Apple Posts iOS 6.0.1 Downloads for Cellular-Capable iPad Mini and Fourth-Generation iPad

[lunaoso]

Originally Posted by Mr. Gates

You, my friend......Have WAAAAYYYY too much spare time .

Or I'm just curious. Not like I'm losing sleep on it.

[wimdows]

Originally Posted by lunaoso

Why is the forth gen iPad still using the 3,x identifier? They didn't make it 4,x? Just curious if anyone knows.

Err...because it's nothing more than a spec bump?

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by wimdows

Err...because it's nothing more than a spec bump?

All the iPads since the first rev are "nothing more" than spec bumps.

[wimdows]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

All the iPads since the first rev are "nothing more" than spec bumps.

They are more than just spec bumps. There are differences in internal design (due to battery size) and physical display design.

iPad 1 - rev 1
iPad 2 - rev 2 (different (thinner & lighter) design)
iPad Retina (3rd gen) rev 3,1 (different (thicker) design+bigger battery and overhauled display - that's not just a spec bump)
iPad Retina (4th gen) rev 3,2 same design, screen etc. = spec bump

[RedOrchestra]

.

HOPEFULLY, with the update to iOS 6.0.1, the disappearing emails on my iPad 3 will no longer disappear!

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by wimdows

They are more than just spec bumps. There are differences in internal design (due to battery size) and physical display design.

iPad 1 - rev 1
iPad 2 - rev 2 (different (thinner & lighter) design)
iPad Retina (3rd gen) rev 3,1 (different (thicker) design+bigger battery and overhauled display - that's not just a spec bump)
iPad Retina (4th gen) rev 3,2 same design, screen etc. = spec bump

I'll concede the jump from the iPad 1 to the 2 was pretty substantial, but the 3 and 4 are more spec bumps to the 2. The jump from the 2 to the 3 was relatively small hardware-wise, with most of the changes being made to compensate for the retina display (which I'd argue is a spec bump, though a substantial one). The 4 is a huge performance boost over the 3, but it still follows the same basic formula started with the 2.

The iPad line follows Apple's usual upgrade path. The first rev is the rough experimental design, the second rev is the streamlined version, with all other releases afterwards building upon it.

[Kwill]

Originally Posted by faroZ06

The iPad mini should also be able to have phone service if it's going to possibly replace car systems.

I didn't realize when the thread veered into a discussion about the iPad replacing car systems.

BTW, there's an app for that called Whistle (http://bit.ly/LP0Xq7). It's not a practical replacement for a fully functional phone, particularly when you use a locked screen. But it can give your iPad the ability to make phone calls and be paired via BT with a car system. I would say Whistle is a good thing to have for an emergency call when your regular mobile phone is out of juice, lost or forgotten.

[EmpireITtech]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

I'll concede the jump from the iPad 1 to the 2 was pretty substantial, but the 3 and 4 are more spec bumps to the 2. The jump from the 2 to the 3 was relatively small hardware-wise, with most of the changes being made to compensate for the retina display (which I'd argue is a spec bump, though a substantial one). The 4 is a huge performance boost over the 3, but it still follows the same basic formula started with the 2.

The iPad line follows Apple's usual upgrade path. The first rev is the rough experimental design, the second rev is the streamlined version, with all other releases afterwards building upon it.

Yea, I think this is what frustrates many Apple users out there bc it seems that each device is very similar to the previous one and not many revolutionary ideas have hit the iOS sector in awhile. Not that totally agree with that, but that seems to be what I see and hear from some

[mikeray]

No sir, the 3 was a total rebuild, and they spent a lot of time making it feel like a spec bump

Originally Posted by Renzatic

I'll concede the jump from the iPad 1 to the 2 was pretty substantial, but the 3 and 4 are more spec bumps to the 2. The jump from the 2 to the 3 was relatively small hardware-wise, with most of the changes being made to compensate for the retina display (which I'd argue is a spec bump, though a substantial one). The 4 is a huge performance boost over the 3, but it still follows the same basic formula started with the 2.

The iPad line follows Apple's usual upgrade path. The first rev is the rough experimental design, the second rev is the streamlined version, with all other releases afterwards building upon it.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by mikeray

No sir, the 3 was a total rebuild, and they spent a lot of time making it feel like a spec bump

Eh, I disagree. We're getting down to the hair splitting here, but if you really want to get technical, you could almost call the 3 the iPad 2S. It uses the same SOC, just boosted up with a couple extra cores to the GPU and an extra 512MB ram thrown in to support the higher demands of the retina display. The biggest changes were due to the larger battery, which is why it's slightly thicker and heavier than the 2. It's more a tweak than a complete redesign.

Originally Posted by EmpireITtech

Yea, I think this is what frustrates many Apple users out there bc it seems that each device is very similar to the previous one and not many revolutionary ideas have hit the iOS sector in awhile. Not that totally agree with that, but that seems to be what I see and hear from some

I think that has more to do with our overly enthusiastic expectations than Apple letting us all down. We've all kinda built ourselves up expecting each new iDevice to melt our brains every generation, but after awhile, things become good enough, and all Apple can do is fine tune the original formula. After awhile, even the once revolutionary iPhone and iPad will find themselves on the same spec bump treadmill as the Mac line.

Not that that's a bad thing. No single company can completely revolutionize their product line year after year. They'd go broke in the attempt, and piss everyone off because they keep changing stuff all the time.

...though admittedly, it would be kinda nice if they spiced up iOS a bit. It's starting to look a little overly simplistic in comparison to what we've seeing from Google and MS here recently.

[BayAreaCub]

I received my ipad mini this last Friday and I'ts going back tomorrow. Considering the fact I have an ipad three with retina display the I pad mini screen is a major let down. Love the form factor and will wait for a mini with retina display.

[haruhiko]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

All the iPads since the first rev are "nothing more" than spec bumps.

iPad 1 - basically an enlarged 3GS, with the same CPU & GPU packaged into the A4 with higher clock speed (1GHz vs 6xxMHz) with no cams, 256MB RAM only, thick case, 1024 x 768 resolution

iPad 2 - much thinner and lighter design, dual-core CPU, much better GPU, doubled RAM to 512MB, 2 cameras, available in white.

iPad 3 - retina display with stunning 2048 x 1536 resolution with 100% color gamut, same battery life, more RAM (1GB; it does matter when you browse several large websites), upgraded rear camera to that of the iPhone 4 (5MP), Bluetooth 4.0 support.

iPad 4 - Updated CPU/GPU with 2x performance although with same amount of RAM. Better front camera, WiFi chip update, baseband chip update for global LTE

So iPad 4 is a bit more than spec bump but much less of an improvement than previous models.