Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Upgrade from my 2017 Pro going to be big, but i still hope there's more than just M2. But i will get lot of new for my money anyway. For example the screen will look lot better than my current one, even if it's not Mini-LED
 
Interesting: Apple to launch a foldable iPad rather than iPhone in 2024, analyst predicts

POINTS
  • Apple will likely launch an iPad with a folding screen in 2024, analyst firm CCS Insight said on Tuesday.
  • CCS Insight said a foldable iPad would likely come before a folding iPhone, bucking the trend of consumer electronics companies launching folding screen smartphones.
  • The analyst firm also predicts that Apple is likely to integrate its own 5G modem into the A series of processor for a “single-chip” solution for iPhones in 2025.


 
The M2 is currently the fastest chip in the world for web browsing. It has the highest score to date on Speedometer and it's a lot higher than M1. I don't understand why downplay the M2. I use the M2 MacBook air and the M1 iPad Pro and the M2 is slightly better at handing complex web apps in Safari, like Google Docs and Google Sheets.
Because an M2, or even an M1 chip for that matter, is overkill for web browsing. There is hardly anything out there for an iPad that requires these faster chips. If we had iPad versions of Final Cut or Premiere then yes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cpnotebook80
Interesting: Apple to launch a foldable iPad rather than iPhone in 2024, analyst predicts

POINTS
  • Apple will likely launch an iPad with a folding screen in 2024, analyst firm CCS Insight said on Tuesday.
  • CCS Insight said a foldable iPad would likely come before a folding iPhone, bucking the trend of consumer electronics companies launching folding screen smartphones.
  • The analyst firm also predicts that Apple is likely to integrate its own 5G modem into the A series of processor for a “single-chip” solution for iPhones in 2025.


LOL. Analyst firm told its intern to come up with a report, and then the intern browsed through MR forums for a few minutes, and done. :D I mean those points are pretty much what people here have been discussing for years.

We should ask that firm for profit sharing. ;)
 
  • Love
Reactions: arkitect
Because an M2, or even an M1 chip for that matter, is overkill for web browsing. There is hardly anything out there for an iPad that requires these faster chips. If we had iPad versions of Final Cut or Premiere then yes.
Apple already made up software locks on certain features, regardless of the hardware capability (stage manager, action mode on iPhone 14, etc). I'm sure Apple can come up with more software features lock that will only for the latest models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sorgo †
The M2 is currently the fastest chip in the world for web browsing. It has the highest score to date on Speedometer and it's a lot higher than M1. I don't understand why downplay the M2. I use the M2 MacBook air and the M1 iPad Pro and the M2 is slightly better at handing complex web apps in Safari, like Google Docs and Google Sheets.
The M2 is not a big upgrade whatsoever, opening websites 0.4s faster is never worth the hefty premium.

How was the M1 slow in any way to justify such a meaningless upgrade?

My M1 iPad Pro is extremely snappy and blazing fast when web browsing.
 
I think the incremental upgrades happen because it’s cheaper for apple to use the same components in more products. Why order more m1 processors if all your range going forward will be m2? It just becomes cheaper to use the m2 from the larger manufacturing order than to order a very small amount of m1’s just to put in a few iPads.

The other thing is about Final Cut pro on the iPad. I’d be very surprised if they did this as I wonder what sense does it make?
a) would iPad app pricing support a £200 price point?
b) if you make it cheaper (say near LumaFusions £25 price point) your destroying the value of the mac product at £200. especially if the feature set has parity.
c) apple are using pro apps to get people to buy £1000 - £4000 macs. Otherwise the software would be much more. For example, Logic pro’s real completion, things like Ableton live suite have less tools bundled compared to Logic and still sell for around £400. What sense would it make to sell a cheap version of Final Cut pro to sell iPads that have average selling prices of £450?
d) finally, how many potential high level video editors are there to sell Final Cut to on the ipad anyway? so how many more iPad pro’s would you even sell? Also, Final Cut is part of a whole computer based workflow, plugins, third party tools etc which would restrict lots of people from using it on the iPad until those things are available.


apple have iMovie and garageband products to get people into their eco system and push them to macs from iPad‘s. i dont see how pro apps on iPads will actually help them sell many more iPads or actually make them more money as a company.

but who knows…
 
  • Like
Reactions: ian87w
I think the incremental upgrades happen because it’s cheaper for apple to use the same components in more products. Why order more m1 processors if all your range going forward will be m2? It just becomes cheaper to use the m2 from the larger manufacturing order than to order a very small amount of m1’s just to put in a few iPads.

The other thing is about Final Cut pro on the iPad. I’d be very surprised if they did this as I wonder what sense does it make?
a) would iPad app pricing support a £200 price point?
b) if you make it cheaper (say near LumaFusions £25 price point) your destroying the value of the mac product at £200. especially if the feature set has parity.
c) apple are using pro apps to get people to buy £1000 - £4000 macs. Otherwise the software would be much more. For example, Logic pro’s real completion, things like Ableton live suite have less tools bundled compared to Logic and still sell for around £400. What sense would it make to sell a cheap version of Final Cut pro to sell iPads that have average selling prices of £450?
d) finally, how many potential high level video editors are there to sell Final Cut to on the ipad anyway? so how many more iPad pro’s would you even sell? Also, Final Cut is part of a whole computer based workflow, plugins, third party tools etc which would restrict lots of people from using it on the iPad until those things are available.


apple have iMovie and garageband products to get people into their eco system and push them to macs from iPad‘s. i dont see how pro apps on iPads will actually help them sell many more iPads or actually make them more money as a company.

but who knows…
I agree. Apple would rather have people using Final Cut buy the $2000 Mac studio than $1000 ipad pro. Imo this is why ipadOS will remain what it is. It's harder trying to convince people to spend $2000 on an ipad than a Mac, so the upselling strategy remains to push people spending more for a Mac if they want those pro apps.
 
A 15" iPad would certainly get my attention. I've heard rumors of that happening but doubt it would be dumped in a press release.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unregistered 4U
And then the realisation that the 11inch is just a chip change.
Thats no real surprise. All indications have been a hardware upgrade for the Pros with no real design changes. And realistically there is only so much you can do with a tablet design wise.

As I was commenting earlier upthread the Pros are getting all the attention, but the 10th gen iPad is the one that will be getting more of a makeover and in extent will have more impact consumer wise. The 9th gen iPad, particularly the 64GB, is/was arguably the best bang-for-the-buck tablet on the market. The 10th gen could solidify that position.

It’s amusing how so many seem to expect revolutionary change with each model upgrade, because thats certainly not realistic. The current M1 iPad Pros are the best tablets (hardware wise) you can buy on the planet. The M2 will simply keep it ahead. There is no real pressure to radically remake the device given no one else is even close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UMHurricanes34
Wow, the iPad section of this forum is so negative. If you are a fan of technology, why would a spec bump be a negative thing? Users of the Apple Watch, AirPods, Mac, iPhone don't complain nearly as much when there are spec bumps. I guess the question is, do you really like the iPad?
 
Huh, the ‘back to school’ £80 discount on iPads is still active on the UK store, despite having been due to finish yesterday…

It’s going to disappear the moment that the store page gets refreshed for the new models, isn’t it? 😂
 
I wonder how much heavier it will be since they won’t be able to use a metal back with wireless charging.
 
If we do get press releases I wonder if we will get staggered announcements throughout the week?
 
Apple is a bit screwed either way right now with the budget iPad refresh...
– If the headphone jack is removed, education will be pretty annoyed – may even consider different brands in future
– If the headphone jack stays, audio lovers will ditch the under-utilised M1 of the Air/Pro and swap to the base iPad, reducing pro sales.
Probably not. They can just buy a dongle with each iPad, put one on every headphone they have, and done.
 
Because an M2, or even an M1 chip for that matter, is overkill for web browsing. There is hardly anything out there for an iPad that requires these faster chips. If we had iPad versions of Final Cut or Premiere then yes.
I don’t know, is it even possible to surf most Apple product websites without an M2? :) I mean, you CAN, but the experience is so choppy! Stuff zooming and flying allll over the place…
 
I'm bummed by the rumor the new 11" Pro won't have the mini-LED screen. I have the 2018 13" Pro and would like to go down in size.
 
I think the incremental upgrades happen because it’s cheaper for apple to use the same components in more products. Why order more m1 processors if all your range going forward will be m2? It just becomes cheaper to use the m2 from the larger manufacturing order than to order a very small amount of m1’s just to put in a few iPads.

The other thing is about Final Cut pro on the iPad. I’d be very surprised if they did this as I wonder what sense does it make?
a) would iPad app pricing support a £200 price point?
b) if you make it cheaper (say near LumaFusions £25 price point) your destroying the value of the mac product at £200. especially if the feature set has parity.
c) apple are using pro apps to get people to buy £1000 - £4000 macs. Otherwise the software would be much more. For example, Logic pro’s real completion, things like Ableton live suite have less tools bundled compared to Logic and still sell for around £400. What sense would it make to sell a cheap version of Final Cut pro to sell iPads that have average selling prices of £450?
d) finally, how many potential high level video editors are there to sell Final Cut to on the ipad anyway? so how many more iPad pro’s would you even sell? Also, Final Cut is part of a whole computer based workflow, plugins, third party tools etc which would restrict lots of people from using it on the iPad until those things are available.


apple have iMovie and garageband products to get people into their eco system and push them to macs from iPad‘s. i dont see how pro apps on iPads will actually help them sell many more iPads or actually make them more money as a company.

but who knows…
a) iPad app pricing can support price points up to £999. But, I think what they’d do it as a subscription.
b) Interestingly enough, when the rumors started last year, JUST before WWDC, LumaFusion announced an upcoming expansion to Android. Could be they already know and are getting ready to become the premier video editor on Android. Logic Pro wouldn’t be as much of a big deal because there are a LOT of DAWs on iPad already and folks will still use what they’ve already gotten comfortable with.
c) They likely make more profit per iPad sale than Mac sale as every iPad sale is future potential App Store sales. Some of the desktop plugin vendors who decide to offer a iPad version may want to sell their iPad version plugin separately. That’s more money.
d) I can certainly see how it wouldn’t be something folks would want to do. Some folks wouldn’t even want to use a laptop and, for their work, would consider anything less than a fully loaded Mac Studio with multiple monitors torture. BUT, there are, in reality, far more people NOT editing trailers or theatrical movies using Final Cut Pro than are. There are far more people without plugins and third party tools than are (not for lack of desire, but lack of funds). That huge number of people wouldn’t be restricted in the slightest.

Not that I think it’s on the cusp, but I’ve gotten to the point to where my thoughts are the only reason why it hasn’t been released for iPad is just because it’s not a part of their product plan. There’s little technical or process-wise that would prevent it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.