrading to iOS 10.3.  I think under 10.2.1 it was around 248 GB.

Mike Wuerthele said:

ireland said:

You're wrong about the four speakers not worth a mention Mike. It's a big deal to some and a healthy clip better than 2-speakered iPad when in all-in-one situations—which Marco Arment would tell you for his Overcast stats is most people most of the time. Never mind facts though when you can just blame readers. And while you mentioned P3 you didn't mention True Tone.

"Your mileage, and agreement, may vary." We keep the forums open for discussions like this. Because I didn't (and still don't) think that the quad-speakers equals much of anything, doesn't mean that you all don't.

You're welcome to feel that I'm wrong -- I do, and have, made corrections! But -- I continue to stand by what's here, as-is.

Your job as a writer is supposed to be UNBIASED with regard to opinions.  You just admitted your failure as a writer.  You don't think the four speaker stereo sound in the iPad Pro "equals much of anything" so you intentionally left it out of an article that is supposed to compare features of two iPads, and to help consumers decide on which is best for them.  You let your bias and opinion affect the content of an article, and then claim that is what the comments are for.  You also left out the true tone display, so apparently you don't think that is worth mentioning either.  Your article fails to point out the differences between the two iPads, because you intentionally left out features in the Pro model that don't exist in the new cheap iPad. 

Mike Wuerthele said:

ireland said:

redgeminipa said:

ireland said:

How do we know the new iPad doesn't have a laminated display? And if it does not, why does it not? And no mention of the True Tone display, better camera and four speakers.

Read the article. It's all laid out in plain English. Apple.com clearly lists the differences. http://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/

Fair enough on the lam display. Not on other points. I laid them out in plain English too.

We did address DCI-P3. I didn't address the speaker situation, because if you're relying on the speakers on your iPad to give you audio, you're probably doing something wrong.

The four speaker stereo sound is the best sounding iPad ever.  Especially landscape mode in which the iPad is smart enough to shift the stereo sound to the sides.  Listening to anything on a previous iPad with sound only out of one side was annoying.  So don't infer that people are doing something wrong if they feel the four speaker audio in the iPad Pro is one of the selling points.  Also, the camera with flash is better than the new iPad, which lacks the flash.  The display on the iPad Pro 9.7 doubles as a flash for a quick selfie pic.  I bet the new cheap iPad lacks that feature too.  I have used both cameras in my iPad Pro during those moments when my iPhone is in another room.  I also didn't pay full price for my iPad Pro.  I saved $250 during Black Friday and an extra 5% off at Target, and then sold my original iPad Air for $350 on eBay.  

sog35 said:

I would love a Red iPad...........

I'm glad they went with the slightly thicker case in order to drop the price.

That is not why the price is lower.  It is a lower price because they are using old components from the outdated iPad Air.  Old display, old case, old parts, and old CPUs from the iPhone 6S.  It would have been a nicer upgrade with the slightly lighter and thinner iPad Air 2 case, Air 2 display, and A9.  Now they want to re-sell an iPad from 2013 and fool people into thinking it is 'new'.  Now we are back to the 90s by re-using old parts for new stuff (just like the 62xx and 63xx Performa and Power Mac days).