At this point, it's not really necessary. Anything more than 512 MB will be wasted. There's no point for Apple to spend extra on superfluous hardware.
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.
Cortex A9-Based iPads, Verizon iPhone, iOS-Based Apple TV Set for 1Q 2011 Launch?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
At this point, it's not really necessary. Anything more than 512 MB will be wasted. There's no point for Apple to spend extra on superfluous hardware.
That is the exact reason why Apple will support it, just like they did Edge. Get all these 1st adopters to commit to a 2 year contract with the old technology, plus make a lot of money finally releasing a CDMA compatible iPhone. Then the following year, when Verizon network is really 4G ready, release a new iPhone for Verizon with iPhone 4G/LTE.
Apple is known for releasing things with 1|2 key feature(s) missing. This way they can test the waters while keeping production cost low. Then if the item is a success they update the item with the missing feature(s), which are now even cheaper due to technology cost always dropping, and more people come and buy the product. Example, iPad RAM & Front Facing Camera.
This most certainly won't happen. Find advertising literature for an iOS device that contains technical specs that have detailed information going into how much memory is built-in.
This 256 vs 512 debate is definitely a top 5 non-issue issue discussed here.
How do you think the iPhone emulator works?
It's iOS running on x86, your app compiles to x86 as well.
Porting isn't a problem, Apple makes their OS platform independent.
I just think that using the A4 is a vastly cheaper proposition, allowing a vastly cheaper and more competitive product for Apple to apply their markups to.
Unless AMD are planning to sell Ontario APUs for under $20 a piece...
Sure... but make sure that next year you then return THAT one because there will be even better features in v3.
Actually, at this point, reality is 256MB. Just as you claim that "anything more than 512 MB will be wasted", some might argue that anything less than 512 will soon prove to be insufficient.
In fact, if you open a few Safari pages on your iPad and try to multitask, you'll see that 256MB is not a lot. If the rumour is true and Apple will double the RAM next year, that will mean that the ageing iPad 2 from late-2011/early 2012 will still have the same RAM as a few smartphones from 2009. Or maybe Apple will increase the RAM up to 1GB. But then, developers will just have to ignore the first generation iPads. It's as simple as that. Or in 18 months, Apple will see its third iPad launch. But some people have issues with buying something that becomes dated in no time.
Your iPad either becomes a dinosaur or the future of the iPad will be less exciting than any other smartphone's. And I haven't even mentioned the issue of higher resolution...
I was thinking the same thing. They always seem to release devices with a few features missing for the first iteration.
Am I totally mistaken, or is simultaneous voice and data impossible on Verizon's current network? Wouldn't it be uncharacteristic of Apple to release an iPhone lacking one of the major benefits of the platform? If there is a way to overcome this with the current network, I'll buy into the rumor. If not, no way this is true.
My Predictions:
Verizon iPhone: Yes with CDMA, no 4G. Steve will have same excuses as first iPhone, 4G has poor battery life, and 4G not really ready/available throughout the US yet. People will buy this version, Apple will release a 4G version the following year and more people will buy the 4G version.
Updated iPad, and iPad 7": Sure, give people choice with a 7" iPad and cheaper price point (just like they do with iPods). Add front facing camera and more RAM just like the iPhone 4 (use the iPhone A8 ARM for all you can, production cost on it have to be low by now). Now here is the tricky part. I think Apple will hold off on a 9.7" iPad, and just release the 7" with iPhone 4 specs. This will give Apple time to perfect the A9 ARM and then update the 9.7" iPad 2 to 3 months later. What Apple learns from the A9 in the 9.7" will later be applied to the next iPhone for AT&T followed by the next Verizon iphone and 7" iPad.
Apple TV: My thoughts are whatever. I think it will have iOS and Apple will start to allow developers to create applications for it. The nice thing is the device will probably be very low powered. Bottom line, want a powerful HTPC, buy a Mac Mini, want something like the current AppleTV, buy the new AppleTV.
Verizon iPhone: Yes with CDMA, no 4G. Steve will have same excuses as first iPhone, 4G has poor battery life, and 4G not really ready/available throughout the US yet. People will buy this version, Apple will release a 4G version the following year and more people will buy the 4G version.
Updated iPad, and iPad 7": Sure, give people choice with a 7" iPad and cheaper price point (just like they do with iPods). Add front facing camera and more RAM just like the iPhone 4 (use the iPhone A8 ARM for all you can, production cost on it have to be low by now). Now here is the tricky part. I think Apple will hold off on a 9.7" iPad, and just release the 7" with iPhone 4 specs. This will give Apple time to perfect the A9 ARM and then update the 9.7" iPad 2 to 3 months later. What Apple learns from the A9 in the 9.7" will later be applied to the next iPhone for AT&T followed by the next Verizon iphone and 7" iPad.
Apple TV: My thoughts are whatever. I think it will have iOS and Apple will start to allow developers to create applications for it. The nice thing is the device will probably be very low powered. Bottom line, want a powerful HTPC, buy a Mac Mini, want something like the current AppleTV, buy the new AppleTV.
it's up to the handset, the network at the current rev can handle it. The spec for simultaneous voice and data (SVDO) was only approved last year. Chip makers for the handsets are catching up slowly.
I doubt there will be a January launch, but I think it will be a january announcement. Remember, because these use 3g networks, they have to go through the FCC, which means apple has to announce them before they submit them to the FCC for approval so that it doesn't take away from their big unveiling extravaganzas... it's what they've done with the other iphones/ipad before
Right... triple the thickness to add a dead-end, mechanical media most people might use once or twice a year.
Brilliant.
Not Excited by Apple TV
In fact, I'm not interested in TV on the web at all, no matter what the platform or vendor. If I have to sit for a commercial before I look at any thing, web TV is a non-starter. The best thing that ever happened to TV is, in my opinion, TiVO. I watch the commercials that interest me and skip those that don't. TV on the web puts TV control back into the hands of Madison Avenue and I can't and won't accept that.
In fact, I'm not interested in TV on the web at all, no matter what the platform or vendor. If I have to sit for a commercial before I look at any thing, web TV is a non-starter. The best thing that ever happened to TV is, in my opinion, TiVO. I watch the commercials that interest me and skip those that don't. TV on the web puts TV control back into the hands of Madison Avenue and I can't and won't accept that.
Of course, but most people on this list can't see that. They want their 5 year old BlueRay technology.
Not trying to pick on you, but what did you think... there was never going to ba an iPad update? I'm surprised it's taking until January... I expected a slightly beefed up version with a front facing camera and possibly a USB connection by September. The camera was such an obvious omission.
January is almost a year from when it was introduced, so that would be the natural upgrade time for a all new iPad.
...so that the likes of Adobe and MS can bloat the hell out of it, no thanks.
I'd rather see Apple force ARM assembly down us devs' throats and live those good old 8bit days we younger ones missed!
Hummmm... you do know, without commercials, your TV would cost even more than it does today... nothing is free... someone has to pay. I'll sit through a couple silly commercials to save a couple bucks.
BTW... I love Tivo too.
This is true. 256 MB is insufficient for multitasking, where 512 MB is just enough. Until Apple increases the processing power, graphics and what not, we don't yet need anything about 512. But of course, more is better than less, when it comes to power.
Apple TV Uses a 1 GHz Intel Pentium M processor and 256 MB of RAM. It is capable of running Standard OS X.