Fixed it for them

[token787]

I fixed the ipad video for Apple, since they don't have the time...improvements in italics

Jony Ive:
“Our Goal was to take all the amazing things that you can do with a full size iPad, but pack them into a product that was so much smaller, with less computing power, and with less resolution than a full-size iPad. And that’s what we did with the new iPad mini.”

Michael Tchao:
“So, when we decided to make the iPad mini, we wanted to make sure it had all the features that makes iPad so magical, except for the retina display and modern chip. We began with a display that doesn’t even come close to the new iPad. So all your apps and content don’t look nearly as good. And at 7.9 inches, it’s still small enough to fit into your hand, even though the reason we didn’t widen the iPhone 5 is because it wasn’t supposed to fit in one hand…”… “it has a dual core A5 chip, apple’s current chip…two generations ago.”

Jony Ive:
“If all we had done is take the original iPad and just reduce it, all that you would be aware of was everything that was just missing, like the modern chip and retina resolution that has become standard on all of our other products.” … “That there is inherent loss in just reducing a product in size, even though this is actually a scaled-down iPad 2.” And what we did, was we went back to the very beginning of iPad 2 and made sure it was a reduction of it, so that we could come out in 5 months and make a retina iPad mini that would maximize our cash flow for essentially the same device.”

Disclaimer: this is just for fun, and these people didn't really say these things, even though they are true. =)

ROFLMAO

 

[Tigger11]

If A5 is not needed to run 1024x768, why did Apple upgrade iPhone 5 to A6 when its resolution (1136x640) is less than iPad mini(1024x768)? If heat and power were the issues, how were they able to fit A6 in a MUCH smaller device (iPhone)? Moreover, the next iPad mini will have A6, its just the way Apple wants it to be - iPad mini a generation behind the flagship iPad (9.7").

The A5 chip has been the processor for the iPad 2 since it debuted, it has plenty of power, in fact the iPad 2 beat the iPad 3 in raw processing power (slightly) when they debuted, there were several threads on this board and others. The iPad Mini is a shrunk iPad 2, why have to redo a bunch of glue logic and get the system tweeked just right, when you have a system that has sold 30 million units you can copy. The 32nm A5 is being delivered in high quantities now, and draws as much as 30% less power then the previous version of the part. Next generation of the iPad mini will have an A6X or later version of the part, the last two generations of the iPad have used different versions then the iPhone and iPad, (the A6 isnt designed for a iPad, thats why they came up with the A6X for the iPad 2). Also given the part constraints mentioned during the quarterly call, taking parts from the iPhone 5, to make the iPad Mini isnt a clever plan when you can get great performance from parts there aren't a shortage on (ie A5).

 

[jmpnop]

The A5 chip has been the processor for the iPad 2 since it debuted, it has plenty of power, in fact the iPad 2 beat the iPad 3 in raw processing power (slightly) when they debuted, there were several threads on this board and others. The iPad Mini is a shrunk iPad 2, why have to redo a bunch of glue logic and get the system tweeked just right, when you have a system that has sold 30 million units you can copy. The 32nm A5 is being delivered in high quantities now, and draws as much as 30% less power then the previous version of the part. Next generation of the iPad mini will have an A6X or later version of the part, the last two generations of the iPad have used different versions then the iPhone and iPad, (the A6 isnt designed for a iPad, thats why they came up with the A6X for the iPad 2). Also given the part constraints mentioned during the quarterly call, taking parts from the iPhone 5, to make the iPad Mini isnt a clever plan when you can get great performance from parts there aren't a shortage on (ie A5).

A5X/A6X has a quad-core CPU which is mainly to drive the retina display. I don't think iPad mini will ever get 'X' version of CPUs. Both iPhone 4S and iPad 2 had A5 processor with slightly different clocks because they had nearly same display resolution. Also you shouldn't compare it to iPad 3 because the performance drop was mainly because of the super high resolution.

If you recall, both iPhone 4S and iPad 2 had the same CPU and they had no problems with supply, I'm quite sure thats not the reason at all. Talking about power consumption, Apple A6 is more efficient than A5, I don't understand how going a generation back would improve power efficiency. Like I said, its a business move to keep product categories from affecting the sales of other - mainly iPod touch and iPad 9.7".

 

[iEvolution]

I fixed the ipad video TEXT for you Italian Blend...improvements in bold italics

Jony Ive:
“Our Goal was to take all the amazing things that you can do with a full size iPad, but pack them into a product that was so much smaller, with less computing power, because our devices are highly engineered and don't need the processing power like our android counterparts and with less resolution than a full-size iPad, so it will be similar to current 7" tablets on the market. And that’s what we did with the new iPad mini.”

Michael Tchao:
“So, when we decided to make the iPad mini, we wanted to make sure it had all the features that makes iPad so magical, except for the retina display and modern chip, because once again, we don't need the processing power for IOS to perform smoothly and our competitiors are still playing catch up in display quality. We began with a display that doesn’t even come close to the new iPad, because this isn't a full sized ipad. So all your apps and content don’t look nearly as good, but still MUCH better than an android tablet with blown up phone apps. And at 7.9 inches, it’s still small enough to fit into your hand, even though the reason we didn’t widen the iPhone 5 is because it wasn’t supposed to fit in one hand…and this isn't an iphone that you would want to use consistently one-handed”… “it has a dual core A5 chip, apple’s current chip…two generations ago, which is still going to outperform the competitors who make you pay for current chips to sell to the 1% of people that actually think it's cool to brag about specs”
Jony Ive:
“If all we had done is take the original iPad and just reduce it, all that you would be aware of was everything that was just missing, like the modern chip and retina resolution that has become standard on all of our other products, and unfortunately still hard to come by on android products” … “That there is inherent loss in just reducing a product in size, even though this is actually a scaled-down iPad 2, which is awesome” And what we did, was we went back to the very beginning of iPad 2 and made sure it was a reduction of it, so that we could come out in 5 months and make a retina iPad mini that would maximize our cash flow for essentially the same device, when we actually have those displays made and ready for market and able to put them in the device without raising the cost”

So Apple is satisfied when they just fit in the crowd of other android tablets? Since when? They aren't trying to be the best?

and no.. the Nexus 7 may be .85" smaller but it has a higher resolution, more space, more RAM, cheaper ($130) and faster processor.

Cute justification for Apple to half ass the iPad Mini though.

 

[craftytony]

So Apple is satisfied when they just fit in the crowd of other android tablets? Since when? They aren't trying to be the best?

and no.. the Nexus 7 may be .85" smaller but it has a higher resolution, more space, more RAM, cheaper ($130) and faster processor.

Cute justification for Apple to half ass the iPad Mini though.

Less Apps, Blown up phone apps, plastic parts.

Love you guys pimping faster processors and more RAM...time and time again Apple outperforms with less processor power.

More space? The nexus comes in 8GB or 16GB and no LTE options....and a large portion of your screen is taken up by the header and navigation menus....

10 hours ipad mini, nexus 8 hours battery life

Nexus only has a front facing camera

Nice try....try again

 

[Tigger11]

A5X/A6X has a quad-core CPU which is mainly to drive the retina display. I don't think iPad mini will ever get 'X' version of CPUs. Both iPhone 4S and iPad 2 had A5 processor with slightly different clocks because they had nearly same display resolution. Also you shouldn't compare it to iPad 3 because the performance drop was mainly because of the super high resolution.

When they go to a retina display they will need to use one of the X processors to run it, they won't use the A5X because its been shown to lag on certain tasks driving the over 3 million pixels that make up the iPad Retina screen, so it will be a A6X or later. I understand it was slower because of driving the 4x as many pixels around, but it doesnt mean it wasnt slower.

If you recall, both iPhone 4S and iPad 2 had the same CPU and they had no problems with supply, I'm quite sure thats not the reason at all. Talking about power consumption, Apple A6 is more efficient than A5, I don't understand how going a generation back would improve power efficiency. Like I said, its a business move to keep product categories from affecting the sales of other - mainly iPod touch and iPad 9.7".

I'm quite sure you are wrong about the supply issue btw. Your A5 example is flawed at best, the Ipad 2 was available on March 11, 2011 it used the A5 processor, the iPhone 4S started sale on Oct 14, 2011, over 7 months later, so sure after over 7 months the iPad rush had died down and they had enough parts to support both iPad line and iPhone line, but thats not the case here. In fact lack of processors may have been part of the delay that moved the iPhone 4s from a summer delivery to a fall delivery. You want them to use the A6 processor for the iPad mini which is shipping a month later then the iPhone 5, when we absolutely know from the quarter call yesterday that iPhone 5 parts (ie screens and A6) are supply constrained already. In addition, I'm not sure why you brought up the iPod touch, thats just more proof for my point. The new 5th generation Ipod Touch that just started shipping is running an A5, just like the iPad mini, Apple TV 3, iPhone 4s and iPad 2. As for the power efficiency question, as was announced in March, Apple has shrunk the A5 to a 32nm process, which means the part is drawing up to 30% less power and running much cooler then the original A5 processors that shipped with the original iPad 2s and iPhone 4s's.

 

[joshwithachance]

I chuckled quite a bit reading this post. I do agree though. The mini is basically just an iPad 2 shrunken down a bit. I mean the iPad 2 is a great tablet, but it's getting a bit long in the tooth now.

 

[jmpnop]

When they go to a retina display they will need to use one of the X processors to run it, they won't use the A5X because its been shown to lag on certain tasks driving the over 3 million pixels that make up the iPad Retina screen, so it will be a A6X or later. I understand it was slower because of driving the 4x as many pixels around, but it doesnt mean it wasnt slower.

I really doubt retina display on iPad mini for many reasons. If they doubled the resolution in every dimension to 2048x1536, iPad mini would technically have a better screen than their flagship product. They'd need a much bigger battery and X series processor. It was a tight fit in the bigger iPad and they had to slightly make it thicker to accommodate the bigger battery. How can they fit the bigger battery in iPad mini? Also heat would a big issue. If they went with a different resolution, it'd result in fragmentation and apps would require modification to take advantage of the new resolution. And lastly, I don't think they'd offer the premium features of the bigger iPad like retina display on a device that costs nearly $200 less.

I'm quite sure you are wrong about the supply issue btw. Your A5 example is flawed at best, the Ipad 2 was available on March 11, 2011 it used the A5 processor, the iPhone 4S started sale on Oct 14, 2011, over 7 months later, so sure after over 7 months the iPad rush had died down and they had enough parts to support both iPad line and iPhone line, but thats not the case here. In fact lack of processors may have been part of the delay that moved the iPhone 4s from a summer delivery to a fall delivery. You want them to use the A6 processor for the iPad mini which is shipping a month later then the iPhone 5, when we absolutely know from the quarter call yesterday that iPhone 5 parts (ie screens and A6) are supply constrained already. In addition, I'm not sure why you brought up the iPod touch, thats just more proof for my point. The new 5th generation Ipod Touch that just started shipping is running an A5, just like the iPad mini, Apple TV 3, iPhone 4s and iPad 2.

If they really wanted to put A6 in the mini, they certainly would've found a solution for supply. I don't think that'd be enough reason for them (especially for a company like Apple) to use a different CPU. It doesn't cost much going A6, but they'd have attracted lot more people. I feel the main reason is price and placement of the product in the lineup. Its not logical to expect Apple to put A6 found in the iPhone 5 in a device thats starts at half the price.

As for the power efficiency question, as was announced in March, Apple has shrunk the A5 to a 32nm process, which means the part is drawing up to 30% less power and running much cooler then the original A5 processors that shipped with the original iPad 2s and iPhone 4s's.

The 32nm A5 is definitely more power efficient than the previous generations but A6 is more efficient than A5. When it comes to power efficiency, A6 is the best of all.

 

[Tigger11]

I really doubt retina display on iPad mini for many reasons. If they doubled the resolution in every dimension to 2048x1536, iPad mini would technically have a better screen than their flagship product.

I believe you are the only person on Macrumors that believes they are not going to put a retina display on the iPad Mini in the next or at worse the 3rd revision. Sorry but you are just wrong on this, eventually every product they make (including the imacs) will be retina displays, it just wasn't possible on a technical level this time around. I guess by better screen you mean PPI, because resolution wise it would have the exact same screen at the current 9.7" iPad.

If they really wanted to put A6 in the mini, they certainly would've found a solution for supply. I don't think that'd be enough reason for them (especially for a company like Apple) to use a different CPU.

No, really they couldn't look at the number of foundries that can make HKMG 32nm parts, how many do you really think have enough empty bandwidth to make an extra 3 million (nearly 100 mm2 ) parts per month? Come back when you find that company because Apple and I are both interested.

It doesn't cost much going A6, but they'd have attracted lot more people. I feel the main reason is price and placement of the product in the lineup. Its not logical to expect Apple to put A6 found in the iPhone 5 in a device thats starts at half the price.

You are about the only one worried about A5 vs A6, my iPad 2 runs great with an A5, and given the shortage of the A6s, the larger size of the A6, the higher power requirements of the A6, it makes sense to put the A5 in the iPad Mini since its just a shrunk iPad 2.

The 32nm A5 is definitely more power efficient than the previous generations but A6 is more efficient than A5. When it comes to power efficiency, A6 is the best of all.

You are going to define what you mean by that, when Apple was talking about it the other day they were comparing old 45nm A5s (used in the iPhone 4s) to new 32nm A6s (used in the iPhone 5), the 32nm A5 is quite a bit smaller part then the A6 (69 mm2 vs 97mm2) and uses less power at the same clock frequency.

 

[jmpnop]

I believe you are the only person on Macrumors that believes they are not going to put a retina display on the iPad Mini in the next or at worse the 3rd revision. Sorry but you are just wrong on this, eventually every product they make (including the imacs) will be retina displays, it just wasn't possible on a technical level this time around. I guess by better screen you mean PPI, because resolution wise it would have the exact same screen at the current 9.7" iPad.

Its not going to happen anytime soon. And yes I meant ppi, resolution would same as 9.7".

No, really they couldn't look at the number of foundries that can make HKMG 32nm parts, how many do you really think have enough empty bandwidth to make an extra 3 million (nearly 100 mm2 ) parts per month? Come back when you find that company because Apple and I are both interested.

It seems that iPhone 5 shortage is mainly due to quality control problems -
http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipad-iphone/news/?newsid=3404482
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/10/17/hon-hais-explanation-for-iphone-5-shortage/
Its probably not A6 which is causing shortage of iPhone 5. Even the Anandtech article says its because of price Apple went with A5 for the iPad mini.

You are about the only one worried about A5 vs A6, my iPad 2 runs great with an A5, and given the shortage of the A6s, the larger size of the A6, the higher power requirements of the A6, it makes sense to put the A5 in the iPad Mini since its just a shrunk iPad 2.

You're just justifying Apple's low standards. It could've been better than just a shrunken iPad 2. It would've been a much better deal at $299/$399 (WiFi / LTE), or they could've gone with A6 or atleast 1GB RAM.

You are going to define what you mean by that, when Apple was talking about it the other day they were comparing old 45nm A5s (used in the iPhone 4s) to new 32nm A6s (used in the iPhone 5), the 32nm A5 is quite a bit smaller part then the A6 (69 mm2 vs 97mm2) and uses less power at the same clock frequency.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/12

iPhone 5 SoC is more efficient at power management, so on regular tasks it'd last longer. But when it comes to power consumption, you were right. I don't get how that affects the decision when they could fit A6 in the iPhone.

 

[Tigger11]

Its not going to happen anytime soon. And yes I meant ppi, resolution would same as 9.7".

It will happen in the next two revisions, so over the next two years or so it takes to get to revision 3, though Apple is going to try really hard to make it happen in the next 12 months.

It seems that iPhone 5 shortage is mainly due to quality control problems -
http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipad-iphone/news/?newsid=3404482
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/10/17/hon-hais-explanation-for-iphone-5-shortage/
Its probably not A6 which is causing shortage of iPhone 5. Even the Anandtech article says its because of price Apple went with A5 for the iPad mini.

So you have a two week old guess, and then a 1 week old guess, or we could just take it from the quarterly report from last night and realize I am right, which do you think we should go with? I mean realize these same sources on the same days (oct 11 & Oct 17) from "sources close inside Apple" told us that the iPad Mini was going to be 8 GB and cost $249. And I am sorry but saying that Apple went with the A5 instead of A6 over the price difference is just silly. Its an engineering & manufacturing decision, plain and simple, its the same one I would have made if I was doing the design. Once they went with a non-Retina display there is no reason to upgrade the processor, have to upgrade all the glue logic and create a bunch of part differences between it and the iPad 2 you'll need more battery (making it heavier) or less battery life (not good either) and having the tablet run hotter, all just so you can say I have an A6 in it?

You're just justifying Apple's low standards. It could've been better than just a shrunken iPad 2. It would've been a much better deal at $299/$399 (WiFi / LTE), or they could've gone with A6 or atleast 1GB RAM.

Its not low standards, putting an A6 and 1 GB Ram doesnt buy you alot driving a non-Retina screen. The iPad 2 is the best selling Tablet of all time and making a small one isnt a bad idea, especially when the 30% smaller tablet weighs less then half as much as the current iPad. I have been posting for over a month that we were going to get a shrunk iPad 2 with a lightning connector and better cameras, everyone that thought we were getting more weren't looking at it scientifically, but thats not my problem.

But when it comes to power consumption, you were right. I don't get how that affects the decision when they could fit A6 in the iPhone.

You are driving a much bigger and more power hungry screen on the tablet then on the iPhone. There is no reason to put more power hungry part (ie A6) in the system when its going to gain you very little and oh btw, you already don't have enough A6's for what you currently are making with those parts. A5 is plentiful draws less power, they only put they A6 in the iPhone 5, because they made the screen bigger and didnt want a repeat of the iPad 2 vs iPad 3 comparision.

 

[mcman77]

Putting a retina display in the iPad mini just isn't feasible today. It would increase the cost, thickness, weight and cut battery life.

OOOrrr it could decrease profit margins per device, increase customer loyalty and just maybe increase total amount of sales per annual since people wouldn't hesitate as much to purchase a full blown device with current tech.

 

[d123]

OOOrrr it could decrease profit margins per device, increase customer loyalty and just maybe increase total amount of sales per annual since people wouldn't hesitate as much to purchase a full blown device with current tech.

But you miss one point, if the mini was thicker and heavier, many people would not buy it (I wouldn't), you may as well just buy a 9.7" then.

The major advantage of the mini is the fact it is so light and thin. For everyday carry in a suit pocket not much else matters.

 

[jmpnop]

So you have a two week old guess, and then a 1 week old guess, or we could just take it from the quarterly report from last night and realize I am right, which do you think we should go with? I mean realize these same sources on the same days (oct 11 & Oct 17) from "sources close inside Apple" told us that the iPad Mini was going to be 8 GB and cost $249. And I am sorry but saying that Apple went with the A5 instead of A6 over the price difference is just silly. Its an engineering & manufacturing decision, plain and simple, its the same one I would have made if I was doing the design. Once they went with a non-Retina display there is no reason to upgrade the processor, have to upgrade all the glue logic and create a bunch of part differences between it and the iPad 2 you'll need more battery (making it heavier) or less battery life (not good either) and having the tablet run hotter, all just so you can say I have an A6 in it?

Source?

Its not low standards, putting an A6 and 1 GB Ram doesnt buy you alot driving a non-Retina screen. The iPad 2 is the best selling Tablet of all time and making a small one isnt a bad idea, especially when the 30% smaller tablet weighs less then half as much as the current iPad. I have been posting for over a month that we were going to get a shrunk iPad 2 with a lightning connector and better cameras, everyone that thought we were getting more weren't looking at it scientifically, but thats not my problem.

Do you remember checkerboarding in safari on iPad 2. 1GB RAM does make a lot of sense and would drive people to upgrade. Regarding A6, why do you just justify Apple's move? They intentionally went with A6, because they wanted it lag behind the bigger iPad by a generation. It could have better than just a shrunken iPad 2.

You are driving a much bigger and more power hungry screen on the tablet then on the iPhone. There is no reason to put more power hungry part (ie A6) in the system when its going to gain you very little and oh btw, you already don't have enough A6's for what you currently are making with those parts. A5 is plentiful draws less power, they only put they A6 in the iPhone 5, because they made the screen bigger and didnt want a repeat of the iPad 2 vs iPad 3 comparision.

Apple will surely put A6 in the mini next year (if they don't go retina), if they wanted to do it they would've put it this year itself.

 

[mcman77]

But you miss one point, if the mini was thicker and heavier, many people would not buy it (I wouldn't), you may as well just buy a 9.7" then.

The major advantage of the mini is the fact it is so light and thin. For everyday carry in a suit pocket not much else matters.

Point taken. But why does it have to get heavier? The iphone5 is retina, thin, light and has great battery life.

The ipad retina maybe could be thinner and soon will be, like the other apple product lineup.

 

[tomhut]

Point taken. But why does it have to get heavier? The iphone5 is retina, thin, light and has great battery life.

The ipad retina maybe could be thinner and soon will be, like the other apple product lineup.

It would get heavier (and thicker) because of the larger battery needed to power the display. The ability to hold this device for long periods with one hand is crucial to its success.

 

[maflynn]

Yes, of course. But I do feel the whole one-handed iphone 5 thing is over-rated. It wouldn't hurt to have widened it a bit. Most of the screenshots show people actually manipulating the ipad mini with one hand.

I use my iPhone in one hand all the time, that is the main reason for sticking with the iPhone. I've owned a droid x and found it more awkward to use while commuting (on the subway holding the strap in one hand and the phone in another).

The size is precisely why I'm going with the mini

 

[mcman77]

It would get heavier (and thicker) because of the larger battery needed to power the display. The ability to hold this device for long periods with one hand is crucial to its success.

why does it need such a heavy battery? The iphone5 got lighter....like i said the processor and screen in tech will be more power efficient hence no big arse battery

 

[tann]

C'mon, threads like these have been discussed 1000x in other threads. They serve no real purpose.

Honestly those of you expecting the A6x plus the retina display in the mini must been dreaming!

----------

why does it need such a heavy battery? The iphone5 got lighter....like i said the processor and screen in tech will be more power efficient hence no big arse battery

iphone 5 screen vs iphone 4s was minimal, yes it was an improvement but it wasn't much bigger with a much higher resolution and therefore didn't need that much more power, the retina ipad screen is a totally different screen to the non retina, it requires a lot more power! The new iPad has a battery ~60% larger than the iPad 2!!

 

[Tigger11]

Source?

What do you want a source for? I have no idea from you post, what you want a source for.

Do you remember checkerboarding in safari on iPad 2. 1GB RAM does make a lot of sense and would drive people to upgrade.

No actually I dont and I use one every single day, in fact usually I would be posting here from one. Honestly I'm not sure I have ever had a real RAM problem on my iPad 2.

Regarding A6, why do you just justify Apple's move? They intentionally went with A6, because they wanted it lag behind the bigger iPad by a generation. It could have better than just a shrunken iPad 2.

Again somewhere in here you have lost your focus. Apple went with the A6 on the iPhone 5 because after they enlarged the screen if they had remained with the A5, it would have made the iPhone 4s faster in the benchmarks (ie see iPad 2 vs iPad 3). The put the A5 in the iPad mini, because the A6 is in short supply, the A5 processor runs the 1024x768 screen just fine and the A5 needs less power then the A6 which helps with the battery situation.

Apple will surely put A6 in the mini next year (if they don't go retina), if they wanted to do it they would've put it this year itself.

They could have put it in the A6 in, but since their is a shortage of the part and it would require a change to all the glue logic, and hurt battery life or require a bigger battery for the same life, they didnt. I doubt the A6 will ever be in any iPad. The next iPad Mini will likely put an A6x in it because its going to have retina display.

 

[tann]

They could have put it in the A6 in, but since their is a shortage of the part and it would require a change to all the glue logic, and hurt battery life or require a bigger battery for the same life, they didnt. I doubt the A6 will ever be in any iPad. The next iPad Mini will likely put an A6x in it because its going to have retina display.

I agree with you on all of your points apart from this one! I just don't think it'll be feasible for them to next year.

It'll come, just not that fast...

 

[jmpnop]

What do you want a source for? I have no idea from you post, what you want a source for.


No actually I dont and I use one every single day, in fact usually I would be posting here from one. Honestly I'm not sure I have ever had a real RAM problem on my iPad 2.



Again somewhere in here you have lost your focus. Apple went with the A6 on the iPhone 5 because after they enlarged the screen if they had remained with the A5, it would have made the iPhone 4s faster in the benchmarks (ie see iPad 2 vs iPad 3). The put the A5 in the iPad mini, because the A6 is in short supply, the A5 processor runs the 1024x768 screen just fine and the A5 needs less power then the A6 which helps with the battery situation.



They could have put it in the A6 in, but since their is a shortage of the part and it would require a change to all the glue logic, and hurt battery life or require a bigger battery for the same life, they didnt. I doubt the A6 will ever be in any iPad. The next iPad Mini will likely put an A6x in it because its going to have retina display.

As far as I know, its the quality control problems and screen shortage which is responsible for the supply shortage of iPhone 5. Do you have source for A6 shortage?

 

[AFDoc]

IF you don't want one don't buy it but ffs those of you that aren't interested in it need to stop making whiny posts about it.

 

[Tigger11]

As far as I know, its the quality control problems and screen shortage which is responsible for the supply shortage of iPhone 5. Do you have source for A6 shortage?

During the quarterly report they said there were parts (plural) issues with keeping up demand, since basically the only two unique parts for the device are the screen and the A6, its more then likely those two parts are the issues, though we know the screens arent the biggest problem, because the raw screens are the same for the iPhone 5 and the new iPod Touch, and we are shipping the iPod touch now, with the iPhone's screen but not the iPhone's processor. The iPod Touch has merely gone from and A4 to an A5 with its most recent upgrade. Also comments from Samsung about an issue with a new 32nm part would also likely be talking about the A6 processor they are making for Apple. Apple is straining Samsung's ability to make enough processors for all there products, that is one of the reasons they are moving to other foundries for there processors as they have already begun doing with screens and flash memory.

----------

I agree with you on all of your points apart from this one! I just don't think it'll be feasible for them to next year.

It'll come, just not that fast...

I don't know if they will be able to do it as fast as a year, but they are definitely going to try. Honestly until they get the retina, I dont know they will upgrade the device. Honestly the iPad 2 (iPad mini) , is really well balanced and pushes the pixels of a non-retina screen just fine. I'm not sure its worth upgrading in a year to say we have an A6, I sure wouldn't swap one out unless there was something for the A6 to be doing.

 

[jmpnop]

During the quarterly report they said there were parts (plural) issues with keeping up demand, since basically the only two unique parts for the device are the screen and the A6, its more then likely those two parts are the issues, though we know the screens arent the biggest problem, because the raw screens are the same for the iPhone 5 and the new iPod Touch, and we are shipping the iPod touch now, with the iPhone's screen but not the iPhone's processor. The iPod Touch has merely gone from and A4 to an A5 with its most recent upgrade. Also comments from Samsung about an issue with a new 32nm part would also likely be talking about the A6 processor they are making for Apple. Apple is straining Samsung's ability to make enough processors for all there products, that is one of the reasons they are moving to other foundries for there processors as they have already begun doing with screens and flash memory.

Apple never mentioned shortage of A6 processors and neither did Samsung. If I'm missing something, share the source to back your claim. The shortage of iPhone 5 is due to screen and the fact that it's difficult to manufacture since anodized aluminium is prone to scratches. The shortage might also be due Qualcomm LTE chip. Here's the links I previously posted-

http://9to5mac.com/2012/09/25/report-apples-iphone-5-supply-shortage-due-to-in-cell-display-tech/
http://www.macworld.co.uk/ipad-iphone/news/?newsid=3404482
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/10/17/hon-hais-explanation-for-iphone-5-shortage/