Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What in the world did Apple do to piss off the NYT?

First they go balls to the wall with the Foxconn thing. Now their review guy writes up a BS review.

Can you say "agenda"?

Well, as you might remember, the NYT went all out on the China labor situation.

I suspect Apple wasn't too pleased about that.

My *guess* is that Apple told the NYT a different embargo date about Mountain Lion as compared to everyone else who got the preview. That is, everyone else besides the NYT was given an embargo date of (say) Thursday, while Apple told the NYT the embargo would be lifted Friday.

This way everyone else scooped the NYT. If you remember, there was a delay for the NYT review of Mountain Lion. But Apple would just tell the NYT "Oh, did you hear us say Friday? We swear we told you Thursday..." while the veiled message would be clear - smear us and we'll withhold previews from you.

Sure, they were briefed on Mountain Lion, but everyone is supposed to have the same embargo date and time.

But this is all just a hunch.

But back to the iPad 3, this would be the NYT firing back at Apple - with the NYT reminding Apple that the NYT buys ink by the truckload...
 
Well, as you might remember, the NYT went all out on the China labor situation.

I suspect Apple wasn't too pleased about that.

My *guess* is that Apple told the NYT a different embargo date about Mountain Lion as compared to everyone else who got the preview. That is, everyone else besides the NYT was given an embargo date of (say) Thursday, while Apple told the NYT the embargo would be lifted Friday.

This way everyone else scooped the NYT. If you remember, there was a delay for the NYT review of Mountain Lion. But Apple would just tell the NYT "Oh, did you hear us say Friday? We swear we told you Thursday..." while the veiled message would be clear - smear us and we'll withhold previews from you.

Sure, they were briefed on Mountain Lion, but everyone is supposed to have the same embargo date and time.

But this is all just a hunch.

But back to the iPad 3, this would be the NYT firing back at Apple - with the NYT reminding Apple that the NYT buys ink by the truckload...

Makes me wonder why the NYT was muckraking over Foxconn anyway. They certainly know as well as anyone that manufacturing conditions in China are similar for about a million American companies - why single out Apple? I suppose because Apple headlines grab readers. I answered my own question there! Anyway, I hope the NYT stops with the immaturity.
 
Not criticizing, curious: How can you have buyer's remorse on behalf of someone else (your wife) for a product you didn't buy? Buyer's remorse usually means regretting something you did buy and it usually would be held by the person who wanted the item.

Also as a more general question, I sometimes see people say on the forums that they're thinking of buying an Apple product for their wife or children, but they never include information about their wife or children wanting that product. And I am always curious whether it's sort of a thing where the person buys it for them and it's a "use this, you'll like it" type situation. Do people buy for others because they know best what others should use?

Actually, I do remember a recent conversation where a woman told me her husband bought her an iPad for Christmas and she didn't like it and got a Kindle Fire instead. And she said something about her Apple fanatical husband trying to force it on her. While I don't get preferring a Kindle Fire over an iPad, I also wasn't aware until recently that people might be buying big ticket items for spouses or children without knowing whether they want the product or not. In my family, big ticket items are always self-purchases, but beyond that even when buying gifts for birthdays or Christmas we check with each other if an item is more than say $70, as in, "I was thinking of getting you this, would you like that, or if not, what do you want?"

Not judging, just curious.

Buyer's remorse as you said is "usually" used in the context you have stated. The context in which I used the term is still linguistically correct ... I am a buyer of the product and at the same time I am remorseful that I did NOT at the same time order another. I think your tongue-in-cheek meter needs re-calibrating since you obviously didn't get the smiley :)

And let's cut the "Not criticizing, curious: not judging, just curious" crap. You are both criticising and judging me by way of anecdotal heresay. You are using your own limited knowledge of my circumstances and then posting two paragraphs full of your own limited experiences to pose the quite ridiculous question, "Do people buy for others because they know best what others should use"?

Any damn fool can tell you the answer to that is "YES". I'm sure your parents bought many things for you using the above criteria.

But hey, I can humour you and perhaps even dispel your "curiosity".

My daughter is 9 and last year asked for an iPod Touch. My wife is of indeterminate age (ouch !) and wanted an iPad. I weighed up the pros and cons and bought my wife a MacBook Pro instead of an iPad last August as her Dell laptop was on its last legs. That kept her happy, particularly as at the time I felt the iPad would be an even better product at it's next iteration. I'm not convinced the iPod Touch represented good value for a pre-teen so I bought my daughter an iPod Nano for Christmas just gone. My daughter loves music and this way the music stays on the nano and the iPad can be used for everything else the Touch could do, but with the bigger screen is far better suited to educational as well as recreational activities. The cost of an iPod Touch that can hold enough songs, games and apps is only a little less than the cost of iPad. Whilst being overall more expensive, a nano and and iPad have much greater potential within my family than a Touch on it's own. But that's just my point of view. My wife will now have to negotiate with our daughter to use the iPad.

I'm sorry to disappoint you but I don't fall into any of the "negative" scenarios you describe in your last two paragraphs. I make purchases based on a perceived need and on the potential uses of the purchase, not simply because there is a new (Apple) gadget available.

To humour you a little more I'll even explain why I'm buying an iPad for a 9 year old. She has been diabetic since the age of 2 and is Type I insulin dependant. That means that she is unable to do any activity or go anywhere unless the people she is with know how food and/or activity affects her condition and how they need to deal with it. That cuts down on school trips she can attend, friends she can sleep-over with etc. and in reality she is unlikely to reach the age of 30 without severe health complications. Most children diagnosed as she was so early in life do not reach the age of 20. They get lax and/or resentful of the continuous limitations and just give up treating the disease. If she ever gets drunk in later life she runs the real risk of death.

Despite all of this she is a constant bundle of joy and rarely feels hard done by. She gets good grades and is a loving person. She has had a laptop since the age of five and is quite proficient in its use from web-surfing to creating and editing stop-motion videos. So I have bought her an iPad without her asking for one and now she can hone her negotiating skills with her mum :)

In my family, big ticket purchases are always made with prior knowledge. We live together and we talk together. Assuming anything else is well, assuming.

:)
 
Last edited:
Seems as if David Pogue is the only one who isn't that blown away. He said it should have been named the iPad 2s. To each his own.

While comments like this seem a bit crazy for an upgrade of this magnitude, I can't help but wonder if we'll be seeing a lot of them when next year's iPad gets here. I mean, how could they top this? Hardware wise, I think it will be mostly spec bumps from here on out- Unless they do that "no home button" thing. I just don't see the iPad making this big a splash for quite some time...
 
The display alone, ALONE, makes this worth it. Never mind everything else.

Retina is a phenomenal enhancement of the User Experience. It isn't just a spec.

Don't forget to thank Samsung. No Samsung, no retina, no new ipad. Actually no Apple PERIOD. Yes of course there are other suppliers, but guess what, if they were any good, Apple would be using them already instead of Samsung. If you think Apple has QUALITY products, thank the supplier who has the biggest and most important role in Apple's success, SAMSUNG!
 
Don't forget to thank Samsung. No Samsung, no retina, no new ipad. Actually no Apple PERIOD. Yes of course there are other suppliers, but guess what, if they were any good, Apple would be using them already instead of Samsung. If you think Apple has QUALITY products, thank the supplier who has the biggest and most important role in Apple's success, SAMSUNG!

What a bunch of c**p!

Before you can make something, it needs to be conceived and designed. And Samsung simply doesn't do that for Apple. They copy the design afterwards, of course, but that's about it. And yes, other suppliers could build QUALITY products for Apple but Samsung happens to be the lowest bidder. That's all it is.
 
Don't forget to thank Samsung. No Samsung, no retina, no new ipad. Actually no Apple PERIOD. Yes of course there are other suppliers, but guess what, if they were any good, Apple would be using them already instead of Samsung. If you think Apple has QUALITY products, thank the supplier who has the biggest and most important role in Apple's success, SAMSUNG!

Thank Michelin for the tires on your Porsche too then.
 
What a bunch of c**p!

Samsung is a leader in LCD display technology. Without them developing better LCDs, there would be no retina iPad.

Yes, they may produce Apple derivative tablets, but there is no doubting their contribution to Apple's success.
 
I look forward to see if Apple (or some sleazy local retailer) is going to advertise this iPad as 4G in Europe since our frequencies are different than those used in the USA or Canada...

They'll still call it the iPad with 4G (or at least they are in the UK). I can see a few people getting confused but it does technically have 4G capabilities..

Well it's not an "A6" processor (A5X is not an upgrade to the actual CPU, just the video card), lacks Siri (arguably one of the biggest selling points of the incremental iPhone 4S), and has the exact same casing/shell as the iPad 2.

It's not quite certain if it actually has "more speed" in a practical sense, because of the minor CPU upgrade. Would've been nice if they built a new casing for it, or at least offered it in a gunmetal color, to help distinguish it from the iPad 2.

Granted, I'm sure Apple will slowly roll out Siri to the new iPads in a future iOS update, once they see iPad excitement from the general public slowing down a little bit.

Not complaining too much (I pre-ordered mine), just saying... If it at least had the true A6 and a redesigned casing, I guarantee no one would be calling it the "iPad 2S."

I know a few people who still would.. :/
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I have to mention the other side of the story. One year on from iPad 2 and all they give us is a better resolution screen and quad core "graphics" from a dual core processor? All the new android tablets have quad core prosessors. Oh and wait for the comments in the app store to stream out. "this app doesnt work on my ipad2". The drip feeding from apple continues.
 
What a bunch of c**p!

Before you can make something, it needs to be conceived and designed. And Samsung simply doesn't do that for Apple. They copy the design afterwards, of course, but that's about it. And yes, other suppliers could build QUALITY products for Apple but Samsung happens to be the lowest bidder. That's all it is.

Wait a minute. Isn't Apple a company that puts quality before cost? Going with Samsung was a QUALITY issue. Samsung's tech made this possible. Apple has no display tech. They don't invent anything. They repackage things like Dell.

Are you really blind to the fact that Samsung is a killer in display innovation. Oh you may want to look at THIS before you answer that. This is Samsung saving the GOOD STUFF for themselves. Enjoy your dose of reality.
 
Don't forget to thank Samsung. No Samsung, no retina, no new ipad. Actually no Apple PERIOD. Yes of course there are other suppliers, but guess what, if they were any good, Apple would be using them already instead of Samsung. If you think Apple has QUALITY products, thank the supplier who has the biggest and most important role in Apple's success, SAMSUNG!

Over zealous a bit, eh? Samsung plays a part in Apple's devices, not in their success. Apple is solely responsible for their own success. Samsung is a very experienced and HUGE component maker, that Apple has dumped a lot of money into over the past couple of years. If Apple had gone with another supplier, that supplier could've used all that money to expand their business as well.

Samsung quality isn't any better than Apple would be able to get out of any supplier. That's what Apple does. They don't just buy parts off the shelf, they play an important role from design to the lines, to ensure they get what they're paying for.

Currently Samsung is the worlds largest supplier of electronic components, so of course Apple is going to buy tons of parts from them (it's a lot easier to deal with a single supplier than multiple), but your foolish if you think Apple is only successful because of Samsung.

----------

Wait a minute. Isn't Apple a company that puts quality before cost? Going with Samsung was a QUALITY issue. Samsung's tech made this possible. Apple has no display tech. They don't invent anything. They repackage things like Dell.

LOL You obviously don't know anything about Apple and are just trolling. EOT
 
Samsung is a leader in LCD display technology. Without them developing better LCDs, there would be no retina iPad.

Yes, they may produce Apple derivative tablets, but there is no doubting their contribution to Apple's success.

Ever heard how Intel recognized in the last months that they started paying attention to seriously reduce power consumption because of Apple's complaints and threats of switching?

No need for any given manufacturer. If there is demand, someone will produce it; maybe at a later time, but they will. And Apple is providing the demand, so you have LG and Sharp scrambling to get there.
(And if not, who's to say that Apple wouldn't do like they are doing with memory and processors: create their own designs and just get someone to build it? Heck, how do we know that they aren't doing something like that already?)

A simple thought experiment: imagine Samsung suddenly disappears. Do you think we would have to wait a lot to get comparable panels?
Now, imagine Apple gets nuked. Who would make the next big thing? Regretfully, I can't imagine who. I can't see Google, Samsung, Sony stepping up. Maybe, just maybe, Googorola or MicroNokia... which aren't even fully formed yet.
 
Last edited:
Even though many are knocking the NYT review, I thought they made a valid point about the increased size of new iPad retina apps reducing the effective storage capacity of iPad 2, iPod Touch and iPhone. Anyone downloading many of these newer apps on the lower capacity devices may need to upgrade sooner than they might otherwise have wanted to.

Hmm, I bet Apple have also considered this. Instead of buying Apple devices maybe I should be buying Apple shares :D
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I have to mention the other side of the story. One year on from iPad 2 and all they give us is a better resolution screen and quad core "graphics" from a dual core processor? All the new android tablets have quad core prosessors. Oh and wait for the comments in the app store to stream out. "this app doesnt work on my ipad2". The drip feeding from apple continues.

But all those new Android tablets with their quad-core processors don't have the better-resolution screen. One year on from the iPad 2 and all the Android tablet manufacturers couldn't figure out how to get a retina-level display into their tablets (and still make them competitively priced). The drip feeding from the Android tablet manufacturers also continues. They don't care about you either.
 
Last edited:
I think the whole tech world agreed iPad 2 was the best tablet. Apple releases a tablet better than by a long way, and some bloggers seem disappointed?
 
I think the whole tech world agreed iPad 2 was the best tablet. Apple releases a tablet better than by a long way, and some bloggers seem disappointed?

The whole tech world agrees the new iPad is the best tablet. Next year, Apple will release an upgraded model, and some bloggers will seem disappointed.

If you go back a year and read what the bloggers really said at the time, you'll find it was the same a year ago.
 
My girlfriend is inheriting my iPad 2. I figured that was a win-win; I get a new toy AND points. Now I'm worried.

Does this mean I shouldn't let her see the display on the new iPad? Am I going to have to start playing DVDs instead of Blu-Rays, and commenting "wow that picture is awesome!" just so her iPad 2 looks that much better?

Oh, the burden of wonderful technology. :D
 
I think butthurt is the word you're looking for. But I see his point, I mean, the iPhone 4S had 4x the resolution of the 4.
Why would they be like that? Have I missed something?

The 4S had the same resolution as the 4? The 4 had twice the resolution (four times the pixels) as the 3GS.
 
Good to hear that the iPad2 cases seem to be an ok fit - the iPad 3 case selection is pretty poor right now.
 
Samsung is a leader in LCD display technology. Without them developing better LCDs, there would be no retina iPad.

Cool story except for the fact that the iPad display was developed by Sharp (including tech from Dr John Zhong who works at Apple)

Oh and LG also makes them now.
 
Some german sites have also tested the "new iPad" and found
some negative things:

- some Apps can't handle the new resolution. For example Real Racing 2 HD is playing back at 1FPS and is unplayable. National Geographic crashes regularly.

- the battery now takes 7,1 Hours for a full charge (4,7 hours on ipad2)

- some websites are more sluggish in performance and load slower than on the ipad2

- some apps are slower when they have to deliver the high resolution graphics for example PDF readers are operating noticeably slower.

- the battery life in their test (movie watching without 4G and Wifi) was down to 8,3 hours from 11,2 hours on the ipad2

- it takes a bit longer to wake up from standby

- it takes 15 seconds longer to boot

I have to say that the last 2 statement made me a bit skeptic. Because longer boot times and wakeup speed have only been a problem for my iOs devices if they have been really cluttered. I got the feeling that they might have restored their new iPad with their old ipad2 backup which might have some stuff that is messed up or slowing down the performance. I'll set up my new iPad completely without iTunes - I think thats the best option to get the maximum performance. Get everything from the cloud and set it up as a new device.

Still the review sites praised it as the best tablet on the market and the screen is fantastic. I am still looking forward to tomorrow but with a bit more realistic view at the facts. It is still the A5 performance and not all the tasks of handling that big resolution can be calculated by the new X 4 core GPU ... so the new iPad might in some situations be slower. ... then again they also noticed that the doubled memory really helps with keeping webpages in the cache and overall app performance.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.