Please help me if I'm not understanding this definition...
It seems like being the 1st to bring 64 bit to a tablet makes it a "new idea"??
Apparently you are the expert though, so I will await your further elucidation.
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 Air Benchmarks Reveal 1.4 GHz A7 Processor, 2x Performance Gain Over iPad 4
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Please help me if I'm not understanding this definition...
It seems like being the 1st to bring 64 bit to a tablet makes it a "new idea"??
Apparently you are the expert though, so I will await your further elucidation.
Sounds like a lucky woman.
/s
If I was her, I'd get a job (or new hubby) so I wouldn't have to be treated like a 2nd class citizen or unwanted stepchild & receive whatever scraps and hand me downs it is deemed I'm worthy of, while my man brags to his internet buddies about how he's keeping me in the dark.
Just saying.
But the 3rd gen iPad is on par with the iPad 2, from a year earlier! I don't understand why they didn't give it a big speed boost then, rather than waiting 6 months. And the iPad mini, compared to the 4th gen iPad from the same time was miles behind! (granted it needs less power for the display, but still!)
If you make a bigger hard drive but with the same physical dimensions using a different build process, then yes, it IS innovation. Or is the retina display not a innovation as well? How about what Intel has been doing for the past 25+ years with x86 chips.
Making UI more intuitive is an UI improvement. Implementing new features is a features improvement.
Let say I add a physical button on side of the IPad which turns the WiFi on and off, would that be an innovation? I added a feature and more intuitive UI...
The screen technology was so good, the internal hardware of the iPad 3 while better then the iPad 2, barely kept things running as is.
Still, at the time, the retina display was an impressive upgrade
mini's battery is smaller but the screen is also smaller, screens use most of the battery life.both have same battery life (up to 10 hours).
some people even say Retina mini might be faster than Air due to having smaller retina screen less processing required by the GPU/CPU.I have no comment on this claim though.
Holy crap, care to cut anyone else down anymore? If the wife was a techie that cared what iPad she was using, she'd look for herself and find it.
I gave my old iPad to my girlfriend. I also didn't show her the article saying how much better the iPad2 I picked up was. And guess what, she LIKED it.
He didn't say she'd tell her she has to have the old one and she couldn't go buy the new one. He didn't say he was going to lie to her. Sounds like she'll be happy with the old model, and that's all that matters. Put a chart in front of someone showing that what they have is slower (even if it's perfectly suitable for their use) makes no sense.
Actually. I'm going to gift my girlfriend a 13-inch air, cause she's not worth the 15-inch rMBP and so she gets a second class citizen laptop. ...I don't think that's how it works.
Sheesh. Don't judge other relationships based on some misconceptions you've brewed up.
----------
^This. By the OP logic, nothing is innovating. Intel's NM reductions year over year aren't innovating, according to him/her. Neither is the tri-gate transistor. It's "still" a transistor, just improved, not innovation!
Big speed boosts aren't exactly a "we cranked the knob higher" sort of thing.
On the battery life, yeah it's quite possible the smaller screen has a lower power draw (smaller backlight?) even though with the same resolution there should be little difference in power use/load on the GPU.
The second claim is very dubious alright. It takes the same processing requirements to display the same image at the same resolution, regardless of how big/small those pixels might be. If it turns out the mini is faster, I'd be astonished if that were the reason.
Probably for the education sector. Schools and families who will only use it for learning purposes probably don't care about the newest modifications. There are a lot of people who still haven't picked one up due to the price point alone. Saving a couple hundred bucks and getting an ipad that is still good can be quite attractive to some.
On the other hand, you could ask her who spends more on hair dressers, clothes, shoes and hand bags. That iPad Air costs about the same as a pair of Jimmy Choos, and he isn't going to wear them when she gets a new pair.
----------
Because that would be an absolutely stupid idea.
Just a little Tongue in cheek.
The air scores the same as my 2012 MBA geekbench, this thing could quite easily run OSX IF only it had the RAM.
----------
Why would it be a stupid idea, oh holy one?
That's why Samsung cheats on benchmarks. (They built the names of several popular benchmarks into their OS, and when you start an app with one of those names, they crank up the clock speed with disregard of heat and battery life to get higher scores).
I was not "claiming" or "advocating" anything of the sort. I was simply trying to get a real world understanding of the numbers flouted about regarding speeds over previous models (which most responders understood...., except you of course
) and nothing to do with freezing technological advancements.Where do you get these ideas.....?
Pretty reasonable to ask if the new iPad 'actually' feels 5.6 times faster than my iPad 3 in the real world.
So no, you clearly do not understand.... But thanks for trying to troll.
When I went from an iPad 3 to an iPad 4, I really noticed the difference. Im talking from my perspective/end user experience, not benchmarks.
Not only did the upgrade pretty much do away with any kind of stutter or lag, a number of apps (mostly photo/video or games with complex 3D) were way faster (less time to render, improved frame rates), and a few game even had better graphic (more detailed textures for example), and even a few everyday tasks like web browsing were improved.
FWIW, both tablets running iOS6.
So moving to an iPad Air will be all that much better for real world performance, plus from an iPad 3 youre losing over 0.4 lbs, getting a better front and rear camera, better microphone setup, and if youre already on other lightening port iOS devices, you get closer to cable consolidation
Im probably going to upgrade our 4th gen, but I _think_ Im going to try a Mini now thats its retina (and likely doesnt give up much in terms of performance to the Air).
It's really stepping into the performance level of laptops a few years ago. That's really crazy and unimaginable when the original iPad debuted in 2010.
More or less, yeah. Those scores are about on par with a Dual Core 2.3 GHz G5 from 2005...
I guess thats one way of looking at it.
Given the mini is actually very good, it also just shows how useless benchmarks are.
----------
I am going to read through all 195 comments to see what all the "same chip as iphone 5s, how will it power the extra pixels" people have to say about this. Hopefully something like "Oh I get it! Faster chip than previous ipad, same amount of pixels, that makes complete sense now, why didnt I realize that earlier"
----------
I understand that, but thinking big picture that they were able to get these increases in a smaller lighter package keeping the battery life the same - its actually a really good achievement, and I think deserves us to be a little surprised!
? Do you know something specific, or assuming stuffs? Unless you can explain based on how rendering works in safari, you're just throwing some facts together hoping it makes sense.
Since they have the same resolution/pixel count, it shouldn't make a big difference.
