I could see this happening.
iPad 3 will not replace iPad 2, they will exist together.
Wait a minute! Another tablet competing with the iPad2? That would have to be called an iPad killer, even if it's an iPad3.
Kinda goes against Apple traditions though. Other than previous year same products no 2nd Touch came out side-by-side with the iPod Touch. No second Nano. No second Shuffle. Not that other companies don't do that though. In fact almost everyone else makes both a 7" (or 8") and a 10" tablet. Samsung even makes 4" and 5" Android media players.
IF there is another iPad coming and it is built to target a different market, then I doubt it will be called the iPad 3.
"iPad 3" is just an arbitrary label attached to a rumored device. It is not an official Apple designation. Unfortunately, what's happened is that many folks have assumed that the new device will be a successor to iPad 2 based on the uninformed and unimaginative designation 'iPad 3'.
I agree with the OP. We currently have four models of iPod coexisting: shuffle, nano, classic and touch. Each addresses a different market segment. Having at least two models of iPad (full size and compact, for example) doesn't seem unreasonable.
"iPad 3" is just an arbitrary label attached to a rumored device. It is not an official Apple designation.
.....
You've seen all the "iPad 2" product displays that apple uses in all non-Apple stores right? It's named and advertised that way by apple.
.....
You've seen all the "iPad 2" product displays that apple uses in all non-Apple stores right? It's named and advertised that way by apple.
ok..but he is talking about the ipad 3 which apple may or may not call it that
ok..but he is talking about the ipad 3 which apple may or may not call it that
What if the third iPad is a 7 inch screen with 250-326 dpi display....which is why it might come out only 6 months after the iPad 2...!?
Also, think about this, 3 screen sizes for MBP, two screen sizes for MBA, 2 screen sizes for iMac...
Would be kinda odd for them to release a 7" inch or anything smaller after Jobs tore the idea to pieces just 9 months ago -- I think he flat out called them "useless".
Calling them useless doesn't mean Apple can't build a better, "non-useless" version. Steve's quite fond of equivocation: When Steve says "No" we hear "Maybe." Here's why
For example...
No video iPod.
No iPhone.
No need for an iPhone SDK.
No iPad.
No iBooks.
No multitasking.
...have all been implied.
I doubt it, Apple promotes their technology and always(except for 3GS) phase out their old.
"iPad 3" is just an arbitrary label attached to a rumored device. It is not an official Apple designation. Unfortunately, what's happened is that many folks have assumed that the new device will be a successor to iPad 2 based on the uninformed and unimaginative designation 'iPad 3'.
I agree with the OP. We currently have four models of iPod coexisting: shuffle, nano, classic and touch. Each addresses a different market segment. Having at least two models of iPad (full size and compact, for example) doesn't seem unreasonable.