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

First iPad 2 Reviews: Evolutionary, 512MB RAM, Thinner, Faster

ZipZap said:
7. USB 3 and Thunderbolt
Click to expand...

Never quite got the obsession with Thunderbolt to be honest .. but besides that, unless Apple switches to an Intel Atom based setup (which they won't) I don't see how Intels Thunderbolt will ever make its way in the iPad. Do they even license it, or do they also require a certain Intel chipset to go along with it like they for the Core i series?

This iPad release did not have enough in it to make me switch .. I'll stick with iPhone and a regular MBP for the time being.

T.
 
Digital Skunk said:
It's good to see that Apple lovers are flocking to overpaid tech bloggers' opinions that support their love affair with the Apple logo.

Walt being the worst of the bunch, but at least he admits that he's an opinionated d0uchebag.

Oh well.

I had cash in hand ready for that new iPad, but I think I'll follow the rest of the modest crowd and wait for a worthy update. I'll take this cash and grab me a new office desk.
Click to expand...

So, because all the reviews have been positive it makes them all wrong does it? I wonder if there was one reviewer who actually didn't like the iPad whether you'd think they were being more honest just cos it fitted with your narrow mindset.
I, and millions like me, frankly care not a jot whether you buy an iPad, but I would suggest you actually try one before assuming it isn't 'worthy'. How conceited is that?
 
425 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)

I'm a bit tired of the whole, "I'll just wait for the iPad 3 in September."

That rumor has been debunked.

Steve Jobs: "2011: The year of the iPad 2"


That means the iPad 2. Not the year of the iPad 2 until September when the last quarter becomes year of the iPad 3.


The iPad 3 will not come until 2012.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your no iPad 3 til next year point .. Steve Jobs hasn't been the most reliable source of information when it comes to future Apple products ;-)
Anything else he could have said (or even not said) could potentially threatend iPad2 sales. He is a smarter man than risking that.

T.
 
faroZ06 said:
More of a joke about how Droid users only care about specs :p
Click to expand...

They remind me of all those amateur DSLR owners who spend most of their time arguing over megapixels, Bayer algorithms, autofocus, camera calibration, MTF charts, etc. instead of being out in the field taking good photographs. They're gear-heads that are always on the look-out for hardware that will improve their mediocre results.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)

tatonka said:
425 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)

I'm a bit tired of the whole, "I'll just wait for the iPad 3 in September."

That rumor has been debunked.

Steve Jobs: "2011: The year of the iPad 2"


That means the iPad 2. Not the year of the iPad 2 until September when the last quarter becomes year of the iPad 3.


The iPad 3 will not come until 2012.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your no iPad 3 til next year point .. Steve Jobs hasn't been the most reliable source of information when it comes to future Apple products ;-)
Anything else he could have said (or even not said) could potentially threatend iPad2 sales. He is a smarter man than risking that.

T.
Click to expand...

True, but I think Steve is smart enough to realize how awkward it would be to explain to the average consumer why he released iPad 3 six months after the iPad 2, during what he said was the YEAR of the iPad 2.
 
Ive been a total naysayer in regards to the iPad 2's refresh being "evolutionary" over "revolutionary"...that said, iPad 3 WONT be here till 2012; as such, Id just be chewing my fingers off waiting for it to hit.

I think its an easy decision...if you have an iPad 1, probably not worth the upgrade...if you dont have one yet, the iPad 2 is a pretty great device (@ 499.99 it cant be beat)
 
Zoboomafoo said:
Are there really people out there who want to take a picture with an iPad? I get video chat i suppose, but I don't think they've made cameras this large in decades.

Maybe I'm just missing a use case?
Click to expand...

I would love to use the camera on my iPT in place of a scanner. Otherwise I don't see much need for it. Unfortunately it is inadequate for the job.
 
I don't understand why everyone is criticizing the camera quality? This isn't a camera for photojournalism, it's a camera for video conferencing. Video conferencing is very bandwidth intensive, which is a particular problem when you're talking about wimpy 3G connections or overloaded coffee shop wifi. The only solution in that case is to reduce the bit rate, and the easiest way to do that is to reduce the resolution. It's a compromise to deliver a smooth viewable video conference instead of a jerky slide-show. It has nothing to do with Apple "being cheap" or using "old technology" as some of the critics would suggest.
 
moderately said:
I would love to use the camera on my iPT in place of a scanner. Otherwise I don't see much need for it. Unfortunately it is inadequate for the job.
Click to expand...

Not true, you can download Genius Scan (itunes store) take a picture. Adjust it
and e-mail it to yourself or others as a scan.

Quality IMO is excellent, but that depends on what you are scanning.

Obviously not meant to deliver high dpi scans.
 
1. its easy to say its smooth mulitasking when it is not, its app freezing.
2. i bet you have only repeated what you have heard jobs state, and never even used one for more then 5 seconds. keep using your phone OS on a tablet and then brag about how smooth it is, of course, it was designed for a phone
bossxii said:
Not if you build the OS and SDK and control how apps use memory. Unlike the "other" phones and tablets, Apple builds hardware to run their software smooth and lag free. You don't need ram if you suspend apps and don't let them run in the background full time. iPad 1 runs smoother with 256megs or ram than any Android device I've used to date, most of them with 1gig.

People keep bitching about spec's and are clueless about how the apps actually work within the OS. Go enjoy a laggy Xoom with 2x the memory.
Click to expand...
have you even used honeycomb for more than 5 seconds? would you like frame style to maximize your screen? would you like to have data at a moments glance without having to open apps? would you like to have true multitasking? i agree for the masses that buy the ipad it works, don't slight others because they have evolved from a phone OS on a tablet
Chupa Chupa said:
But most people are not hard core gamers just like most drivers are not NASCAR racers. The unified iOS comforts people. People do not want to learn multiple OSes. Apple is creating a platform here.
Click to expand...
 
425 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)

I'm a bit tired of the whole, "I'll just wait for the iPad 3 in September."

That rumor has been debunked.

Steve Jobs: "2011: The year of the iPad 2"


That means the iPad 2. Not the year of the iPad 2 until September when the last quarter becomes year of the iPad 3.


The iPad 3 will not come until 2012.
Click to expand...

Unless they come out with a retina display "iPad 2 HD" later this year, in which case everybody will be right! :p
 
dunno why people are compalining about 512mb ram, its more then enough, dont compare it to android, cause the bloat software takes up half the memory.

512 is more then enough
 
ZipZap said:
Well, I am not willing to take a big loss on a perfectly good ipad 1 just for a little (and I mean little) less weight.

The improved CPU is a good addition but my ipad 1 plays games and movies just fine so wheres the value add?

I dont really see anything so compelling that I need to have an iPad 2.

Hopefully ipad 3 will bring the following:

Revolutionary changes:
1. Even less weight
2. New battery technology (lighter and more powerful)
3. 4G capability
4. Loose the border space and decrease the form factor (like an endless pool the display goes almost to the edges)
5. Higher resolution display
6. No more home button
7. USB 3 and Thunderbolt

Evolutionary changes:
1. More video memory (1gb)
2. More SSD memory (64/128 gb)
3. Higher resolution front facing camera
4. Flash for back camera
5. Multiple simultaneous Bluetooth devices (most likely an iOS improvement)
Click to expand...

Seriously, where can you hold the device if it doesnt have edges/borders. ITs just a stupid design decision to remove the borders around the screen. Stop writing when you have no clue. Your hands would cover the actual screen instead of the bezel.

Alsu usb 3 and thunderbolt require a whole intel chipset. Come an. Serioulsy dude.
 
Capt Underpants said:
People are going to be really disappointed with the camera on the iPad.

But Apple really intends it to be a video-centric feature. Holding up an iPad and taking photos is cumbersome. If Apple had their way, iPad 2 owners would take out the iPhone for photos.
Click to expand...

I have been using my iPhone4 on job sites taking photos of surveys, audits and job completions for my contract vendors. Afterwards I have to transfer them to my iPad where I use Apps like SignMyPad and Noterize to embed them into PDF forms I complete for each job.

Using the camera kit is now nice and easy but I still have to get out the other i device and camera kit along with dock cable to transfer them ( there are wireless apps to do this but are slow and still buggy).

Once I have my photos sent to my iPad, I then have to embed them into the docs using various apps, have it signed and then send them as e-mail. Most often when sending photos directly from the iPhone4, I have to reduce their quality 1st to reduce file size as most companies I email to are unable to accept emails over a certain size.


With the iPad2 3 things are immediately remedied, I no longer have to transfer pics from one device to another just to embed them into a document and while performing my work I can simply use the onboard camera to take the photo direct to the iPad and also the image size will probably be of a smaller size since it may be lower pixel camera.

I can't wait, finally a one stop shop for everything + others I've been waiting for. I think it's an excellent upgrade from iPad1. :apple:
 
toddybody said:
Still not gonna get one till it has: a user replaceable SSD and gigabit ethernet port
Click to expand...

That's called the MacBook.

What's the obsession people have with what amounts to "this race car sucks because it's not a dump truck too"? This thing is a sub-9mm-thick tablet with severe size, weight, and power constraints; why the he11 doe people think it should also have assorted ports & other removable components which, by their very nature, demand greater size, weight and power?

If you want USB, expandable memory, wired networking, better cameras, replaceable battery, etc. then this is not the product you're looking for - and there are plenty out there which are, given the realities of inherent size, weight, & power demands of what you do want.
 
The Wedge said:
So does the iPhone 4.
Click to expand...

I know, that's why I was asking if it had the same 5 megapixel camera as on the iPhone 4.

From the original unedited post, The New York Times stated that it had a 5 Megapixel camera, and I was questioning this because of the fact that other reviewers were stating that the quality of the camera wasn't very good. So I was wondering if it was a mistake on nytimes's part or if it was the same 5 megapixel autofocus camera as on the iPhone, or if maybe it was a cheaper camera with inflated megapixels.

Arn already responded to it and said it was probably a mistake and edited his post. New York Times has already removed this from their article as well, posting that "Bafflingly, though, the stills are only 0.7 megapixels."
 
I just wanna know what you do with the smart cover when it's not being used to cover it. None of the videos show anything but it being ripped off. Why would I take it off and then have 2 separate devices. Anyone know if it sticks to the back or something?
 
Like how ATD said battery life is worse, but engadget got about an hour more of video playback. That seems like a big disparity, wonder how ATD tested it.
 
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