I don't share my iPad that is why my wife has her own.
Oh I try, with about an 85% success rate. It's my 19 and 21 year old girls that give me problems.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
128GB model discussion
- Thread starter tac22
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh I try, with about an 85% success rate. It's my 19 and 21 year old girls that give me problems.
Jeez.......This discussion AGAIN? I've had this argument here like 100 times already.
I want and need 128 GB. Many others want and need it as well. Many other don't want it nor need it. There is no right or wrong here.
I wish Apple will give it to us, but I'd say there is NO possibility of this in the iPad 2. ZERO. It's too expensive right now and Apple as always in their portable devices are obsessed with maintaining the cost structure and making devices thinner and thinner.
As for cloud computing and streaming - Whoever think that this is a solution, with 2 GB Caps and poor and inconsistant AT&T coverage, needs their head examined. Has anyone tried to stream a movie while riding on a train / bus? Impossible.
Tony
I want and need 128 GB. Many others want and need it as well. Many other don't want it nor need it. There is no right or wrong here.
I wish Apple will give it to us, but I'd say there is NO possibility of this in the iPad 2. ZERO. It's too expensive right now and Apple as always in their portable devices are obsessed with maintaining the cost structure and making devices thinner and thinner.
As for cloud computing and streaming - Whoever think that this is a solution, with 2 GB Caps and poor and inconsistant AT&T coverage, needs their head examined.
Has anyone tried to stream a movie while riding on a train / bus? Impossible.Tony
In retrospect, 16GB is insufficient for me
Last year I was outspoken that 16GB is fine and unless it's your primary computer (which it's not well-suited to be) then stream the rest etc. etc. and now months and many big apps later, I could do with a bigger iPad. There are lots of 700+MB apps out there and since it's shared among 4 people in my family, we have a very wide variety of apps loaded up.
There's also the offline wikipedia apps that require 2-6GB so yeah, I'll want 32GB next time, and voted accordingly.
Last year I was outspoken that 16GB is fine and unless it's your primary computer (which it's not well-suited to be) then stream the rest etc. etc. and now months and many big apps later, I could do with a bigger iPad. There are lots of 700+MB apps out there and since it's shared among 4 people in my family, we have a very wide variety of apps loaded up.
There's also the offline wikipedia apps that require 2-6GB so yeah, I'll want 32GB next time, and voted accordingly.
I have a 160GB classic which is a few years old, and I would like to replace it. I have about 100GB of music and videos I enjoy having with me at all times (so I have what I want if/when the mood hits.) I would love to see a 128GB iPad to replace my classic. Seems weird, I know, but I mostly use my iPod in the car, and the iPad would work just fine there, plus be a portable device/computer when I get where I'm going.
I hope to purchase the next iPad, and while lack of a higher capacity model probably won't be a deal breaker, it would make the purchase slightly more compelling.
I hope to purchase the next iPad, and while lack of a higher capacity model probably won't be a deal breaker, it would make the purchase slightly more compelling.
Last edited:
128 gb ipad?
well why not?if cost more Im wiling to pay for it imagine all your favorite tv shows,movies you havent seen my 64gb ipad was not even enough it can only fill 5-7 tv shows of the entire season if apple will give it to me a 128gb ipad 3 i will be happy and please no ipad 2s because thats so bad.
well why not?if cost more Im wiling to pay for it imagine all your favorite tv shows,movies you havent seen my 64gb ipad was not even enough it can only fill 5-7 tv shows of the entire season if apple will give it to me a 128gb ipad 3 i will be happy and please no ipad 2s because thats so bad.
The screen res change will be the biggie.
If people suddenly want to view photo's and video's at 4x the current screen res (twice as wide and twice as high) then watch the file sizes of images and video's that give you the clarity a new screen deserves bump up.
Actually I could see them doing it in a double stage. Much like the rubbish camera, they knew it would get complaints as if they deliberately make it worse so it gives them an obvious thing to change next year.
So I could guess. New 4x screen res, but no change in memory.
People realising the new files burn through memory and moan about it.
Then the following year, the memory sizes get doubled to squash the complaints.
If people suddenly want to view photo's and video's at 4x the current screen res (twice as wide and twice as high) then watch the file sizes of images and video's that give you the clarity a new screen deserves bump up.
Actually I could see them doing it in a double stage. Much like the rubbish camera, they knew it would get complaints as if they deliberately make it worse so it gives them an obvious thing to change next year.
So I could guess. New 4x screen res, but no change in memory.
People realising the new files burn through memory and moan about it.
Then the following year, the memory sizes get doubled to squash the complaints.
I believe an iPad 3 128 GB will be perfect for both Apple and Apple's customers.
Think about it. Currently we have this:
$499 - 16 GB
$599 - 32 GB
$699 - 64 GB
Now Apple can do this:
$499 - 32 GB iPad 3
$599 - 64 GB iPad 3
$699 - 128 GB iPad 3
Apps are getting bigger and people will need more space. Especially if Apple is going with a retina display for the iPad 3: than apps will contain 2 images (the original 'low-res' one, plus a double as big 'high-res' one).
Second, Apple can advertise with a price drop: $100 price drop. Where a 32 GB model in 2011 would cost $599, it will than only cost $499.
Third, Apple can add a 'budget model': a 16 GB iPad 2 for $399. This way, they can ensure that they will stay the market leader (no one else will be able to offer a tablet with similar functionality for $399).
So, I suggest Apple will do this:
$399 - 'budget model', 16 GB iPad 2
$499 - 32 GB iPad 3
$599 - 64 GB iPad 3
$699 - 128 GB iPad 3
Key reasons:
1) Apps, especially games, are getting bigger and bigger. If the iPad 3 goes retina display, apps will get even bigger (two images: low-res one, plus a 'high-res' one (with four times as many pixels).
2) Makes space for a 'budget model' iPad 2. A 8 GB iPad 2 would not be enough space for anyone (that would be about 4.5-5 GB of actual space available). A 16 GB iPad 2 is good.
3) 'Price drop'. The iPad 3 won't go on sale for $399, but they can still say the iPad has dropped $100 in price. (32 GB iPad 2 costed $599, 32 GB iPad 3 costs $499).
Edit: thread starter thinks it's more likely that the iPad will get a price-drop rather than an upgrade in storage. I don't think that is likely. If the iPad 3 will truely have a retina display and improved internals (A6, high-quality cameras, etc.) than production cost will certainly go up. Than it makes much more sense to double the storage, because than they can still advertise with a $100 price drop.
The budget model than obviously could be a 16 GB iPad 2.
Think about it. Currently we have this:
$499 - 16 GB
$599 - 32 GB
$699 - 64 GB
Now Apple can do this:
$499 - 32 GB iPad 3
$599 - 64 GB iPad 3
$699 - 128 GB iPad 3
Apps are getting bigger and people will need more space. Especially if Apple is going with a retina display for the iPad 3: than apps will contain 2 images (the original 'low-res' one, plus a double as big 'high-res' one).
Second, Apple can advertise with a price drop: $100 price drop. Where a 32 GB model in 2011 would cost $599, it will than only cost $499.
Third, Apple can add a 'budget model': a 16 GB iPad 2 for $399. This way, they can ensure that they will stay the market leader (no one else will be able to offer a tablet with similar functionality for $399).
So, I suggest Apple will do this:
$399 - 'budget model', 16 GB iPad 2
$499 - 32 GB iPad 3
$599 - 64 GB iPad 3
$699 - 128 GB iPad 3
Key reasons:
1) Apps, especially games, are getting bigger and bigger. If the iPad 3 goes retina display, apps will get even bigger (two images: low-res one, plus a 'high-res' one (with four times as many pixels).
2) Makes space for a 'budget model' iPad 2. A 8 GB iPad 2 would not be enough space for anyone (that would be about 4.5-5 GB of actual space available). A 16 GB iPad 2 is good.
3) 'Price drop'. The iPad 3 won't go on sale for $399, but they can still say the iPad has dropped $100 in price. (32 GB iPad 2 costed $599, 32 GB iPad 3 costs $499).
Edit: thread starter thinks it's more likely that the iPad will get a price-drop rather than an upgrade in storage. I don't think that is likely. If the iPad 3 will truely have a retina display and improved internals (A6, high-quality cameras, etc.) than production cost will certainly go up. Than it makes much more sense to double the storage, because than they can still advertise with a $100 price drop.
The budget model than obviously could be a 16 GB iPad 2.
Of course there is.
Zen Viewer
iFiles
GoodReader
Downloads HD
ReaddleDocs
FileApp
(DropBox as well)
Some of them are quite feature-rich.
I believe an iPad 3 128 GB will be perfect for both Apple and Apple's customers.
Think about it. Currently we have this:
$499 - 16 GB
$599 - 32 GB
$699 - 64 GB
Now Apple can do this:
$499 - 32 GB iPad 3
$599 - 64 GB iPad 3
$699 - 128 GB iPad 3
Apps are getting bigger and people will need more space. Especially if Apple is going with a retina display for the iPad 3: than apps will contain 2 images (the original 'low-res' one, plus a double as big 'high-res' one).
Second, Apple can advertise with a price drop: $100 price drop. Where a 32 GB model in 2011 would cost $599, it will than only cost $499.
Third, Apple can add a 'budget model': a 16 GB iPad 2 for $399. This way, they can ensure that they will stay the market leader (no one else will be able to offer a tablet with similar functionality for $399).
So, I suggest Apple will do this:
$399 - 'budget model', 16 GB iPad 2
$499 - 32 GB iPad 3
$599 - 64 GB iPad 3
$699 - 128 GB iPad 3
Key reasons:
1) Apps, especially games, are getting bigger and bigger. If the iPad 3 goes retina display, apps will get even bigger (two images: low-res one, plus a 'high-res' one (with four times as many pixels).
2) Makes space for a 'budget model' iPad 2. A 8 GB iPad 2 would not be enough space for anyone (that would be about 4.5-5 GB of actual space available). A 16 GB iPad 2 is good.
3) 'Price drop'. The iPad 3 won't go on sale for $399, but they can still say the iPad has dropped $100 in price. (32 GB iPad 2 costed $599, 32 GB iPad 3 costs $499).
Edit: thread starter thinks it's more likely that the iPad will get a price-drop rather than an upgrade in storage. I don't think that is likely. If the iPad 3 will truely have a retina display and improved internals (A6, high-quality cameras, etc.) than production cost will certainly go up. Than it makes much more sense to double the storage, because than they can still advertise with a $100 price drop.
The budget model than obviously could be a 16 GB iPad 2.
agree with most things you're saying here, but i think there's a good possibility they'll sell the $399 iPad 2 with 8gb, not 16gb. thats what they tend to do with the iPhone's when they sell 2 different products. i'm expecting a $399 8gb iPad 2, but i guess we'll have to wait a while yet
agree with most things you're saying here, but i think there's a good possibility they'll sell the $399 iPad 2 with 8gb, not 16gb. thats what they tend to do with the iPhone's when they sell 2 different products. i'm expecting a $399 8gb iPad 2, but i guess we'll have to wait a while yet
I agree with you that there's also a good possibility that there wel be a 8 GB model, but that wouldn't make sense:
$399 - iPad 2 8 GB
$499 - iPad 3 32 GB
(unless they just add a 128 GB and keep the same prices (so $499 16 GB, $599 32 GB, $699 64 GB, $799 128 GB)).
8 GB is really too little for an iPad. Than you only get 5 - 6 GB of usable space.
----------
Only one, there's not enough space in the iPhone for two modules. The current iPod touch has 2x32 GB (because radios and stuff are left out).
I believe the iPad also uses two, but I'm not sure about that.
I'm fine with my 16gb iPad, but I don't think that an 8gb could be very practical at all -- especially with maybe only around 6.5gb (?) actual useable space leftover.
It would be neat if they upgraded storage with the next model and went to 32gb, 64gb, and 128gb models at the same current price points, but with the other upgrades (whatever they end up being), I would be very surprised if they were able to keep the prices as they are and also double the storage.
I would still quite likely just get the lowest storage option though - either 16gb or 32gb. Apple is probably going to continue pushing their Cloud solution pretty hard. And to be honest, with iTunes Match now available, I'm starting to see how an iPod Touch or an iPhone really could fully replace my iPod Classic. (Though it would be cool to see them release one final 250gb iteration and then just keep it on the market.)
It would be neat if they upgraded storage with the next model and went to 32gb, 64gb, and 128gb models at the same current price points, but with the other upgrades (whatever they end up being), I would be very surprised if they were able to keep the prices as they are and also double the storage.
I would still quite likely just get the lowest storage option though - either 16gb or 32gb. Apple is probably going to continue pushing their Cloud solution pretty hard. And to be honest, with iTunes Match now available, I'm starting to see how an iPod Touch or an iPhone really could fully replace my iPod Classic. (Though it would be cool to see them release one final 250gb iteration and then just keep it on the market.)
yes, 128gb is needed, and is probably coming soon.
Also need this upgrade in Ipod Touches
Those of you saying who needs 128gb, get your head out of your ass. Not everyone uses netflix, not everyone uses cloud music solutions (its not even available in most countries outside of the US). I almost have 64 gb's in music alone, I dont want to have too be connected to the internet to listen to my music, and listening to a 60gb collection as much as I do would not be good for my bandwidth.
64gb is tiny.
Also need this upgrade in Ipod Touches
Those of you saying who needs 128gb, get your head out of your ass. Not everyone uses netflix, not everyone uses cloud music solutions (its not even available in most countries outside of the US). I almost have 64 gb's in music alone, I dont want to have too be connected to the internet to listen to my music, and listening to a 60gb collection as much as I do would not be good for my bandwidth.
64gb is tiny.
I agree, its as likely as them keeping a 2 generation old iPhone around as a free-on-contract incentive.
As I was saying, 8 GB indeed is not enough but I do believe there's a serious possiblity they will just do it anyway. Apple is very cheap with things like this. They could have created 64 GB iPhones in 2009, but that would cost a little bit extra and than there huge profit over one sold iPhone would be slightly less.
They are doing the same thing with RAM memory. The iPad 1 should have had 512 MB RAM from the start instead of 256 RAM. There's no way that they didn't notice that 256 MB was a little bit low. It's all about the money: 512 MB of RAM may cost almost $1 more than 256 MB of RAM.
$1 doesn't seem much, and it really isn't much, but Apple has always been about making money with, really, over-priced products. Same for the speakers used in the iPhones and iPads: if they spent $5 extra on the speakers, than the quality would improve DRAMATICLY. But that means less profit.
Example: iPad 2 production costs are estimated to be at about $325 (estimates were at launch, so production costs are now even lower). If they were to use higher-quality parts (so better cameras (more megapixels, more sensitive for light), flash (camera), better (stereo?) speakers, double the RAM than costs would go up. Of course Apple buys a lot of these components so the extra cost won't be too high. Let's say another $25.
That means that Apple, in March 2011, had a producten cost of $325 for the iPad 2. A 'higher quality' (better specs and hardware) iPad 2 would have costed $350. Let's do the math.
Example.
Let's say Apple sells 10 million iPad 2 units each quarter. So 40 million each year in the price range $499 to $829. Let's just say the mean is $599. Than we would get the following numbers.
iPad 2 income 1-year: 40 million * 599 = $23 960 000 000
iPad 2 production costs: 40 million * 325 = $13 000 000 000
iPad 2 'HQ' production costs: 40 million * 325 = $14 000 000 000
If they would use higher quality hardware, than they would miss $1 billion in revenue (and thus profit, in this case). Apple is not willing to do that. As I said, Apple's job has always been to make money: creating nice products with 'normal' hardware and selling them for a premium price.
And to be honest, that's very smart from Apple. That's how they make their money and customers, apparently, don't care.
Edit: of course this post doesn't reflect real Apple numbers but it's just an example. Using parts that costs a little bit more, can result in millions to billions less profit.
Last edited:
I have roughly 9 pages of apps and games and my 32 gig is almost halfway full. thats with music and some videos as well. I think 32 is a good size if you dont try and shove everything on it.
I dont think we will see a 128 gb due to the cost of the ssd. it hasnt come down enough to be practical.
I dont think we will see a 128 gb due to the cost of the ssd. it hasnt come down enough to be practical.
You are forgetting that Apple might be using a dual set-up like in the iPod touch (a 8 GB iPod touch has 2*4 GB, a 32 GB 2*16GB and a 64 GB 2*32 GB). Apple is already using one 64 GB SSD in the iPhone. I see no reason why they couldn't use two 64 GB SSD in the iPad. At a price-point of $699 (assuming they just double the storage), they will still make a huge profit. Even more than on a 64 GB iPad at $599, and much more than on a 32 GB iPad at $499.
Don't forget that everytime you double the storage, the price goes op with $100. (currently $499 > 16 GB. Double it. 32 GB > $599. Double it. 64 GB > $699).
That's an increase of $100 each time. However, it doesn't cost Apple an extra $100 to have double the storage. It costs them much less.
Therefor, 128 GB is a very real possibility.
I agree, its as likely as them keeping a 2 generation old iPhone around as a free-on-contract incentive.
Apple makes a ridiculous profit on that phone; plus it's a good introduction to the Apple world for a lot of people.
Yes, and as the entry level price of tablets lowers, they need to keep a cheap iPad2 around.
The 3GS was ridiculously overpowered at its launch which is why it's still able to keep up with iOS5 unlike how iOS4 crippled the 3G. The 3GS is only marginally slower than the A4 in the 4, and it runs a non retina display, so it has to drive only 25% of the pixels.
I could see the 4S lasting all the way to through iOS7 or maybe even 8 given how powerful it is, just like the 3GS...