I would have liked it thinner, lighter and with less bat life.

Discussion in 'iPad' started by blow45, Mar 26, 2011.

  1. blow45 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    #1
    I know since the ipad 1 10 hour bat claim, apple can't go back and offer 7 hours, but I think they overshot here, 7-8 hours battery life would have made everyone very happy and would have crumbled the competition, and they would be able to make it much thinner and lighter thus. Anyone not want 20% less battery bulk? I know I do, and sure 10 hours sounds great, but really who's gonna be needing more than 8? Not that many, that's for sure.

    In any case, I also think the new design makes for a harder grip because despite it being thinner it doesn't taper the way the original did.

    Still it's the best tablet out there so far, and until the new ipad that is, and I guess technology has to catch up to make it even better, because it's still not thin enough, nor light enough.
     
  2. mcdj macrumors 604

    mcdj

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    NYC
    #2
    I'm with you. I rarely run out of juice by the end of the day and am rarely without a charge source. Would gladly sacrifice a bit of battery life for some weight reduction, though I'm not sure how much thinner it needs to be or even could be.
     
  3. caubeck macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    #3
    Making it thinner would have posed a problem for headphone and cable slots. There are limits.
     
  4. rovex macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    #4
    But then look at the iPod touch...
     
  5. KittyKatta macrumors 6502a

    KittyKatta

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Location:
    SoCal
    #5
    "Thinner" doesn't make sense because you still have the same footprint. If there's anywhere to cut down in weight then it would be the materials and the surface dimensions.

    In terms of materials then very few would choose switching to plastic over aluminum/glass. But for surface dimensions then there definitely is room to trim down that bezel. And for those who dare to defy Steve Jobs, moving to a smaller screen like 7-8" would still be a workable tablet but the smaller size would mean less weight.

    BTW. As for headphone jacks and ports then I'm liking what Palm is doing with the ultra tiny Veer. It has a magnetic port similar to MagSafe so you snap on a headphone jack when necessary. I'd like to see them do MagSafe to replace the 30pin not only to shrink it, but also because it's so cool.
     
  6. OTACORB macrumors 6502a

    OTACORB

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    Location:
    Central, Louisiana
    #6
    I think Apple found the sweet spot! Thinner and long battery life. They could have kept it the same thickness and just used less battery making it lighter, which would have meant less battery life. 7 hours would have been good, but now we have Samsung saying theirs will do 10 hours now, so had Apple backed off this that would give Samsung an advantage.
     
  7. falconeight Guest

    falconeight

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    #7
    I don't agree with the first iPad having a better form factor. I love the size and feel of iPad 2.
     
  8. ssampath macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    #8
  9. synagence macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    #9
    Having had and enjoyed iPad1 ... iPad2 is definitely the sweet spot .... if they could ever make it lighter without compromising on battery life (one of the ipad's undisputed strong suits) then fine but it feels great in hands now
     
  10. sineplex macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    #10
    The LCD, glass and the back are major contributors to the weight

    I hearby end the thread and the poor assumptions about battery weight.
     
  11. Bleak macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    #11
    It's a disgusting piece of crap.
     
  12. shanmugam macrumors 68020

    shanmugam

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Location:
    Blazer town!
    #12
    i would like the lighter iPad as well compared to 10hours of battery life.

    but 10 hours of battery life give 4 days of occasional usage compared to iPhone where almost you charge everyday.

    hope Apple brings down the weight more in the next version/revision.
     
  13. blow45 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    #13
    don't hereby end the thread (what gall btw :rolleyes:) because I was very careful in not underestimating the weight of the other components, so read again because I said 20% less battery bulk, not 20% lighter.


    good points, I don't know how thin or light it needs to be either, or as you very accurately say, can be. Unless lcd makes power consumption much less soon, it cant' be much, the cpu doesn't draw much, nothing, compared to screen tech, there are for course screen techs in the broader lcd spectrum with less power consumption but all of them are either crap or too experimental.

    I would think that it needs to have the same as the original, the tapered one, form factor, but a few millimeters thinner than the current one and at least 100g lighter, ideally, but of course you can't demand this at the moment, not when apple took the safe (wrt the competition) position of opting for 10h to begin with. I still think that if the air what with it having the legacy and power hungry x86, as well as a full (so to speak) os, can be thinner (considering keyboards and all) so could the ipad have been, but of course in pc standards the 5 h bat life for the small air is great, but for tablet standards it isn't. The catch here is apple set these standards themselves, because with 10h battery life they are still head and shoulders above anyone else. It was a design choice they made and we ll have to live with it until the tech gets better, because there is no way they are going to say we have 9h bat life with ipad 3, they might even say 12h battery life and keep the form factor without making it thinner (I d hate that, but it's a natural thing to do).
     
  14. gameboy213 macrumors 6502

    gameboy213

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #14
    I think the ten hour battery is a key point for Apple. Especially in vertical markets.

    Personally I use the device enough as it has replaced my MBP, that less battery life compared to the first gen would have been a real annoyance for me. I think the thickness and weight is pretty darn good.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  15. fertilized-egg macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    #15
    I personally wish the iPad was a bit bigger if anything. You just don't get the same immersive experience with a smaller tablet nor the same spacious UI. A 7" tablet is fine as a sort of a big mobile PMP/ebook reader, but too small to be a home device, IMHO.


    I agree. I think the 10 hour battery life thing was one of the core features upon which they wanted to build the iPad experience.
     
  16. Pirahna macrumors newbie

    Pirahna

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    #16
    If anything I would have preferred more battery life even if it got heavier. Sometimes when I fly overseas I might be in a plane for 12-15 hours or more.
     
  17. BobbieM629 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    Location:
    Midwest
    #17
    I love the thinner and the lighter.. It's amazing, but the key for me in buying the new iPad was actually the battery. Since I am a pretty heavy user this was critical to me. I do get FAR more hen 10 hours on the battery, but I think this was a key selling point for apple! Thisndesign is amazing.
     
  18. BobbieM629 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    Location:
    Midwest
    #18
    I totally agree!!
     
  19. blow45 thread starter macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    #19
    for sure, but it comes with a cost, that's what I am arguing, even a perceived cost to some, and not to others (weight and thinness).

    but, I would argue that apple need be more concerned about the thinness of ipad being a handheld device, than a device such as the air (I have one) where sometimes thinness can be problematic (not very stable on lap, etc.). There really are no drawbacks with ipad being thin.

    of course, like I said, they made their mind on the 10h battery life and now there's no going back, good or bad, it's an opinion at the end of the day. I think what really pushed them to aim this high is competition from eink devices with weeks of battery life, they felt that they had to come up with something that, failing to match eink specs in power usage (and of course being a more powerful and complete device overall, by far, than eink), they could at least claim (it being a brand new product and all) that it could be virtually used all day and plugged at night, rendering the weeks on one charge argument less stronger.

    I admire you, if I stay on a plane for more than 7-8 hours in one go, I get bonkers, I need to get out.
     
  20. ssampath macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    #20
    Just over a year ago I bought myself a quad core Dell Studio 15 with 1080p display and all. Was very pleased with myself until I started using it and realized that the darn thing runs so hot I cannot put it on my lap and the battery lasts maybe 1 hour.
    I think one of the best services that Apple is providing is making the right compromises for most of its customers. To me 10 hours is really liberating as I don't have to keep looking at the battery % all the time. Even when it is down to the 10% mark and starts warning you it has one more hour to go. As for the weight and thickness, it is obvious they would like to make it as thin and light as possible but engineering gets in the way at times.
     

Share This Page