For everyone who believes Apple has been "holding back" features on the iPad 2, it appears that the materials costs are actually higher than they were for the first iPad. So while they certainly "could" have added more/better features, they had fairly solid business reasons for not doing so.
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.
An FYI to the Conspiracy Theorists
- Thread starter poloponies
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
9to5Mac: http://www.9to5mac.com/56039/for-ip...-demand-raise-touch-panel-and-a5-chip-prices/
AppleInsider: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...t_of_apples_ipad_2_touchscreen_up_to_127.html
Both appear to track back to DigiTimes and iSupply.
OP: it's pointless to argue with conspiracy theorists; even if you make a sound case, they'll just label you (and any cited sources) as part of the conspiracy.
When I bought the 2nd gen iPod Touch, Apple "held back" my bluetooth functionality on it until I paid the $10 or $15 upgrade fee.
Apple has "held back" in the past, why change now?
Since when was there a "one solid business reason per item" limit?
Sure, the A5 costs more than the A4, but that doesnt mean that they WERENT holding back other features in order to make a path for the next iPad. IF Apple were in some sort of danger of losing their market stranglehold then I'm sure the iPad 2 would be more aggressive. But as it is then Apple could've released the same specs in a new shell and it still would sell because they really have no immediate threats yet.
You have a very vivid imagination.
This is a forum of "public opinion". It's a shame you're so bent on being passive / aggressive with you're conspiracy label.
The simple facts are, Apples practice of holding out on certain features is a time tested method in many businesses. It has everything to do with "saving something for later" all for the specific purpose of making the older product obsolete, and the new product compelling.
If the components do or do not ad to the price is of no consequence, since if that were true you'd never see them included in the next new model.
This is a forum of "public opinion". It's a shame you're so bent on being passive / aggressive with you're conspiracy label.
The simple facts are, Apples practice of holding out on certain features is a time tested method in many businesses. It has everything to do with "saving something for later" all for the specific purpose of making the older product obsolete, and the new product compelling.
If the components do or do not ad to the price is of no consequence, since if that were true you'd never see them included in the next new model.
Most tech companies map out the next 2 to 4 product releases - with each further out release less finalized than sooner to be released products. There is flexibility to add/drop features based on many market factors before hitting retail production. I'm sure there are features Apple 'left out' of iPad2 that will be in iPad3. The same will happen with iPad3/iPad4, etc. Reasons for not including everything technically possible right away: high cost parts; low yield parts; parts too big for existing board design; expected low customer usage; and yes sometimes it's to hold back for a potentially larger financial benefit in a future release. All normal biz reasons.
I'd like a higher resolution iPad screen. Probably not in iPad2 due to high cost/low yield - and judgement the market doesn't yet require it.
I'd like a higher resolution iPad screen. Probably not in iPad2 due to high cost/low yield - and judgement the market doesn't yet require it.