Bloomberg: iPad 3 in March with retina display, quad core chip
- Thread starter giga
- Start date
- Status
WordAssassin
Member
Just read about the A5X and A6 chip, plus the "leaked" price chart with the iPad 2 ($499) VS the iPad 3 ($579).
My first thought was, "Well this is obviously not real because they wouldn't keep selling last year's model at the current price while introducing the new one slightly higher, there's got to be a drop somewhere."
Which made me think: iPad 2S and iPad 3?
iPad 2S is just an iPad 2 with the A5X chip in it, maybe a few other tweaks, sold at the $499 price point, and the iPad 3 has the A6 chip in it, new shell, retina display, all the normal upgrades, for $579.
What's everyone think of that possibility? Or would that only serve to fragment the shit out of the iPad line?
My first thought was, "Well this is obviously not real because they wouldn't keep selling last year's model at the current price while introducing the new one slightly higher, there's got to be a drop somewhere."
Which made me think: iPad 2S and iPad 3?
iPad 2S is just an iPad 2 with the A5X chip in it, maybe a few other tweaks, sold at the $499 price point, and the iPad 3 has the A6 chip in it, new shell, retina display, all the normal upgrades, for $579.
What's everyone think of that possibility? Or would that only serve to fragment the shit out of the iPad line?
Lots of cool tech. Believe me, I wish every iPad had a wacom digitizer!
What holds it all back, though, is that it's just that - hardware. Apple's execution works because they keep the platform dead-simple in terms of upgrades (Apple sells a regular update, but a singular one, giving it console-esque reliability) allowing the developer marketplace time to catch up and invent as they go. I don't have the time or money to develop for every type of Android set, and every resolution and every special feature, so what do I do? I aim for the minimum spec and maximum audience.
Google does a good job of introducing new OS versions and fighting the fight from their end, but without any sort of control over the hardware that comes out, it's always going to be a tough slog figuring out what tablets/handsets you want to support.
Yeah, I can appreciate that from a developers point of view - heck, as a budding
But, that being said, I very much appreciate the competition in the Android space, hardware wise - I just think the hardware developers need to step up their software game (specifically, keeping up to date with OS updates). I'm a patient guy though, hopefully the ecosystem in general will keep improving.
I'm holding out for a tablet with a wacom digitizer, like the 10.1 Note, and a keyboard dock like the transformer line. It doesn't seem so crazy anymore.
Kabuki Quantum Lover
Member
It's a possibility, but I can't imagine the production strains of producing a new variant of the iPad2 platform in conjunction with a higher-spec iPad3. Production lines are going to be strained for a very long time.
Technosteve
Banned
I think It should be called Apple reality distortion display with Infinite resolution
That actually sounds amazing, and is what I thought upon seeing this stuff. Putting a beefed up A5X in the cheap model would significantly boost the install base for the next generation of apps and keep people on a more even plain, performance wise, even if the 2S doesn't have retina.
Except it then puts 3 "higher" end versions out in the market - 2, 2S, and 3. Apple won't do that with something like the iPad. There is no reason to believe they won't drop the iPad 2 to $399 and keep the base iPad3 at $499. Apple has ALWAYS kept their base prices the same (at least recently), if not lower them.
jts
...hate me...
They can also simply drop the 2.
It's true they generally keep the prices stable, and just introduce new tech. However, if there is actually a generational leap in technology, they will increase the price, but not without keeping something else at the same price point. Is the retina display alone enough to bump price? I don't think so.
As for dropping prices, they only really do that if there is very little generational improvement. That said, with some pressure, they may feel they need to have a more entry level model, which would be perfect for dropping the ipad2 down a tier or two.
As for dropping prices, they only really do that if there is very little generational improvement. That said, with some pressure, they may feel they need to have a more entry level model, which would be perfect for dropping the ipad2 down a tier or two.
I don't think it will happen, just that it would be cool. In my hypothesis, they would drop the original iPad 2 but yeah, you make a good point.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
So Best Buys are cutting $50 off all iPad 2 now.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/iPad-Tablets/iPad/pcmcat209000050007.c?id=pcmcat209000050007
It's getting close. I can feel it...
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/iPad-Tablets/iPad/pcmcat209000050007.c?id=pcmcat209000050007
It's getting close. I can feel it...
Slurpy2k20
Member
I just don't see the benefit of going this route. Might as well leave the iPad 2 as is- it's already very capable, and drop it a hundred bucks. Apple usually likes to laser focus the publics attention to one model. Diluting that by coming out with 2 different models is confusing, and very un-Apple like. Unnecessary fragmentation.
Didn't they modify the 3GS post iPhone 4?
What I suspect is they'd do the same thing here ... basically cost reduce the iPad 2. Whether they'd actually call it a iPad 2S is the question. Unless they are doing some improvements on it (which seems pointless), I think they'll just keep it named the iPad 2 and sell it alongside the new rev. That would not be fragmentation.
No.
Didn't they reduce the storage to 8GB?
So for those of you that have gotten a day 1 iPad 2, what is the best place to buy from to ensure you get one?
I waited and then when I wanted one, a couple months later, I couldn't get one anywhere so I just bought the iPad 1 at AAFES at 50 dollars off and no tax. This time, I want the iPad3 on day 1 (as long as it has LTE).
I waited and then when I wanted one, a couple months later, I couldn't get one anywhere so I just bought the iPad 1 at AAFES at 50 dollars off and no tax. This time, I want the iPad3 on day 1 (as long as it has LTE).
I think you're correct.
Whoops. Yes.
I misread the post I was quoting. I thought he was saying the 3GS specs were improved after the 4 was announced and that they would do the same with the iPad 2.
I'm pretty sure they reduced internal storage and did a die-shrink on the SOC (65nm to 45nm). Probably other changes we aren't aware of.
Analyst supply checks, so take with a grain, but makes sense: http://allthingsd.com/20120227/ipad...ular-a5x-chip-while-apple-works-on-its-quads/
About the Austin factory: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/16/us-apple-samsung-idUSTRE7BF0D420111216
About the Austin factory: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/16/us-apple-samsung-idUSTRE7BF0D420111216
Bboy AJ
My dog was murdered by a 3.5mm audio port and I will not rest until the standard is dead
That's a letdown. Well, as long as there's plenty of RAM, I'll be alright.
Sounds like the iPhone 4S/5 rumor mill all over again.
Brace yourselves for an un-retina, iPad 2S.
jts
...hate me...
The display exists.
Why? The current A5 is pretty much on par with the Tegra 3 in general performance and outpaces it in graphical performance. If you were expecting a Cortex-A15, then that's a different problem.
JonathanPower
Member
Am I the only one who is hoping they will make a 12" model ? I think that 10" is too small to really surf the web and that 12" would be the sweet spot...
If they even would use them for it.
shira
Member
But, but, but, to make it retina it would take like 9000x4000 dpi
So the iPad 2 is close to the Tegra 3 in performance?
So my choices are:
Cheaper iPad 2
or
Transformer Prime
Or wait for the iPad 2S (or iPad 3). Sigh.
Why do we need quad core tablets? I've played around with my Amazon Fire and my work's iPad 2 (I work in a library. They thought it was a good idea to buy an iPad 2 for the public to use in the library) and they're pretty fast. The Fire's problems stem from the software.
What percentage of the iPad's apps are iPad 2 only anyway?
JCreasy
Member
Al-ibn Kermit
Junior Member
The individual CPU cores of the tegra 3 aren't much faster but having twice the number of cores makes multitasking apps more smooth. I still think the iPad3 is probably going to be a quadcore with the same A9 cores as the tegra 3.
Apps don't even use CPU cycles in the background on iOS, so that's moot.
Al-ibn Kermit
Junior Member
I thought that was only for third-party apps?
First party apps aren't really cpu intensive.
Bboy AJ
My dog was murdered by a 3.5mm audio port and I will not rest until the standard is dead
I expected octocore.
I really don't care. I just want to browse the web properly. That's all I care about. No stuttering when scrolling on a web page, no massive lag when it's image heavy, and no more got damn browser crashing and tab reloading. I actively avoid clicking unknown sites on my iPad for fear of Safari crashing.
OG user.
shira
Member
I think if it is a quad in March there will be less chance for a mid-year refresh.
Mid year refresh of what, iPad?
Dude, quit acting like such a damn fool. Do you really think Jobs specifically picked the dpi/ppi for the retina display on the iPhone 4?
All they did was double the resolution of the 3GS, therefore quadrupling the pixels on the screen. The dpi/ppi they got was just the result of doubling the resolution. Jobs always wanted things to be neat, clean, and simple. Doubling the res let app creators easily increase the res of their apps perfectly by doubling everything. It let old iPhone apps scale perfectly to the new one.
The iPad 3 is following exactly what Jobs wanted. The screen resolution is doubled, and the pixels quadrupled. The dpi/ppi this time just happens to be less because of the screen size, but it's not what Jobs cared about. He cared about making the transition to this better screen as smooth as possible, and thanks to the double res, old apps will scale perfect, and new ones will be easily made. If Cook had made the res some random number just so the dpi/ppi would match the iPhone, that would be messing with Jobs' vision. Apps would scale all wrong, and it would be a pain in the ass for app creators to update their graphics to the new res, something I'm certain Jobs would never want.
So, chill the fuck out man. You really have no idea what you're talking about.
While you are certainly correct in why they chose the resolutions they did, they actually did have a very specific performance target in mind when they coined the term 'retina display'.
In all likelihood they would have increased the size of the screen had they not cared about about the marketing potential in what they were doing.
Pagusas
Elden Member
Do you honestly believe Jobs wasnt deeply in the iPad 3 development before he died? I guarantee you probably even in the very first iphone 4 meeting where they talked about screen resolution, they also talked about how they would carry that over to the ipad eventually and up its resolution. the "retina" display is ALL MARKETING TALK. that's all it ever was, Jobs was a marketing genius and knew how to coin phrases and turn stats into memorable key words. Was there a deeper meaning behind the idea of such a high dpi? Sure. But its silly to ever think the marketing catch phrase they used some how has tied jobs to a singular concept of what a resolution increase should be.
jts
...hate me...
Nah, in this resolution-independent Apple dreamt world of iOS, keeping the screen at 3,5" isn't about enlarging the pixel density but about not creating a new interface size, that would require a total rework of all apps, assets, SDK, etc.
I'm not on the boat that says that there will never be an iPhone with a screen larger than 3,5", but if there ever will, it will be a HUGE decision by Apple. Never an afterthought.
I'll certainly agree Jobs was a marketing genius, but disagree on the rest. First off, I've never claimed this somehow tied Apple to some singular concept of anything. What I'm saying is the specific marketing phrase most certainly is tied to a singular concept.
If you look back when 'retina' was announced, it wasn't just a simple marketing slogan. An actual concept was ingrained to it - that at the expected viewing distance, this display is the maximum amount of detail that the human retina can perceive. Basically the gut check is that a curve will no longer appear to have pixels, it will actually be perceived as a natural arc. The math involved was eventually divulged (57 arcseconds or better), but the point here is that there was a very specific claim tied to the marketing slogan. It wasn't just your typical trademark. It had an actual specification inherently tied to it ... and was quite actively marketed with said meaning.
When this all transpired, there was A TON of discussion, arguments, even some backlash. Many claimed their target was not truly what it needed to be, and the situation remained in the media and forums for quite some time. Once the dust had settled most generally agreed the target is 'good enough', though there were still plenty that continued to bitch and moan.
Now had they made their claims, and had an even higher arcseconds target, we'd probably still be discussing this shit about their current lineup. Basically the media backlash would have been HUGE. The point here is that if they were to now bring out a device and claim it has a 'retina display' ... and it doesn't meet the target they themselves evangelized ... it will get slaughtered in the press.
Oh you may be quite right on this. Let me rephrase what I was getting at.
I'm not saying they necessarily stuck with that size just to hit their arcsecond goal. What I'm saying is the would have never marketed 'retina display' had that goal not been reached. Well who knows ... they may have still called it retina display, but they certainly wouldn't have made the specific claims that went along with it. They would have been destroyed in the media.
Jayayess1190
Member
So, iPad 4 is where its at?
What does that even mean?
- Status