Do you go into the Apple store and buy a Macbook Pro early 2012? No, you buy a Macbook Pro. If we're getting technical, it's the Macbook Pro 8,1 or something like that...
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.
If the next iPad is called iPad HD...
- Thread starter Gallium
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you go into the Apple store and buy a Macbook Pro early 2012? No, you buy a Macbook Pro. If we're getting technical, it's the Macbook Pro 8,1 or something like that...
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
when you go buy a Macbook Pro, you do not say. Hi can I buy a Macbook Pro(mid 2009) you simply say Macbook Pro. The 'mid 2009' is not part of the name. VS iPad 2, the number is part of the name. I am all for finding a way to distinguish them, but I disagree that they should distinguish it by adding #'s to the name.
urkel said:
when you go buy a Macbook Pro, you do not say. Hi can I buy a Macbook Pro(mid 2009) you simply say Macbook Pro. The 'mid 2009' is not part of the name. VS iPad 2, the number is part of the name. I am all for finding a way to distinguish them, but I disagree that they should distinguish it by adding #'s to the name.
iPad 2 -> Super iPad 2 -> Super iPad 2 Turbo -> Super iPad 2 Turbo HD Remix. > Super iPad 2 Turbo HD Remix Arcade Edition
And therin lies the rub.
I believe that many of the rumors will either prove flat out wrong, or overly inflated compared to the reality.
Remember all the hype about "iphone 5" before the launch of the iphone 4s. Every pundit was holding forth a length about new case designs, blah blah blah. And Apple just slipped through an incremental increase.
I think this will also be an incremental increase. Same case, small improvements in speed and memory.
Whilst true, and I'm always skeptical about the touted rumours, surely there has to be a retina display and a upgraded gpu that can do it justice? That would count as a massive upgrade to me.
Quad core, schmod core, I refuse to get excited about those rumoured specs. My single core old iPhone 4 absolutely smokes all the latest and greatest Android phones my mates have with double the clock speed and twice the cores. "BUT IT'S FASTER!" they claim. No, in terms of user experience, the only thing I'm interested in, it is clearly NOT faster, sorry. It's markedly s-l-o-w-e-r. I'm not a iOS fanboy either, I have and love a Galaxy Tab 7.7, an awesome piece of kit, but I can't pretend to be impressed by the os on it.
I say there has to be a screen upgrade simply because I can't see how Apple could sell the iPad for another year when 1024x768 is starting to look old hat and a myriad phones have already superseded it. Yes yes, I know Apple doesn't have to compete with such devices necessarily, but the idea of that screen into 2013 doesn't look too good.
Last edited:
I agree, I simply find the concept of putting a display with a higher resolution than that on ANY laptop on a low powered ipad unbelievable... And I doubt it is achieveable in the price band that Apple has chosen for iPads.
Not to mention, I don't need a display of that pixel density for something I put on my lap instead of hold 6" from my face.
I suspect that Apple will announce a higher resolution display, to the tune of 1400x1050 or (most likely) 1600x1200, which is a reasonable improvement over the existing screen. That is within the relm of the possible at a reasonable price. That would give the iPad a higher resolution screen then any other tablet, except for the just announced (and not released) asus transformer (1920x1080). And that probably won't hit the market for another 6 months anyway.
It is possible to add a new resolution band to existing apps. That has happened twice already in iOS history. Tried and true. The relm of the possible.
Can you really believe that Apple will grace a $500 iPad with a better display then what the highest end Mac Book has, which is 4-5 times the cost? Not to mention, the mac book probably melts your lap when runnng a game on it's high resolution screen, how is an ipad with passive cooling going to drive that display with any decent fps for something like infinity blade? You gotta get rid of the heat somehow. Yes, a gpu to drive that display is the easy part, but cooling that gpu is difficult in the tablet form factor.
Last edited:
But the # is a selling point. More than computers, iPads will be a device "for everyone". Lets pretend they do move to iPad HD next gen. In 2013 then what is more likely to garner an upgrade for an iPad HD owners who don't keep up with the latest iPad news?
1) Walking by a "New iPad HD" sign
2) Walking by a "New iPad 4" sign
For us, we'll be digging for every detail about the iPad HD (Early 2013) and when it comes out we'll know exactly whats so desirable about it. But to casual users then they'll know enough that they own an iPad 3 so when they spot the "iPad 4" they're forced to be curious at the least, and impulsively upgrade at the most.
I'm not against changing it from a number system eventually. It's just that, despite the huge sales, I feel the iPad still doesn't have the foothold it will in the future. So there's a fine line between "simplifying" by sequential releases vs "oversimplifying" and making the name too generic.
I've always felt that they might call it the iPad 2HD. then the numbering system would still be in place as on the iPhone line.
The nomenclature of the iOS devices has always been a little bit odd. Usually Apple has used nice adjectives to differentiate products in the same line. What kind of iPod do you have? a classic, nano, touch, or shuffle. What kind of Macbook do you have? A Macbook Pro or a Macbook Air. Since the iOS devices all have the same screen and basic features within a line, it is hard to use such adjectives.
I always thought that the 2nd generation iPad would still be iPad and not marketed as iPad 2 since the iPad 1 was not continued as a lower end model.
The iOS nomenclature for phones at this point is pretty clear. There will be no mythical iPhone mini, but Apple simply will maintain three generations of Phones.
I'm thinking if Apple is going to establish an iPad portfolio, it might be reasonable to think that iPad 2 simply becomes iPad and over the years keeps getting cheaper and cheaper for the education market, etc. The next generation will be called iPad HD or iPad retina or something of the sort, and will keep the current price point and name for the next several years.
I always thought that the 2nd generation iPad would still be iPad and not marketed as iPad 2 since the iPad 1 was not continued as a lower end model.
The iOS nomenclature for phones at this point is pretty clear. There will be no mythical iPhone mini, but Apple simply will maintain three generations of Phones.
I'm thinking if Apple is going to establish an iPad portfolio, it might be reasonable to think that iPad 2 simply becomes iPad and over the years keeps getting cheaper and cheaper for the education market, etc. The next generation will be called iPad HD or iPad retina or something of the sort, and will keep the current price point and name for the next several years.
I blame the letter "G".
Think of it from the consumer perspective (forgive the errors. this is off the top of my head)
2007
iPhone [aka iPhone 2G]
iPod Touch [aka iPod Touch 1G]
2008
iPhone 3G [referring to carrier speed]
iPod Touch (2G) [Referring to generation]
2009
iPhone 3GS [referring to carrier speed and the power of "S"]
iPod Touch (3G)
2010
iPhone 4 [referring to sequence]
iPod Touch (4G)
iPad
iPad 3G [Referring to carrier speed]
2011
iPhone 4S [referring to "after 4th gen" and "Siri?", "Speed", ????]
iPad 2 [referring to 2nd gen]
So imagine IF the iPad (2012) is now iPad 3. How is a consumer to know that the iPad 3 is two generations more advanced than the iPad 3G? Thats why I prefer Apple just did straight numbers from the start with iPhone 1,2,3,4,5. But now that they're in this mess then maybe simplifying is the way to reset the problem and by using a generic term like iPad (for the basic one) and iPad HD/Pro (for higher end) leaves the details up to the salesman. It opens up HUGE problems in the resell market where buyers may accidentally bid on an old 2012 iPad rather than the 2015 model but thats not Apples problem.
Just a thought.
Edit:
(To be honest, I like putting the year in the name. I know its ugly and stupid to see "Windows 2000" on a server you use in 2012, but with Apple a product is refreshed yearly so putting the year in the name isn't so bad.)
Last edited: