Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; 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)



Many, not all, do care. It will also be a point of differation that the pundits will harp on for the next year.

No, its a point that YOU were the first on here to point out, so if anyone is going to harp on about anything then YOU are a prime candidate.

In fact as others have said, if every time you post your intention is to criticize Apple for every single thing they do, and at the same time wind up as many people as possible, you do an excellent job...but that's just a really sad job to want. Don't you think? I mean this being a mac site and all.

Regardless of how much RAM it has, it is still without doubt the leader of the field and still without any meaningful competition, not that I or many others care.

I like Apple not only for the incredible products they make, but the wider ethos that lies behind the company ...

Of course the cynics will say that ultimately Apple are only in it for the money, but I think the more correct assertion is that because money is NOT the primary reason that drives the company is why millions of people respond so positively to their products, and which of course conversely fuels the anger, hate, and jealousy, against them.

You seem to really dislike Apple, do you know why? It has to be more than the amount of RAM they put in their products... doesn't it?
 
The thing is, people generally WANT something that's easier to use. They don't care if what they're playing or looking at is a bit out of date.

This is why the PC gaming market is nothing compared to its console equivalent. It's not exactly the same because a console will generally last you four to five years before you need an upgrade to play the majority of the latest stuff, whereas an Apple device will be going in two to three. However, it's along similar lines - People would rather have a nice, easy device which does the job they expect than a potentially more powerful yet unwieldy beast.

That Apple are much bigger on optimisation of the operating system than the Android set is really a much bigger deal than whether the apps are 'retina ready' or whether there is more ram or a faster CPU. Personally, I'm not going to rule out buying more Android stuff in future, but it will be when a carrier has made a genuinely attractive UI and viruses are more or less completely eradicated. I'm not really into ****ing around with it and blinging it up, if that interests you, great, but I have other devices I can do that kind of thing with, I don't need a phone to be anything but easy.
 
Editorial: It's Apple's 'post-PC' world -- we're all just living in it
March 3, 2011 07:56PM by Joshua Topolsky

On Wednesday, Apple introduced the world to the iPad 2. A beautiful device, to be sure. Feature packed? You bet. Soon to be selling like hotcakes? Absolutely. But the introduction of an iteration on an already existing product wasn't the most notable piece of the event, nor was the surprise appearance of Steve Jobs. No, Wednesday's event was significant because it introduced the world to Apple's real vision for the foreseeable future, a theme the company has hinted at but never fully expressed. This week, Apple showed everyone where it was headed, challenged competitors on that direction, and made it clear that the company not only has staked a claim in that space, but is defining it.

This week, Apple stepped into the "post-PC" era of computing -- and there's no looking back, at least not for the folks in Cupertino.

By joining the company's ongoing vision of a "different" kind of computing with a soundbite friendly piece of marketing-speak, Apple has changed the rules of the game, and made the competition's efforts not just an uphill battle, but -- at least in the eyes of Steve Jobs and co. -- essentially moot. But what exactly is the "post-PC" world? And why is it significant? Let me explain.

In this new world, Apple no longer has to compete on specs and features, nor does it want to. There is no Mac vs. PC here -- only "the future" versus "the past." It won't be a debate about displays, memory, wireless options -- it will be a debate about the quality of the experience. Apple is not just eschewing the spec conversation in favor of a different conversation -- it's rendering those former conversations useless. It would be like trying to compare a race car to a deeply satisfying book. In a post-PC world, the experience of the product is central and significant above all else. It's not the RAM or CPU speed, screen resolution or number of ports which dictate whether a product is valuable; it becomes purely about the experience of using the device. What that means is that while Motorola and Verizon will spend millions of dollars advertising the Xoom's 4G upgrade options, CPU speed, and high-resolution cameras, Apple need only delight consumers and tell them that specs and and speed are the domain of a dinosaur called the PC. Apple isn't claiming victory in the Space Race -- it's ceding space to the competition.

But guess who gets Earth all to itself? Apple's not saying that it beats other tablets on the market. It's saying "we do one thing, and these guys do something else altogether." They're not competition -- they're not even playing the same game!

That's not to say Apple has given up on PCs, and in fact, the company's laptop sales are consistently exceeding expectations. But take a look at what's creeping around the corner. There's Lion, with its iOS-like interface, its simplified experience. If Apple has its way, and if the sales of its mobile devices carry on in the manner they have up until now, a post-PC outlook will even fit devices that look alarmingly like... PCs.

But right now -- in the tablet space at least -- the problem for Motorola, Samsung, HP, RIM, and anyone else who is challenging Apple becomes infinitely more difficult. Almost any company could put together a more powerful or spec-heavy tablet, but all the horsepower in the world can't help you if you don't find a way to delight the average consumer. Those other tablet makers may have superior hardware (and in the case of the Xoom, some superior software as well), but without that key component of sheer delight, the road for them is long and hard. HP is getting close by touting features like Touch-to-Share, but against experiences like the new GarageBand for iOS and the 65,000 apps (and counting) that currently exist, it's hard to see a clear path to sizable competition. That goes for Google and RIM as well.

What Apple has done by introducing its "post-PC" language into the vernacular is almost more a game of semantics. Now when Motorola boasts the brain-crushing, bone-splitting power of the Xoom, the company could easily come off like the guy who buys the red Ferrari because he has something to prove.


Apple isn't just challenging perceptions of the PC -- they're saying that the age of the PC is over (at least for most people). The company is forcing consumers to ask if they even still want or need something called a PC (while of course making sure to point out that the competition is playing the same old game). And really, that's all part of the plan. Apple is in the process of making the iPad the de-facto standard for what the next stage of computing looks like, from the look and feel to the kind of software and experiences you have on the device. Apple doesn't just want to own the market -- it wants to own the idea of the market. We've seen this act before, and we know how it ends.

There was a time before the iPod too, when companies like HP, Samsung, and even Microsoft fought against Apple for the hearts and minds of the consumer -- but I'll be damned if anyone can remember it.
 
I hate conspiracies but with rumor that this iPad is an 'in between' model and the fact that Apple want us to buy as much as possible, couldn't it all be intentional?
I mean, maybe Apple wants us to upgrade to the next iPad when al the new cool futures come out with a new iOs...

No it couldn't!

Apple has a simple system:

They pick a price point for their device and then keep that price point.

(It's not up to anybody but them to decide which profit margin they require.
Obviously the development until the product is sold is quite hefty, overhead etc.)

Then they keep developing that product adding more "things" be that faster chips, more HD , SSD etc.etc., but always keeping the price point.

In essence to me the product gets better and less expensive for what you get.

Their system leads to incremental upgrades because the "things" they add need to become available in quantity at reduced prices.

Say Samsung makes 16GB Flash memory at $ 2.00 and now you want 64 at $ 2.00, Samsung will have to figure out how they can make the 64 GB as fast and well as the 16 GB. Now they have to develop and invest in new machinery to do that. At the same time the 64 GB is the new 16, the demand will be there for a 128 GB, 256, 512 GB for premium users.

That process takes time and is a permanent race. We will see 512 being the lowest in 5 years IMO.

Nobody can keep ahead of this, hence the delays or what seems like a long time between upgrades

That is the same for displays, LED's SSD etc.

It seems that only in the electronics industry one can get more and more for 1/2 or the same price.
It also takes a while for all the copycats and other manufacturers to adopt these new chips and create higher demand

Since Apple integrates all components for a great user experience, some of their "specs" may look anemic, but they make it work very well as a package.

I see the stores "littered" with cheap garbage products which manufacturers try to sell on price.

Quality just costs more and Apple goes after users who want things to just work and in the long run buying one Apple for 3 years is cheaper than buying two garbage products.

In summary their incremental upgrades are based on the way they develop their products and their pricing structure.

They could put more ram or more HD space etc. into their products at higher prices and they do offer BTO options.

For an ipad I don't see BTO (yet)
 
I really just do not understand the anger people are showing towards those questioning the memory on the iPad2. When it comes to iOS and it's advances to date, the limiting factor for "old" hardware is the amount of memory. The iPod Touch 2nd gen and iPhone 3 are capable of handling what iOS 4.2 and below can offer, EXCEPT for the memory requirements.

No is asking for a something that will last 5 years, and be able to handle every new feature coming out. But it is reasonable to ask for hardware that can run the new iOS for the two years after purchase, without feeling like you are watching a spinning beach ball constantly.

Yes iOS appears to be a lot more efficient with the RAM it is provided. But as others have already pointed out, the present version of iOS takes up at around 150M in memory just to boot up and sit there doing nothing. That number isn't going to decrease over time. So expect the iPad 1 to have worse and woerse performance over time, just performing the same basic tasks(when you update iOS).

Sometime in the not too distant future, iPad2 will be left behind by an iOS update. With 1Gig in RAM instead of 512/256, it would have been able to make that jump. And the performance of the iPad2 will have already greatly decreased, due to increasing memory demands, prior to that.

Apple users have always enjoyed something PC fans could not - having their hardware last a long time and continue to be productive all that time. With the presumably underspec'd RAM, that is no longer the case with the iPad line. You got two years of tip quality use, some didn't evn make it a year with iPad1 apparently, and then you are on the treadmill the PC side has always been on.
 
...he went to great lengths to say that it's not about the MHz race anymore it's about the usability and the software.

Comparing hardware specifications kept me away from Apple products for a long time.

As a recent convert, I have to say that there is something to what Jobs has said. Personally, I find Apple products much easier to use than I ever anticipated. They're intuitive and get the job done easily and faster, with less tweaking required and less of a requirement for knowledge of the intricate workings of the operating system.

And I say this as someone who jailbreaks iPad and iPhone. It's still easier than Windows, and less dangerous than Android.

I don't know why Android is mentioned as much as it is mentioned in this thread.

Google is in this game for the collection of information. Nothing with the Google name on it is ever going to be completely safe if you are worried about your data. The good news is that they'll know what it is you are talking about and they'll be able to market things that you're interested in. But the bad news is that they're not really entirely open about what it is that they are doing.

The same heuristic analysis routine that is used by the UK GCHQ to know when somebody in the USA is talking about a terror attack is the same routine that is used by Google to always know what you are dong with GMail or your Android device.

I don't care about this very much.

But I know it ought to drive some of you ultra-indepence types straight up the wall, and I don't know why it does not.
 
I really just do not understand the anger people are showing towards those questioning the memory on the iPad2.

I'm not mad about it at all, but I am personally looking for 1GB. :)

I understand what is going on, and I agree that the bottom line usability of a product is what matters. At the moment it's likely that 512 is all that we need for all of the products that are in the App Store for the iPhone and iPad.

But the future's just 24 hours away!
 
Such a shame that the iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch are totally crap when it comes to internet browsing because of the lack of flash which alot of websites still use. I only use my iPod Touch and iPad for just checking emails and forums and for the fantastic apps and I use my MacBook Pro, iMac and Dell mini 10v for proper internet browsing. In saying all that the iPad and iPod Touch is absolutely brilliant for apps which no other gadget can compete with.

LOL, by the end of this year we will not even be talking about Flash anymore. Apple is selling too many iOS devices. Any site worth a gain of salt will have an HTML5 site...
 
Editorial: It's Apple's 'post-PC' world -- we're all just living in it
March 3, 2011 07:56PM by Joshua Topolsky

On Wednesday, Apple introduced the world to the iPad 2. A beautiful device, to be sure. Feature packed? You bet. Soon to be selling like hotcakes? Absolutely. But the introduction of an iteration on an already existing product wasn't the most notable piece of the event, nor was the surprise appearance of Steve Jobs. No, Wednesday's event was significant because it introduced the world to Apple's real vision for the foreseeable future, a theme the company has hinted at but never fully expressed. This week, Apple showed everyone where it was headed, challenged competitors on that direction, and made it clear that the company not only has staked a claim in that space, but is defining it.

This week, Apple stepped into the "post-PC" era of computing -- and there's no looking back, at least not for the folks in Cupertino.

By joining the company's ongoing vision of a "different" kind of computing with a soundbite friendly piece of marketing-speak, Apple has changed the rules of the game, and made the competition's efforts not just an uphill battle, but -- at least in the eyes of Steve Jobs and co. -- essentially moot. But what exactly is the "post-PC" world? And why is it significant? Let me explain.

In this new world, Apple no longer has to compete on specs and features, nor does it want to. There is no Mac vs. PC here -- only "the future" versus "the past." It won't be a debate about displays, memory, wireless options -- it will be a debate about the quality of the experience. Apple is not just eschewing the spec conversation in favor of a different conversation -- it's rendering those former conversations useless. It would be like trying to compare a race car to a deeply satisfying book. In a post-PC world, the experience of the product is central and significant above all else. It's not the RAM or CPU speed, screen resolution or number of ports which dictate whether a product is valuable; it becomes purely about the experience of using the device. What that means is that while Motorola and Verizon will spend millions of dollars advertising the Xoom's 4G upgrade options, CPU speed, and high-resolution cameras, Apple need only delight consumers and tell them that specs and and speed are the domain of a dinosaur called the PC. Apple isn't claiming victory in the Space Race -- it's ceding space to the competition.

But guess who gets Earth all to itself? Apple's not saying that it beats other tablets on the market. It's saying "we do one thing, and these guys do something else altogether." They're not competition -- they're not even playing the same game!

That's not to say Apple has given up on PCs, and in fact, the company's laptop sales are consistently exceeding expectations. But take a look at what's creeping around the corner. There's Lion, with its iOS-like interface, its simplified experience. If Apple has its way, and if the sales of its mobile devices carry on in the manner they have up until now, a post-PC outlook will even fit devices that look alarmingly like... PCs.

But right now -- in the tablet space at least -- the problem for Motorola, Samsung, HP, RIM, and anyone else who is challenging Apple becomes infinitely more difficult. Almost any company could put together a more powerful or spec-heavy tablet, but all the horsepower in the world can't help you if you don't find a way to delight the average consumer. Those other tablet makers may have superior hardware (and in the case of the Xoom, some superior software as well), but without that key component of sheer delight, the road for them is long and hard. HP is getting close by touting features like Touch-to-Share, but against experiences like the new GarageBand for iOS and the 65,000 apps (and counting) that currently exist, it's hard to see a clear path to sizable competition. That goes for Google and RIM as well.

What Apple has done by introducing its "post-PC" language into the vernacular is almost more a game of semantics. Now when Motorola boasts the brain-crushing, bone-splitting power of the Xoom, the company could easily come off like the guy who buys the red Ferrari because he has something to prove.


Apple isn't just challenging perceptions of the PC -- they're saying that the age of the PC is over (at least for most people). The company is forcing consumers to ask if they even still want or need something called a PC (while of course making sure to point out that the competition is playing the same old game). And really, that's all part of the plan. Apple is in the process of making the iPad the de-facto standard for what the next stage of computing looks like, from the look and feel to the kind of software and experiences you have on the device. Apple doesn't just want to own the market -- it wants to own the idea of the market. We've seen this act before, and we know how it ends.

There was a time before the iPod too, when companies like HP, Samsung, and even Microsoft fought against Apple for the hearts and minds of the consumer -- but I'll be damned if anyone can remember it.

nicely put..... and of course it means that the present is now a world where microsoft is relegated to being a company that equates to the past....
 
Ok so i don't think i can wait any longer, pretty pissed about this lack of upgrade but would it make sense to just buy the ipad 2 now and then sell it at christmas time and wait for the ipad 3 which i assume will be in march? If i get the 16 gb wifi for 499 I could probably sell at christmas for 400? what do people think of this plan?


Do it! Sounds like a good plan!
 
I hate conspiracies but with rumor that this iPad is an 'in between' model and the fact that Apple want us to buy as much as possible, couldn't it all be intentional?
I mean, maybe Apple wants us to upgrade to the next iPad when al the new cool futures come out with a new iOs...

There will not an iPad 3 this year. I don't understand people that can not figure out Apple's update cycle. The ipad2 is a whole new version it will be here for a year...
 
the (Xoom) sold out in many best buys on its first day actually. jus' sayin'

I went into a best buy yesterday and they had many Xooms...

The Xoom is not selling well...people want the IPAD 2.

I am not saying the Xoom is not any good...just not an IPAD 2.

The only way to beat apple in the Tablet wars is gonna be on price.

The Xoom should be priced at around $399....then it would rule..

But the Xoom build quality is kinda crappy compared to the Ipad 2.

People are gonna pick up the Ipad 2...and start to use it at a Apple store...and its all over....they will sale millions....
 
There will not an iPad 3 this year. I don't understand people that can not figure out Apple's update cycle. The ipad2 is a whole new version it will be here for a year...

Your right you don't make a whole different model than is .33 mm thinner, and has 2 times the CPU power and 9 times the graphics power and twice the memory as a in between product.

The is IPAD 2 baby!

Will continue to rule all tablets
 
its just a matter of OS implementation.

i bought the ATRIX and i thought it was fast because of a gig ram and dual core processor. I'm wrong.. very sluggish and the browser is so slow.

you guys are memory freak..
 
I went into a best buy yesterday and they had many Xooms...

The Xoom is not selling well...people want the IPAD 2.

I am not saying the Xoom is not any good...just not an IPAD 2.

The only way to beat apple in the Tablet wars is gonna be on price.

The Xoom should be priced at around $399....then it would rule..

But the Xoom build quality is kinda crappy compared to the Ipad 2.

People are gonna pick up the Ipad 2...and start to use it at a Apple store...and its all over....they will sale millions....

great simple truth and well put

forget "critical?" tech specs, initial user experience is addictive!
 
I think gizmodo is just trying to strike fear in Apple customers because of what happened to them. The only reason we knew about the RAM in iPhone 4 was because of the prototype. Apple NEVER posts how much RAM is in their iPod touch, iPhone, or iPads. You have to run an app to determine that.

Apple probably didn't say anything because they never have before, why should they now?

Wrong, check your facts.

As a previous user stated, during both the reveal of the iPhone 3gs and the iPhone 4 they touted the increase in RAM at the keynote because it was a central point to be made.

In the case of the reveal of the iPhone 3gs they revealed that the RAM had been doubled from 128 to 256. They were basically acknowledging that the original iPhone 3g, which was perfectly fine speed wise out of the box, had taken a major hit in performance with the release of the App Store and all the subsequent iOS software changes over the several months after it's relese. By the time the 3gs was released my 3g had become seriously slow and bogged down. I still waited for the iPhone 4 before I upgraded though.

When the iPhone 4 was revealed they touted the fact that it had an A4 1 ghz processor and 512 megs of RAM. These were bullet points on the keynote and directly from Steve Job's mouth. The main reason being is that the iPhone 4 representing a leap forward in iOS functionality in the area of multitasking. If you remember the iPad 1 didn't have multitasking until Fall 2010, while the iPhone 4 had had it since it's June 2010 release.

My first question/concern after watching the iPad 2 keynote was "What about the RAM?". It really suprised me that if they were willing to so blatantly point out that there was a new processor that was "2x as fast" and "graphics" that were "9x as fast" that they wouldn't mention whether or not there was an upgrade in RAM. Especially considering the fact that when the iOS version that allowed multitasking on the iPad 1 was released a lot of users said it really bogged the iPad 1 down.

Frankly I'm surprised it took MacRumors this long to post anything about it. I think Gizmodo has a valid point/concern and it is just echoing what a lot of people immediately thought after the keynote. I highly doubt it is some kind of vendetta.
 
Last edited:
I don't think will see another ipad anytime soon not this year anyway, so regardless of ram size this would be the entry point for any one who did not get on board. It will get better in another cycle but who has the the time to wait.
 
When the iPhone 4 was revealed they touted the fact that it had an A4 1 ghz processor and 512 megs of RAM. These were bullet points on the keynote and directly from Steve Job's mouth.

Don't think this is true at all. I will go back and look at the video, but I do not believe the RAM was ever mentioned.
 
Ok, just checked. You are incorrect. Apple never revealed the RAM in the keynote. They revealed it in a developers conference a few weeks later.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.