Apple and their iPads

[SuperKerem]

This is so true!

there's a theme around here of people simultaneously telling people they don't need this or that spec that apple decided to skimp on, and then chastising them for using "ancient" hardware when they are disappointed with performance or feature limitations in a year or two.

just smile and nod. they can't help themselves.

for what its worth, i DON'T care about specs for their own sake (or i'd never buy apple in the first place!). i care about experience, and for me its only about trying to make decisions that will retain a quality experience for more than a year. as an iPad 3 owner, i'm intimately familiar with apple hardware that is equipped to run its launch OS great, but was not forward thinking enough to handle evolving software.

its tough for me now, because like the iPad 3 with retina display, the 9.7 pro is the only device that mixes the features (pencil) and form factor i want right now, but i know its not a good future proof decision.

 

[rui no onna]

Apple tends to release hardware (in particular RAM) that is minimum necessary for good performance with their finely tuned software. By the time Apple does increase RAM, it's because the upgrade has become necessary for smooth operation. That's been the case since the first iPhone (128MB RAM). You either accept it and buy the Apple device that fits your needs or you switch to a different platform.

Apple is in the business of selling hardware and they're not going to make "future-proof" devices because that'll mean less reason to upgrade ergo less sales. They also enjoy massive economies of scale so even if the price difference between 2GB and 4GB is a mere $5, when you're making 50+ million iPads a year, that's $250 million.

 

[SuperKerem]

Apple tends to release hardware (in particular RAM) that is minimum necessary for good performance with their finely tuned software. By the time Apple does increase RAM, it's because the upgrade has become necessary for smooth operation. That's been the case since the first iPhone (128MB RAM). You either accept it and buy the Apple device that fits your needs or you switch to a different platform.

Apple is in the business of selling hardware and they're not going to make "future-proof" devices because that'll mean less reason to upgrade ergo less sales. They also enjoy massive economies of scale so even if the price difference between 2GB and 4GB is a mere $5, when you're making 50+ million iPads a year, that's $250 million.

Yeah, I guess that's why Apple's worth billions

Fortunately some devices like the iPad 2 and iPad Air 2 are more 'future-proof' than others

 

[rui no onna]

Yeah, I guess that's why Apple's worth billions

Fortunately some devices like the iPad 2 and iPad Air 2 are more 'future-proof' than others

Yup. Apple currently has market capitalization of $585.9 billion so that's more than half a trillion dollars.

And interestingly enough, the iPad 2 only has 512MB RAM. It was more "future-proof" because the low resolution doesn't need much to operate acceptably. I feel the iPad 3 was rushed so they can release something with Retina display. However, starting with A6/A6X, we're starting to get diminishing returns for non-enthusiast usage.

I reckon comparing relative performance of iPads to Intel, the line-up will be something like this:

iPad 3: Atom (Bay Trail)
iPad 4: i3 (Clarkdale)
iPad Air: i3 (Sandy Bridge)
iPad Air 2: i3 (Haswell)
iPad Pro 9.7": i5 (Skylake)
iPad Pro 12.9": i7 (Skylake)

Atom Bay Trail will be noticeably laggy. Anything from i3 Clarkdale and newer will run normal tasks smoothly but the difference in CPU will be significant for applications that require more grunt.

 

[SuperKerem]

Yup. Apple currently has market capitalization of $585.9 billion so that's more than half a trillion dollars.

And interestingly enough, the iPad 2 only has 512MB RAM. It was more "future-proof" because the low resolution doesn't need much to operate acceptably. I feel the iPad 3 was rushed so they can release something with Retina display. However, starting with A6/A6X, we're starting to get diminishing returns for non-enthusiast usage.

I reckon comparing relative performance of iPads to Intel, the line-up will be something like this:

iPad 3: Atom (Bay Trail)
iPad 4: i3 (Clarkdale)
iPad Air: i3 (Sandy Bridge)
iPad Air 2: i3 (Haswell)
iPad Pro 9.7": i5 (Skylake)
iPad Pro 12.9": i7 (Skylake)

Atom Bay Trail will be noticeably laggy. Anything from i3 Clarkdale and newer will run normal tasks smoothly but the difference in CPU will be significant for applications that require more grunt.

Haha, with the Intel references you're my type of geek

Honestly, I would say the iPad Air 2 and iPad Pro 9.7 should be in the same category since the CPU is only 10% faster and the RAM is identical