iPad Seen as 'Weakest Link' in Stagnating Tablet Market

[Keirasplace]

I can't see any performance hit using iOS 8.2 on iPad 4.
On iPad 2 is barely acceptable, but on the iPad 4 it's fast.

I think 8.2 on the Ipad 2 is totally acceptable; at least to me. I think it is more what people are willing to accept, than a failing per say of the software. For example, many found 6.1.6 intolerable on the 3GS, I did not and I'm still using it.

 

[Max(IT)]

Good to hear that it is working well for you. I've tried a variety of things including reinstalling from scratch. Maybe there are slight differences in the hardware (maybe a bank of defective RAM) that cause it to react differently than others.

Like the answer to the question of how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop, the world may never know why the same gen/model iPads behave differently with the same version of iOS.

I'm actually using it on about 40 units (maybe 42) in my company.
Never heard about different hardware between them.
I basically can't see significant differences between them and my own iPad air, using a quite heavy software for aeronautical charting and navigation.

----------

I think 8.2 on the Ipad 2 is totally acceptable; at least to me. I think it is more what people are willing to accept, than a failing per say of the software. For example, many found 6.1.6 intolerable on the 3GS, I did not and I'm still using it.

I don't know about iPad 2, but in the same company we are using 30 iPad mini first gen, basically same hardware, and it's totally acceptable.

 

[sracer]

I'm actually using it on about 40 units (maybe 42) in my company.
Never heard about different hardware between them.
I basically can't see significant differences between them and my own iPad air, using a quite heavy software for aeronautical charting and navigation.

What I meant by "different hardware" between them has to do with manufacturing tolerances and elements of the hardware that fail/falter over the life of the device. Apple allows a range of results during testing that they consider "passed". It is possible that the impact of those near the boundaries of acceptability is felt more with subsequent versions of iOS.

My sense is (and it could be wrong) that there seems to be an increase in the disparity of user experiences the older a particular generation of device gets and the number of updates are applied to that generation.

Apple tests the latest hardware with the latest version of iOS and they adjust both ends to attain the desired results. But once that generation of device is out in the field, there is less inclination and less resources to thoroughly test and adjust iOS updates for previous generations of hardware.

Then there's the application mix which is a variable that can't be ignored. I don't deny that there is a wide range of experiences given the same hardware and iOS version... but I can't dismiss it all as the rantings of people with an agenda.


That's different than using a variety of components of comparable specs (which is something that companies like Dell do... the running joke a few years ago was that you can tell which component contractor was the low bidder that week based on the week the device was built---components changed that frequently).

Apple may do that (screens perhaps?) but I'm not aware that they do anything like that with other components.

 

[Max(IT)]

What I meant by "different hardware" between them has to do with manufacturing tolerances and elements of the hardware that fail/falter over the life of the device. Apple allows a range of results during testing that they consider "passed". It is possible that the impact of those near the boundaries of acceptability is felt more with subsequent versions of iOS.

My sense is (and it could be wrong) that there seems to be an increase in the disparity of user experiences the older a particular generation of device gets and the number of updates are applied to that generation.

Apple tests the latest hardware with the latest version of iOS and they adjust both ends to attain the desired results. But once that generation of device is out in the field, there is less inclination and less resources to thoroughly test and adjust iOS updates for previous generations of hardware.

Then there's the application mix which is a variable that can't be ignored. I don't deny that there is a wide range of experiences given the same hardware and iOS version... but I can't dismiss it all as the rantings of people with an agenda.


That's different than using a variety of components of comparable specs (which is something that companies like Dell do... the running joke a few years ago was that you can tell which component contractor was the low bidder that week based on the week the device was built---components changed that frequently).

Apple may do that (screens perhaps?) but I'm not aware that they do anything like that with other components.

Maybe it's related to the software installed...
My experience is primarily focused on a strictly controlled environment.

 

[Palladium SG]

Lol @ analysts. If Apple can already capture 90% of all phone profits I don't even need Google to see that it's even more of an Apple massacre in the tablet market. Remember how the 5C was termed a "failure" even it was outselling a Samsung S5 out of all things by these idiots?

BTW shocking fact to the PC master race worshippers, there are plenty of people who bought iPads because they *don't* want to deal with PCs regardless of specs because they had bad experiences with Windows incompatibilities, bugs and viruses when all they want is just to read email and surf the web.