Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple to Launch 'iPad HD' This Fall Alongside Pro Apps?

MacRumorUser said:
And that's the reason I think they don't allow 'Retina' Res iPhone on the iPad. So they can let developers make more money charging us 'more' or twice for an application that doesnt look like ******
Click to expand...

As a developer, I can perhaps chime in. It's actually quite a hassle to keep iPhone and iPad versions of your app. It would be very nice if an app which supported retina would automatically display in that resolution on the iPad. I decided to make a universal app out of my existing game to give iPad users a better experience. I can share some of my thinking: On the one hand, the fact that for a while on the iPad the "race to the bottom" seemed less pronounced, and apps were selling for a little bit more than their iPhone equivalent. I would have loved to differentiate, and have a "universal" app for, say, $1.99 and an iPhone-only app for $0.99. If only to see which percentage of sales went to iPad and which to iPhone/iPod. On the other hand, this would mean that my existing users (all iPhone/iPod) who also happened to have iPads, would have to purchase my app again. I decided that would be really unfair, so I just forgot about that discrimination.

I find it rather frustrating sometimes that when I buy an app for my iPad, I have to re-purchase the iPhone version of that app. Even though it's just a few dollars, I notice I have this mental block that feels like I'm paying twice for the same thing.
 
" a double resolution screen (2048 x 1536), "

Of course, that's not double the resolution, but quadruple.
 
oldwatery said:
iPad Pro.
Now there's a joke. What the hell does Apple know about Pro anything? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well they're good in naming some of their products Pro. Like the MacBook Pro's where majority of people who buy them are college students. Then an iMovie Pro they just released, I'm sorry I mean Final Cut Pro X.
 
rlmccormick said:
Apple needs to do something to shrink the number of iPad models. There are currently 6 and if this rumor comes true that will add to the mix. I'm hoping the next iPads support multiple carrier technologies in one device, that will help a lot.
Click to expand...

There are more than 6 Models of iPads... There are a total of 18 different iPad 2 models.

Verizon
-16Gb (White)
-32GB (White)
-64GB (White)
-16Gb (Black)
-32GB (Black)
-64GB (Black)

AT&T
-16Gb (White)
-32GB (White)
-64GB (White)
-16Gb (Black)
-32GB (Black)
-64GB (Black)

WiFi
-16Gb (White)
-32GB (White)
-64GB (White)
-16Gb (Black)
-32GB (Black)
-64GB (Black)
 
wtf

Apple is starting to piss me off.

Retina for iphone + HD for ipad.

But, still a TN screen for their macbook pros? WTF.

Give us IPS already.
 
Jeebus, "smaller and lighter"... cripes. The rumor in question is THINNER and lighter. Now you've got all the "I want a smaller iPhone" folks all hot and bothered!
 
nickdelvecchio said:
I could maybe see the whole "PRO" iPad thing.... MAYBE..... but not a smaller/less iPhone. i don't think they would do that.... the 3GS is 50 bucks right now. if people want an iPhone but don't want to drop 200 on a contract thats their option. not as good specs, but they know it works.

I highly doubt apple would cheapen a product like that.
Click to expand...

You misinterpreted the quote. Smaller means thinner here and he said nothing about reduced specs. Apple's been packing more and more stuff into less and less room for quite some time now if you haven't noticed. All he's saying is that the components were made for a smaller space, so they can easily fit in a bigger space, not that they are cheaper.
 
Holy, the day they make an iPad that can run OS X.. I'll be first in line. Or a MacBook Air which doubles as an iPad (ability to slide keyboard in and out of the back).
 
paradox00 said:
The article specifically says that this wouldn't supplant (supersede and replace) the iPad2. This one would likely cost more, and have slightly different feature set.

The writing on the wall for OSX has been there for a long time, but that doesn't mean Macs are on their way out. It just means a new OS is on its way in. Mac OSX replaced Mac OS 9 and a unified OS will likely replace iOS and Mac OSX. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. OSX has numerous, redundant and legacy features that simply aren't needed (especially once Lion comes). To get rid of them, a clean break is needed. iOS can't replace OSX, but Apple could certainly take what they've learned from both iOS and OSX and create an OS suitable for both. I look forward to Mac OSXi ("OS Eleven" with the lower case "i" referencing its iOS roots and "OSX" obviously referencing the OSX roots).
Click to expand...

You make sense and we already see some nuances from iOS in Lion. It'd be interesting to see Apple built iOS 6/7 and OS11 from the ground up with major coding and features in both . . . maybe when they get toe Mac OSX 10.10.10 and iOS 10 or something.

Shivetya said:
Give the damn thing a real camera, I am close to selling my iPad2 simply because the built in camera ruins the experience. There are so many opportunities that are wasted because of that POS camera.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. I'm not going to sell it anytime soon, but the next version with a better camera may push me to doing what I know is a waste of time, and goes against all logical and mature nature . . . upgrade to the very next revision of my current product.
 
Sander said:
As a developer, I can perhaps chime in. It's actually quite a hassle to keep iPhone and iPad versions of your app. It would be very nice if an app which supported retina would automatically display in that resolution on the iPad. I decided to make a universal app out of my existing game to give iPad users a better experience. I can share some of my thinking: On the one hand, the fact that for a while on the iPad the "race to the bottom" seemed less pronounced, and apps were selling for a little bit more than their iPhone equivalent. I would have loved to differentiate, and have a "universal" app for, say, $1.99 and an iPhone-only app for $0.99. If only to see which percentage of sales went to iPad and which to iPhone/iPod. On the other hand, this would mean that my existing users (all iPhone/iPod) who also happened to have iPads, would have to purchase my app again. I decided that would be really unfair, so I just forgot about that discrimination.

I find it rather frustrating sometimes that when I buy an app for my iPad, I have to re-purchase the iPhone version of that app. Even though it's just a few dollars, I notice I have this mental block that feels like I'm paying twice for the same thing.
Click to expand...

im amazed more developers havn't taken to putting iPad usability as an in app purchase "upgrade". take it further and release a "lite" version for free with an in app purchase of x amount for the full version and an additional x amount for the full version on iPad.

i have more than a couple iPhone app's with a seperate iPad app i purchased and would prefer this method.

back on topic, I would love a version of aperture on the iPad. Would make me upgrade my iPad first gen in a heartbeat. (even more so if they actually enabled tethered shooting via the camera connection kit, but that will probably never happen).
 
It doesn't make any BUSINESS sense to release a new iPAD in the same year they release iPAD2.

Apple is still a company in for profit and they have please and answer to their stock holders and investors too.

With iPAD2 sales being really strong right now, and getting very little competition from other players, what business sense does it make for them to release new technology that early?

In that light, Apple should always be investing in R&D and having the 2 or 3 generations of software/hardware and multiple prototypes always in the works so they always have competitive edge or an 'ace' up their sleeves incase their competition pulls something off.

Even if they have multiple working prototypes for the next iPAD/iPhone/iPOD ready they wouldn't release it until it makes business sense to.

Release new products for the sake of release it; will only drive a company out of business.

That said, if Motorola, HP, HTC, Samsum, Asus, etc pulls out a miracle tablet tomorrow, Apple will probably have something already up their sleeves to respond if they have too; until then or Sales of iPAD2 takes a significant drop; you're not going to see a new iPAD until March 2012 at the earliest.
 
devinci99 said:
It doesn't make any BUSINESS sense to release a new iPAD in the same year they release iPAD2.

Apple is still a company in for profit and they have please and answer to their stock holders and investors too.

With iPAD2 sales being really strong right now, and getting very little competition from other players, what business sense does it make for them to release new technology that early?

In that light, Apple should always be investing in R&D and having the 2 or 3 generations of software/hardware and multiple prototypes always in the works so they always have competitive edge or an 'ace' up their sleeves incase their competition pulls something off.

Even if they have multiple working prototypes for the next iPAD/iPhone/iPOD ready they wouldn't release it until it makes business sense to.

Release new products for the sake of release it; will only drive a company out of business.

That said, if Motorola, HP, HTC, Samsum, Asus, etc pulls out a miracle tablet tomorrow, Apple will probably have something already up their sleeves to respond if they have too; until then or Sales of iPAD2 takes a significant drop; you're not going to see a new iPAD until March 2012 at the earliest.
Click to expand...

A premium iPad HD 2.0 makes perfect sense right now. OMG... they have the hottest selling product, and then come out with a Retnia version just before the holidays.... the other manufactures would be crying big time and sales would be through the roof more than they are.

I'm guessing they are doing an HD version because of price point. They need to keep the entry product at $499 and i'm guessing with a retina screen, this would be hard to do.

It makes perfect business sense and genius really.
 
komodrone said:
A screen having 2048 x 1536 resolution itself would cost more than $499 to make. So we're talking $999 ipad HD?
Click to expand...

I think that is why the rumor might have some truth behind it.

There has been way too many rumors surrounding a 2048x1536 display for this not to be something that Apple is seriously considering. However, I seriously doubt that there is any way possible that Apple could put screens of that resolution into all iPads, and keep a $499 entry level price point.

So - maybe the answer is to have a Super-iPad with a high res screen for those who can justify a $1000+ price tag, and keep the current iPad screen for the entry level models.

As iOS devices are Apple's future, they need to introduce some real product differentiation into their iOS product line - in the same way that they have multiple options on the mac side.

This product differentiation is inevitable. I have no doubt that in 5 years time, we will have iPads and iPhones of multiple screen sizes and tech specs. The only unknown is the timing. Whether they start down this path in September is anyone's guess.
 
aristotle said:
Uh, do you really own all of those things in your sig? Have you considered selling some of them? It almost sounds like you are hoarding. I mean, how many laptops does a person need?
Click to expand...

Yes I do...and just what does it have to do with this thread...or you for that matter?
 
maybe this other iPad really is happening. some people are not gonna be happy that already bought an iPad 2.

and as for the iPhone 5, please give us a bigger screen
 
If the ipad increases in resolution, I can only hope that the macbook families will also prove to increase to HD and higher like the imac
 
blackburn said:
Lately the only pro thing about it is the price. It's a notebook nothing else. I think powerbook was a much nicer term, ambitious yet not that "look its pro".

Professional laptops are those portable workstations or portable servers or even the rugged ones like the panasonic toughbook.

Pro makes people feel good about spending that much money. It's marketing.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, a quad 2.2 processsor with 8gb ram was not considered a "consumer" machine. It's a portable workstation...it's PRO in every sense of the word.
 
Brien said:
Though it does make you wonder how much longer OS X has to live.
Click to expand...
Apple described OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard as a complete "under the hood" rewrite which is why very few features were added to this release.

Because of this, Snow Leopard should be OS 11, however it looks like Steve is enamored with the OS X moniker.

If Apple was planning the imminent demise of OS X, it would be doubtful that they would put so much effort into rewriting it.

It's also worth pointing out that Mac sales are growing and Apple is increasing marketshare. In contrast, many of Apple's PC competitor sales are stagnant or falling (which is doubly bad since the world population is increasing and more people in developing nations are using computers).

My guess is that the underpinnings of OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard will be used for about ten years (regardless of what they call it) before it needs to be fully rewritten. It's Unix, so it has a long, robust, and proven history.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

With all these Pro features they might have to call the rumored iPad2 HD the Lisa2
 
Speaking only for myself, an "iPad 2 HD" that just offered a Retina Display would be great because I'd like to get an iPad 2 now, but am holding off because of all these rumors about an "iPad 3" coming in September.

Yes, I know these are rumors and one should be skeptical of their veracity and provenance, but I'd really hate to buy an iPad 2 now and in two months see the "iPad 3" ship with the RD, a dual-core CPU, more RAM and such for the same price.

But if all we'll see if a new display - and a significant price jump - then I'll be happy with an iPad 2. Yes, I know likely in March or April the actual "iPad 3" with the extra goodies will ship, but I am more comfortable giving up those features because I have to wait 6-10 months for them versus 2 months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back