All iPads: won't be a retina mini till fall 2013..because A7 won't be ready for iPad 5 till then

[irDigital0l]

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

They didn't launch the iPad 4 because of competition - the only reason they didn't do a silent upgrade (due to the feature set not being something that normally warrants an announcement and big launch) is because they wanted to let everyone know the product is new and good for an entire cycle, meaning one year (typical iPad refresh cycle). They will launch all iPads, iPhones, iPods in the autumn time frame, just before the holidays from now on.

Apple needed to get a 7'' tablet into the holiday market. Apple was already using market share due to cheaper Android tablets and needed to plug the hole. It also didn't make sense for the iPad mini to have newer features than the bigger iPad so they updated it. Updating it would also make the iPad a lot more competitive to the Nexus 10 and Surface.

Again, Apple might not be able to do full 1 year cycle anymore as seen with the iPad 4. If they have to get into the market, they will. Its better to release yours early than not release any at all. Google is expected to announce a cheaper $99, upgraded Nexus 7 Q1 of 2013.

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

They are currently having stock issues with the mini, in order to get ready for a new launch they would have to stockpile for weeks or months in order to meet demand day one. They would never do that when they have so much demand for the current product they can't meet it - it's not good business to upgrade a product where demand exceeds supply for the existing product. And there is a whole conversation we could have regarding the possibility that retina can even be made to work in the mini (while retaining the mini's main "magical" attraction, it's form factor and battery life).

Component makers for the second-generation iPad mini are supposedly preparing for an earlier-than-expected time to market despite Apple not completing the iPad mini's global rollout.

As for whether it can be even accomplished, it seems reasonable that Apple already had an iPad mini with Retina display prototype. There were reports and rumors, but Apple chose to go with nonretina and instead focus on a light and cheaper product for their first generation.

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

Apple does yearly (or longer) release cycles for all its products, and this recent mini launch (and iPad 4 "tag along") was the resetting of the launch date for the iPad family. There will be no retina mini in March or Spring time.

The competition will always be doing something, but I would never use it to predict any reaction from Apple. And any price drop for the Surface is due to lack of demand.

I just can't see Apple leaving a wide-open gap for others to take over during for 9 to 10 months. The fact is they won't release any iOS product in either spring or summer if thats the case. They could loose significant marketshare as Samsung will be releasing its Galaxy S4 around May. Say what you want about it, but its become the #1 selling Android phone and has sold a ton. It used to be the big iPad, but I don't see them updating the big iPad until the fall where HTC, Google, and Microsoft are expected to release big competitors.

[lianlua]

Originally Posted by w00t951

If they put a Retina display in there, they'll probably stick with just the A7 or possibly A6. The X series are more than 40% larger in die footprint and consume a lot more power and output a lot more heat.

They need the X series if they're going to stick with an existing retina resolution and an existing SoC rather than create new variants.

Originally Posted by ThatsMeRight

A6 GPU is as powerful as the A5X's GPU. And since the iPad 3 has an A5X chip...

You're painting with too broad a brush. The SGX543 GPU is used in the A5, A5X, and A6, but not the A6X. The A6 version has one more core than the A5 and some other improvements that give it a performance boost on non-retina resolutions, but it still falls short of the memory bandwidth of the A5X. It has neither the performance nor the bandwidth of the SGX554 in the A6X, either, which by the time a retina mini is ready will already be a generation old.

A retina mini with a plain A6 doesn't make any sense. Why functionally improve every part of the mini except the GPU?

Originally Posted by w00t951

A15 isn't a CPU, it's a reference architecture licensed by ARM to other companies.

You're drawing a distinction where there is none. It's a CPU design. You can build a vanilla A15 and call it a day. A kit car is still a car.

In recent months, the A9 generation has been updated to the A15 architecture, which supports faster dual channel memory in comparison to the preceding A9.

Not so much, no. The A15 isn't a replacement for the A9. It's a different family.

The previous generation of SoCs supported ARMv7 instruction sets, and the A15 series supports ARMv7A instruction sets.

ARMv7-A has been around since at least the Cortex A8, if not longer.

The move helps take advantage of the improved memory bus of the newer SoC design.

The newer ISA doesn't really have anything to do with the "memory bus", which isn't strictly speaking part of either the instruction set or the CPU itself. ARM devices can be built with varying memory interface speeds, designs, and bandwidth and different GPU configurations to match. Look no further than the previous generation of iOS devices and all the Android tablets. All kinds of Cortex A9/ARMv7 CPUs with all kinds of memory systems and GPU variants.

The A6 series of Apple processors incorporates features of the Cortex A15 architecture into their existing A9 designs.

Yeah, it doesn't. The Apple A6 is not based on the ARM A15.

Memory bandwidth has been improved - current SoC GPUs were limited in their performance by the memory bandwidth.

Which has nothing to do with what you're talking about, and "improved" in this case means 6.4 to 8.5GBps, which is far short of the 12.8GBps of the A5X.

[MacRumorUser]

Originally Posted by FrozenDarkness

I don't quite understand this, of course Apple oped for the A5 because profits. The entire point of the mini was supposed to be an economical model and that economy does not change next year.

No. It was not supposed to be the 'economic' model (implying the 'cheaper option'.)

They clearly were not competing with 'cheap tablets', they just made a smaller ipad, not a cheap ipad.

A Retina MBP 13" isn't a budget choice compared to the 15" MBP, and likewise the ipad mini is not a budget ipad 9.7".

[gto55]

Can't apple use an A5X CPU,and maybe 1gb ram, to run a retina display for it's next iPad Mini ?

[irDigital0l]

Originally Posted by MacRumorUser

No. It was not supposed to be the 'economic' model (implying the 'cheaper option'.)

They clearly were not competing with 'cheap tablets', they just made a smaller ipad, not a cheap ipad.

But it was obvious that Apple launched the iPad mini to compete with the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD, neither which are exactly cheap as they both have some better specs than the iPad mini.

Apple could have made better specs, but their margin of profit would be low so they opted for cheaper, old components.

----------

Originally Posted by gto55

Can't apple use an A5X CPU,and maybe 1gb ram, to run a retina display for it's next iPad Mini ?

Think it will use an A6 instead of A5X. the X models are used for the larger iPad's bigger retina display screen.

[tann]

Originally Posted by gto55

Can't apple use an A5X CPU,and maybe 1gb ram, to run a retina display for it's next iPad Mini ?

The A5X vs A6 and A5 is HUGE and massively power hungry.

If they can shrink it (or something similar like A6X (provided A7X is released by next year) then they could use that and a less power hungry retina screen (IGZO or something) and they might be able to pull it off.

[Mrg02d]

What would more RAM be needed for considering the method iOS uses for multitasking?

My ipad3 has 1GB and I feel it does a fine job as is. Unless apple gets cute and allows multiview or something, more ram is wasteful.

I'd love to see useful applications that need more RAM though. I'd love a chat window that can pop up so I can talk while I surf the web, write my papers, and make my keynotes. Or how about be able to have safari open while in an app?

[MacRumorUser]

Originally Posted by irDigital0l

But it was obvious that Apple launched the iPad mini to compete with the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD, neither which are exactly cheap as they both have some better specs than the iPad mini.

No they didn't. They created a 7" iPad because people wanted a smaller iPad not because they wanted to compete with an android tablet at the bottom price range.

€229 for a 32gb nexus 7. €439 for a 32gb iPad Mini

It's like saying the Porsche 911 was created to compete with the Fiat Punto

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by irDigital0l

I just can't see Apple leaving a wide-open gap for others to take over during for 9 to 10 months. The fact is they won't release any iOS product in either spring or summer if thats the case. They could loose significant marketshare as Samsung will be releasing its Galaxy S4 around May. Say what you want about it, but its become the #1 selling Android phone and has sold a ton. It used to be the big iPad, but I don't see them updating the big iPad until the fall where HTC, Google, and Microsoft are expected to release big competitors.

I've only re-quoted the above snippet from your much longer post - the rest I'll ignore because I've already stated my position on it, and we could just go back and forth ad nauseum, which isn't so interesting - my position it out there, so is yours. However, the above quoted part of your post is very interesting (and something new to discuss), and I've got some ideas and I've got no ideas (both!). You raise a very good point - what will Apple do in the first half of next year for new products? (assuming the whole iOS product line is Autumn release)

We know the Mac Pro line is coming. Yawn. I only yawn because I'm not wealthy enough to have an amazing Mac Pro setup here of course! Although, there have been some notions expressed on this forum (not really official or unofficial rumours) that the Mac Pro line may adopt a Mac mini form factor with component and modules that lock or click together in the same size as the Mac mini - now that would be quite interesting.

Then there is the Apple TV, or the rumoured Apple television (whatever that may be called). This could bring about a big launch, but even the two together are not as much as what would be left in the 2nd half of the year (with the iOS product line launches).

What that leaves is ...???

Perhaps the Apple TV opens up an App Store, and perhaps opens up gaming on the Apple TV, perhaps even with a new game controller (or through the iPod Touch, iPhone, or iPad) to turn the living room experience into something more controlled by Apple.

Perhaps there are other products in the works we know nothing about?

It's a very interesting topic, and I'm not a product manager who has ideas about these sorts of things so I'm not the best to imagine what they may do - what are your thoughts assuming iOS products are 2nd half of year only?

[SeanR1]

Originally Posted by Mrg02d

What would more RAM be needed for considering the method iOS uses for multitasking?

It would help with large websites in multiple tabs.

[tymaster50]

this makes me wonder, what would the iPhone 5 battery life be like if the screen wasn't retina?

[tann]

Originally Posted by Mrg02d

What would more RAM be needed for considering the method iOS uses for multitasking?

It would be beautiful if the iPad had 2gb or so. The iPhone 5 with 1gb is amazing, I can swap between 10+ apps! On my iPad it's still 4-5 because of the higher res and therefore higher art the apps have and stuff I think.

So 2gb in the iPad would probably exceed the iPhone in terms of app switching, I think the next iPad will get more ram though. It will be a nice bump then the mini can have 1gb .

[lianlua]

Originally Posted by irDigital0l

Apple could have made better specs, but their margin of profit would be low so they opted for cheaper, old components.

This has been thoroughly debunked in countless other threads. The iPad mini has a higher components cost than the 7" tablets.

Think it will use an A6 instead of A5X. the X models are used for the larger iPad's bigger retina display screen.

The "X" models are needed for retina displays. Physical size of the display is irrelevant to the GPU. A retina mini with the same resolution as a regular retina iPad needs the same GPU power.

[irDigital0l]

Originally Posted by MacRumorUser

No they didn't. They created a 7" iPad because people wanted a smaller iPad not because they wanted to compete with an android tablet at the bottom price range.

€229 for a 32gb nexus 7. €439 for a 32gb iPad Mini

It's like saying the Porsche 911 was created to compete with the Fiat Punto

Remember when everyone was saying Apple wouldn't announce a smaller iPad because it didn't need to, Steve Jobs said 7-inch sucks, etc. That basically started after the iPad 3 was announced and some rumors floated of a smaller iPad.

Everyone was like "why does Apple want to compete with cheaper Android tablet".

"Steve Jobs said they wouldn't make a 7-inch tablet."

"10-inch is the perfect size, 7-inch is too small for tablet apps"

Then the Nexus 7 comes out and its actually decent, sells millions. Same with Amazon Kindle Fire HD. They're lower cost which makes great holiday presents.

[irDigital0l]

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

We know the Mac Pro line is coming. Yawn. I only yawn because I'm not wealthy enough to have an amazing Mac Pro setup here of course! Although, there have been some notions expressed on this forum (not really official or unofficial rumours) that the Mac Pro line may adopt a Mac mini form factor with component and modules that lock or click together in the same size as the Mac mini - now that would be quite interesting.

Then there is the Apple TV, or the rumoured Apple television (whatever that may be called). This could bring about a big launch, but even the two together are not as much as what would be left in the 2nd half of the year (with the iOS product line launches).

What that leaves is ...???

Perhaps the Apple TV opens up an App Store, and perhaps opens up gaming on the Apple TV, perhaps even with a new game controller (or through the iPod Touch, iPhone, or iPad) to turn the living room experience into something more controlled by Apple.

I'd say Apple might have been able to release only iOS devices in the fall in the past when competition wasn't so good and strong. Now Android continues to lead in marketshare and they're devices and marketing are really good. They're selling millions in pre-orders alone, something only the iPhone could have done. Nexus 7 and 10's are not of stock on Google Play. These are selling like hotcakes. Apple no matter how big and/or popular it is, can't afford to do that. In fact they're going to start speeding up release cycles.

-------------------------

Anyways, back to my thoughts and predictions.

Mac Pro announcement doesn't warrant a special event even if its going to be made in the US.

The iTV will not come out this year. 2014 earliest...Apple has these in the works, but if its going to announce a TV its earliest logical time would be in January of 2014. They announced the first iPhone and iPad in January 2007 and 2010 respectively. Steal CES 2014's thunder and put any Samsung/Google TV to shame.

The Apple TV (4th generation) itself can't warrant a special event. It'll either be announced in March (new iPad Mini) or in Fall (with new iPods).

--------------------------

I'm thinking more like this...

Notes:

2013
March - iPad mini with Retina display
June (WWDC) - 11/13'' MacBook Air with Retina display, OS X 10.9, iPhone 5S, iOS 7
October - new iPad, new iPod touch, new iPod nano, new Apple TV, iTunes Radio

If Apple did release only iOS products in the fall, it would have to be like this, although I think its just too much of a gap for Samsung, Google, Microsoft, RIM to take advantage of.

June (WWDC) - 11/13'' MacBook Air with Retina display, OS X 10.9, iOS 7
September - iPhone 5S, new iPods, iTunes Radio
October - iPad mini with Retina display, new iPad, new Apple TV

[daywiz]

Originally Posted by irDigital0l

I'd say Apple might have been able to release only iOS devices in the fall in the past when competition wasn't so good and strong. Now Android continues to lead in marketshare and they're devices and marketing are really good. They're selling millions in pre-orders alone, something only the iPhone could have done. Nexus 7 and 10's are not of stock on Google Play. These are selling like hotcakes. Apple no matter how big and/or popular it is, can't afford to do that. In fact they're going to start speeding up release cycles.

-------------------------

Anyways, back to my thoughts and predictions.

Mac Pro announcement doesn't warrant a special event even if its going to be made in the US.

The iTV will not come out this year. 2014 earliest...Apple has these in the works, but if its going to announce a TV its earliest logical time would be in January of 2014. They announced the first iPhone and iPad in January 2007 and 2010 respectively. Steal CES 2014's thunder and put any Samsung/Google TV to shame.

The Apple TV (4th generation) itself can't warrant a special event. It'll either be announced in March (new iPad Mini) or in Fall (with new iPods).

--------------------------

I'm thinking more like this...

Notes:

2013
March - iPad mini with Retina display
June (WWDC) - 11/13'' MacBook Air with Retina display, OS X 10.9, iPhone 5S, iOS 7
October - new iPad, new iPod touch, new iPod nano, new Apple TV, iTunes Radio

If Apple did release only iOS products in the fall, it would have to be like this, although I think its just too much of a gap for Samsung, Google, Microsoft, RIM to take advantage of.

June (WWDC) - 11/13'' MacBook Air with Retina display, OS X 10.9, iOS 7
September - iPhone 5S, new iPods, iTunes Radio
October - iPad mini with Retina display, new iPad, new Apple TV

Any reason why both the iPads can't be updated at the same time. Why does the full size iPad according to most people only arrive in Oct while the iPad mini comes in March. doesnt make sense. It's going to be a double upgrade and in all probability its coming in June.

[irDigital0l]

Originally Posted by daywiz

Any reason why both the iPads can't be updated at the same time. Why does the full size iPad according to most people only arrive in Oct while the iPad mini comes in March. doesnt make sense. It's going to be a double upgrade and in all probability its coming in June.

What feature would the iPad 4th gen really need?
Not really any as of now.

What feature would the iPad Mini really need?
Retina display.

This makes me think that Apple would release the iPad mini sooner than the larger iPad.

Also it might take less sales of the regular iPad if the iPad mini was sold at a different time. I know that Apple isn't afraid of cannibalizing its own sales but this different time frame could also surprise competitors.

[tymaster50]

lol the kindle fire and nexus got a few months of airtime and then the iPad Mini was announced and now it's on every kid's holiday list.

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by irDigital0l

What feature would the iPad 4th gen really need?
Not really any as of now.

Thinner and more lightweight - that's one thing the iPad needs next in big evolutionary changes. Think thinness like in the mini, but in the 10" form factor - what an amazing device that would be!

[irDigital0l]

Originally Posted by WilliamLondon

Thinner and more lightweight - that's one thing the iPad needs next in big evolutionary changes. Think thinness like in the mini, but in the 10" form factor - what an amazing device that would be!

That won't be likely. If Apple could bring the iPad back to around the iPad 2 that would be an achievement.

Also, I like my devices to have a little weight, it makes the device feel solid instead of "plastically light", but that's just me.

But see here's the thing.

Even before the iPad Mini was announced the debate was whether it was going to be retina. There were reports that it was going to be retina and there were reports that it wouldn't.

This is like when before the iPad 2 was announced. Was it going to have retina or not? If not, then everyone knew that the iPad 3 would have it.

No one has talked about the iPad needs a lighter weight, not as much as the Retina mini. I'm also pretty sure the iPad is still light and thin compared to other tablets. The iPad mini however, lacks in display compared to others as well as other iOS devices.

----------

Originally Posted by MacRumorUser

No they didn't. They created a 7" iPad because people wanted a smaller iPad not because they wanted to compete with an android tablet at the bottom price range.

€229 for a 32gb nexus 7. €439 for a 32gb iPad Mini

It's like saying the Porsche 911 was created to compete with the Fiat Punto

I would also like to add...

If they weren't competing with Android tablet, then why did Apple compare the iPad Mini directly to the Nexus 7 in the Keynote?

Because they were competing with other 7 inch tablets.

[tann]

Originally Posted by irDigital0l

I would also like to add...

If they weren't competing with Android tablet, then why did Apple compare the iPad Mini directly to the Nexus 7 in the Keynote?

Because they were competing with other 7 inch tablets.

They were showing why the current 7" tablets are wrong and why the mini is perfect.

They are of course competing for the smaller tablet range, but not on price. They are offering a smaller iPad at the price they see it is worth vs a price the same as other tablets.

[WilliamLondon]

Originally Posted by irDigital0l

Also, I like my devices to have a little weight, it makes the device feel solid instead of "plastically light", but that's just me.

No, it's not just you - I know exactly what you mean. I've got a Kindle (bog standard reader) which I love. It's very lightweight (which makes it a joy to read with for hours), but it's plastic and I know it's not going to last forever, it's already showing signs of wear, and I know more are to come. I also know that I need to be a bit careful with it, not because it's costly or dear, but because I know it would break easily or bend or not endure any rough handling.

Now my mini is very different. It's not nearly as light as my Kindle (even taking into account the size difference between the two). The mini just feels different in my hands. It's thin, yes, but it's got a very, very solid feel to it. Its heft isn't a negative thing, it's reassurance that this device is made with quality materials. Now, I'm not going to handle it roughly, but you know from holding it, that it will last longer and the build and materials are quality. It's sort of like premium or luxury German engineering in cars compared to cheap economy cars - it's the "thwump" sound you hear when you close the door that tells you this is quality engineering. That's what the mini is like compared to the Kindle, and I know this could easily be transferred to the full sized iPad, I wouldn't want it any other way.

[irDigital0l]

Originally Posted by tann

They were showing why the current 7" tablets are wrong and why the mini is perfect.

They are of course competing for the smaller tablet range, but not on price. They are offering a smaller iPad at the price they see it is worth vs a price the same as other tablets.

But it was the Nexus 7.

Let me reword myself...

Apple used the iPad Mini as an opportunity to compete with other 7-inch tablets. By making it cheaper than the regular iPad, it also was able to offer a cheaper iPad.

iPad Mini was good for Apple...

1) Allowed it to get into the 7-inch tablet market with little effort.
2) Offer a cheaper iPad that many people wanted.

[gadget123]

Originally Posted by tymaster50

Apple's doing too much with these iPads. There's 5 versions of the iPad out right now and all of them basically work the same lol except for maybe the first one because it doesn't have a front camera. There hasn't been any "defining" features to set them out. For all intents and purposes the iPad 4 is just a redesigned iPad 3 to move products towards lightning. Instead they stuck an A6x in there while it's the fastest on the market I'm sure if we are using a tablet we can wait a extra second.

The iPad 4 is just like iPad 3 so it should have just got an iPad HD tag or something.

[tymaster50]

Originally Posted by gadget123

The iPad 4 is just like iPad 3 so it should have just got an iPad HD tag or something.

personally I think they should have waited to release an iPad 4.They only had to release the mini. The iPad 4 was like a side mention lol. Hell the only way to tell the difference is by looking at the charging port