Exactly. The heaviest component in the iPad is the battery. Less battery means lighter and potentially cheaper as well.
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.
"iPad 4" (2013) predictions
- Thread starter frosse
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly. The heaviest component in the iPad is the battery. Less battery means lighter and potentially cheaper as well.
All that really matters is
What Apple paid for the 64GB of NAND storage for current shipping products versus what they can get 128GB of of NAND storage for.
Samsung
http://www.waybeta.com/news/161769/samsung
Toshiba
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5912/toshiba-announces-thnsnf-series-ssds-19nm-nand-is-here
I'd be personally shocked if 128GB iPad weren't available in 2013. NAND trajectory wrt to fabrication is pointing strongly towards SSD becoming more mainstream in 2012 as far as pricing goes.
Yup..
http://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/12289/How+much+do+the+individual+iPad+component+weigh
iPad first gen
Glass/Display combo = 346 grams
Looks like the battle may come down to IGZO and the rumored In-cell display technology to reduce the heft of the glass/display.
Yes, an IGZO display by Sharp greatly improves the touch screen as shown in this previously posted video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=L1wRivEeIU8#t=199s
Thanks, I'm aware of those changes, I meant that switching to IGZO is not going to make any significant difference to the size & weight of the device. (referring to the first post)
Apple were pretty quick with their adoption of 802.11n, and actually shipped hardware that was capable of it before the standard was finalised, then allowed you to purchase a firmware update to go from g to n for a nominal fee. That's why I'm hoping we would see 802.11ac
It would be necessary for 1080p airplay mirroring too—the current 720p mirroring is slow enough as it is over 802.11n.
I find that I use the camera surprisingly often. I don't take it out for photography, but if I'm going to email a copy of a receipt or a signed document to someone, it's good enough that I can use Scanner Pro and get it done in a few seconds.
If I want to send a photo of something quickly via iMessage, I'll use the iPad's camera rather than getting my DSLR out, taking a photo, downloading it to my PC, converting it to a JPG, transferring it to the iPad and then sending it over.
If you use an app like Camera+ which lets you lock white balance, exposure and focus, you can get surprisingly good results quickly with the iPad.
The main reason I would actually want a flash would be for notifications, rather than photography though.
I would have no objection to a better quality "facetime camera" as the current one is awful, though I never use it.
I was under the impression that quad-core android devices were not showing nearly the same benefit as we have seen on the desktop due to the nature of the apps running on them not being able to take advantage of that many cores. It's not like you're multitasking and having apps running in the background. A higher clocked dual-core chip would scale performance identically in all apps, rather than the few computationally complex enough to benefit from quad-core.
They have already had the size & weight regression. I would expect them to keep it the same form factor and either improve the CPU & GPU more, or improve battery life, rather than shrink the battery again to save a few millimeters of depth.
32GB at $499 would probably be tough. I expect they'll do this:
16GB, 64GB, 128GB, at the current price points.
Why? It provides more of an incentive to move from the $499 model to the $599 model. Shifting the mix to the higher-priced products, while maintaining the key $499 pricepoint, would be a good move. It's what Apple does with the iPod touch currently.
16GB, 64GB, 128GB, at the current price points.
Why? It provides more of an incentive to move from the $499 model to the $599 model. Shifting the mix to the higher-priced products, while maintaining the key $499 pricepoint, would be a good move. It's what Apple does with the iPod touch currently.
16GB is simply not enough (Retina Artwork) and we're not even talking about today's NAND pricing. The iPad 4 doesn't need to go into production until the last month of this year.
NAND pricing is a factor of yield and with the smaller geometry parts I'm expecting to see NAND storage increase on Apple's products.
Actually, I hope they get rid of the Home button. It's not necessary especially since you can enable the virtual Home button in the iPad settings. Once I was informed about this I haven't used the physical button in 2 months and don't see myself ever using it again.
Not going to happen. I like assistive touch, but i have to turn it off when i'm using music apps or else it will freeze up every time i use 4 fingers or more. I'm sure there are also other kind of apps that make use of 4 (or more) finger input.
One thing that I'd really like to see is this:
It seems that when the iPhone and new MacBook got the retina display, Apple was able to wave their magic wand and 'raise' the display to the surface of the glass. On those devices, it no longer feels like the display is under the glass - they seem to be on the same level.
That never happened with the iPad and it's a feature I was really looking forward to. It really changes the overall feel of using the display. (Especially a touch one)
----------
Stirrup speakers.
It seems that when the iPhone and new MacBook got the retina display, Apple was able to wave their magic wand and 'raise' the display to the surface of the glass. On those devices, it no longer feels like the display is under the glass - they seem to be on the same level.
That never happened with the iPad and it's a feature I was really looking forward to. It really changes the overall feel of using the display. (Especially a touch one)
----------
Stirrup speakers.