Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
As many have side I find it very surprising that people are making such a big deal of the RAM. Apple invests a lot in R&D, more than most and they are innovating more than most. Look at laptops, cellphones, and desktops over the past several years and you will see outside of apple there has been very little change. It is actually quite shocking how little innovation there is. Netbooks are literally small laptops. They make parts smaller and components more powerful, but no one has challenged the core of what a computer or phone is.

Before the iphone there was windows mobile, and nothing improved for years, it was difficult to keep stable, performance would tank without clear reasons... The iphone changed the whole picture, look at every phone being released now and they are all copying it (I have no issue with that, competition will make it all better, but no one can pretend it was not all driven by apple). And for those saying apple is just trying to suck money out of us (of course they are, they are a company), but the iphone was the first real phone that you could easily and regularly upgrade to the latest os and get the latest software features. that never really worked with window mobile or any other phone, you got what you bought and got a new phone when needed. Even android is not so straight forward because of all the different manufacturers.

The ipad is doing the same for the netbook type computer as the iphone did for phones. Don't know if it will succeed but they are trying. There is a lot of innovation in these products and they do cut corners on some specs to keep the price down, but the reality is there is nothing like this on the market, if you like it great, if not wait and see where it goes.

Point is you do pay a premium because of the high quality parts (9.7" touch screen is not cheap either), and also for the overhead it takes a company like apple to create these products. I a pretty sure a first gen ipad will work well enough 2 years from now, but the newer ones will be much better. But who is anyone trying to fool if you don't think that goes for all computers, every year the standard ram balloons, hard drive sizes go up, software takes up more space and ram, bluray comes out... all tech gets old fast, nothing unusual here.

And I am not a fanboy, all my computers are windows 7 (really like it), but think Apple is amazing with gadgets/cellphones, and not iPads :)

Peter
 
The guy at the Apple store said it is. he also said it was way better than ANY netbook. I just wish I could sync my iPhone with my "netbook killer". Steve also said its way better than a netbook, so according to Apple it IS a replacement for a netbook.
Here's Steve said:

"So... all of us use laptops and smartphones... the question has arisen; is there room for something in the middle. We've wondered for years as well -- in order to create that category, they have to be far better at doing some key tasks... better than the laptop, better than the smartphone.

What kind of tasks? Browsing the web. Doing email. Enjoying and sharing pics. Watching videos. Enjoying music. Playing games. Reading ebooks.

If there's gonna be a third category, it has to be better at these tasks -- otherwise it has no reason for being."


Jobs didn't say it could do everything a full-fledged laptop (or netbook) could do! He said it needed to do some very key things better than ANYTHING else. That's the point. Jobs is making the claim that iPad is better at certain things than ANY OTHER TYPE OF COMPUTING (better than on the best phone [iPhone] or better than even the best laptop [Macbook Pro] and I dare say he'd think even a Mac Pro)!! Think about that! Better experience for 7 of the top most things we do... Web Browsing, Email, Photo viewing, Video viewing, Music, Playing games and reading eBooks!

That's where Jobs wants to compete! Of course, let's not forget that 150,000 apps will work out-of-the-box on the iPad.

Yes, iPad, aside from iWork, is primarily a machine for unwinding and enjoying some downtime with your media and having fun. Which is what a lot of people buy netbooks for. Something small to keep in your bag to surf the web and do email while out and about until you get home. Most just want to "stay connected" on the road until they come home to a desktop or a bigger laptop.
 
Not sure what websites and/or how many you are loading, but 256 MB is more than enough for a browser. Many websites are executed server-side where only text and images are presented to the client browser. 256 MB is a lot for text and images. Client-executed sites/applications, such as Flash, are a different story.
What about using some tabs and switching between them?

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/9571380/
 
And while 256MB of RAM doesn't compromise snappiness now, it probably will limit things in a few months if iPhone OS 4 brings multitasking as expected. If apps are written to expect access to 256MB of RAM and only needing to be shared with system processes, there is definitely going to be trouble with RAM thrashing when multiple programs of this size are running.

Actually, Developers aren't given all 256MB of RAM when they are coding for their apps. Apple has been rejecting apps that use barely more than 100MB, so I don't think that's going to be too much of a problem.

And as I said, the 3GS multitasks quite beautifully.
 
Then quite your bitching and go buy something else. Really even a 14 year old should know that.

Why? A product thats as hyped and as expensive as an iPad should be perfect enough I shouldn't have to bitch about it! Its kind like a drug. Even with its flaws, I couldn't live w/o an iPhone. The other products don't have the problems the iPhone has, but they have their own issues that are even more annoying than what the iphone had.
 
My god is right. If you buy it, load several web pages at home, then get in the car, read one. then try to read the other, if must reload. Well I don
't have a MiFi, so I'm screwed.

I do exactly this (preloading pages) when traveling. While in the airport lounge before or between flights, I'll click "open in new tab" for 10 to 30 pages at times while I have the 802.11 access. When the boarding call comes, I'll put the tablet to sleep and get on the plane.

When we're cruising, I'll wake the tablet and read the pages that are sitting there.

(It helps that my multi-touch tablet runs a full x64 OS with 5 GiB RAM, SSD, ....)
 
In theory, that's all nice and dandy. The problem in the real world, however, is that today's DSLRs produce RAW images that have 50MB+ in size per photo, that movies in 1080p are easily 4 to 8 GBs big and that an average high quality mp3 also easily has more than 10 MB.

Now you want to actually edit and manipulate one or two or three of those files. Let's say you want to create a collage from six of those high resolution RAW images. Or you want to create an audio file with eight tracks.

Those are very specific uses of a computer and never ones anyone has ever claimed you could do on an iPhone. Few people have the need to do any of that, so I don't really get your misapplied point.

What does the size of the movie matter? You can watch any movie you want on it. Yes you can't edit the next Avatar on your iPad. Imagine that. You also can't do that on your netbook either. Again, don't get the point.

You pick out 3 very specific niche uses of computers and use that as a reason to try and invalidate what I said. Sorry you are wrong. Might as well throw in CAD as well. How about running the IRS database.. iPad can't do that either. Oh yeah, you also can't handle 100 virtual private servers for webhosting on an iPad either... etc etc.

As for your last example of a 10 meg mp3.. running out of stuff after two? Really? You could only come up with two things the iPad couldn't do before you hit 10 meg mp3 files?

Here I will give you another one.. The iPad will not run the New York Stock Exchange, heck not even NASDAQ.


You will quicker run out of those 256MB memory than you can imagine, and the thing will start swapping like crazy. If it even -can- swap memory.

You can take my original post and target it directly at yourself. You are ignorant on the subject of how computers utilize memory and that is fine, most people are.. The problem over the years has been coding bloat and total inefficiency in programming. I am sure you are to young to remember a day when people coded things to fit inside 16k and do stuff people would now take 2 gigs of memory to do.

As for price, memory is not free. It costs something. It takes up space. It contributes to heat. Potentially to battery drain as well. Everything they add and do has all sorts of unique costs. Apple is very good about weighing those costs. You say memory costs nothing. Even if you ignore the fact that it would have to be placed in side the machine taking up room, increasing, weight, heat and everything else when you multiple the cost by 10s of millions of units it adds up.

Look at the size and space most iPhone apps use and iPad apps. Even with data, which is only going to be accessed partially most apps are much, much, smaller than desktop counterparts. This is one of the huge advantages of apple's closed system. It allows programs to be more efficient.

they wanted to squeeze as much profit in those USD 499 as possible. End of discussion.

Actually I have said it 100 times since the iPad was announced, but most likely Apple is losing money on the $499 model. The priced it that way because they felt that was the right price to capture the market. However the cost is they lose money on every $499 device they sell. Adding more memory means losing even more money. They hope to make up the difference and generate profit with the upscale memory and 3g models. They are allowed to make a profit right?


Apple releases a product WITHOUT dozens of features that people actually wanted. But you will always have an army of self proclaimed Apple defenders and fanboys who will find millions of excuses why you don't need any of those features. Or why Apple's much weaker features are still okay compared to the competition that's technologically years ahead.

Apple has proven themselves pretty smart and savvy when it comes to make the trade-offs and concessions. Again you are being ignorant if you think Apple didn't consider all of this in advance. However every single possible addition or change has a whole slew of costs, costs that can heavily impact other aspects of the device. At the end of the day some features or left off or modified because it makes the device better.

Like I said Apple has proven themselves and their ability to make this tough choices and to make the right choices. You have proven nothing. You are a spec sheet jockey who thinks the only product that is good is one who throws in every possible item regardless of how it impacts the usefulness of the device.

The freaking iPad in April of 2010 has been shown to get 11-12 hours of real time use watching video non-stop. These are the reasons Apple makes these trade-offs. So they can delivery in areas that are important to people who they made the device for...

It is not designed to be a do everything device, it is designed to be a superior content consumption and access device, and from the looks of it, it does it very well. It is not a generic overblown all-purpose desktop computer. You just don't seem to even understand what it is or more importantly why it is.




For example, a 1 Megapixel camera in a mobile device compared to 5 Megapixel cameras (with Zeiss lenses) that are in competing products - and still everybody will say that Apple's outdated and inferior technology is "just fine".

Yet what device has the largest percentage of pictures stored in online photobanks? Given up guessing yet? They offered enough for what the people wanted. Most people don't care about having a 10 ooglepixel camera on their phone, and thus they are not interested in paying more for it.


If Apple was going to release a computer without a CPU, you'd probably still find Apple fanboys who'd defend that.
If it worked and did what I wanted it to do, what difference would it make. In fact that would be an amazing achievement. What is funnier is you would be bashing it for not having a cpu instead of marveling at how they made a functional computer without one. See the point there?


Apple has products that are worth their price. I just don't think that the iPhone, iPod and iPad are among them - especially not with all the artificial restrictions in those devices that are only there to make the customer a slave to iTunes and the AppStore.

Well close to 100 million people seem to disagree with you so whatever!
 
I do exactly this (preloading pages) when traveling. While in the airport lounge before or between flights, I'll click "open in new tab" for 10 to 30 pages at times while I have the 802.11 access. When the boarding call comes, I'll put the tablet to sleep and get on the plane.

When we're cruising, I'll wake the tablet and read the pages that are sitting there.

(It helps that my multi-touch tablet runs a full x64 OS with 5 GiB RAM, SSD, ....)

It is nice, but the iPhone can't do that. neither can the iPod touch. as it sounds, neither can the iPad. Its not that it would have costed Apple much to add 512MB RAm or even 1GB That issue is just so simple to solve, but Apple choses not to.
 
Worded perfectly. All these fanboy make me sick. They think a 2.26GHz Core 2 Duo, 2 GB Ram and a small 160GB HD is okay for $1199. the other things can't really cost that much. the aluminum couldn't have cost more that $5.00

You think that the original iPhone runs slower on the latest os than on the original one.. So your opinion is suspect at best.
 
Not sure what websites and/or how many you are loading, but 256 MB is more than enough for a browser. Many websites are executed server-side where only text and images are presented to the client browser. 256 MB is a lot for text and images. Client-executed sites/applications, such as Flash, are a different story.

Because of images, to show them, they have to be decompressed in memory. see the banner on the top of this page? that alone takes atleast 0.2MByte of your ram. Now imagine a page with news, multiple bigger pictures and javascript (that is not free, a sandbox costs memory too).
 
It must suck to constantly be planning and waiting for the future and never actually enjoying the present. Go right ahead and wait for the "next generation" iPad while I enjoy THIS iPad. And guess what, when the next version is released, I'll be buying that one too. That's just how I roll ;)
 
You think that the original iPhone runs slower on the latest os than on the original one.. So your opinion is suspect at best.

I don't think, I know. If I had an Original iPhone on 1.1.4, and one on 3.1.3. I could prove it to you. Sadly I don't. I don't even have the Original because it was a pain in the ass to use.
 
This is so sad that I have to respond.

What makes me laugh is the fact the most of you people complaining about the 256MB RAM forgot that the Flash Memory iPad contains is so brilliant to use as VRAM.
VRAM = Video RAM and no you can't use flash as video RAM.
Why did we invent RAM in the first place?
RAM is primary storage and is directly accessible by the processor and can be altered on the fly.
Was in not because the write speed of the HDD was too slow?
No HHDs are a form of secondary storage not primary and as such are not directly addressable by the processor. While slow they often allow for huge storage capacities beyound what can be had in RAM.
But this is Flash Memory, not a Hard Drive.
Yes it is and I think this fast behaviour confuses people and leads them to think the machine on a whole is fast. It is when data can all be held in RAM by an app. When the lack of RAM forces a reload of data from someplace besides flash you end up with performance issues.
And for those of you reporting slowdowns on 3.0 on the original iPhone, that's only because you have so many apps, there's not enough room on the iPhone for VRAM anymore.
I don't know what you are trying to say here but it sounds like garbage. The 3.0 software update did slow down the iPhone significantly. This has nothing to do with the installed apps.
Delete some apps and you'll see your iPhone flying again. Another example: I've seen Multitasking on a jailbroken iPhone 3GS fly if it's only used half its storage. When it's loaded full it just dies.
Of course it does which is one of the reasons it wasn't considered by Apple. The little processor can only handle so much multitasking.
I think that gives us a pretty solid indication of what exactly Apple is doing with the spare space here to make up for the mediocre RAM.
That does not compute. Frankly I don't think you know the difference between RAM, Secondary Store, Flash nor Virtual Memory.
For this precise reason, I'm getting the 32GB iPad. I have no doubt the 16GB iPad will slow down if you use 15GB of space, but that's not happening on the 32GB.

Flash space has nothing to do with the issues brought up in this thread. Having your Flash store full can cause performance problems but that can happen with any size flash disk.

Also note this: even though the iPad is coming with 256MB of RAM, user apps get far less than that. Under 200MB by some estimates. That is a tight squeeze for todays GUI software!
 
In theory, that's all nice and dandy. The problem in the real world, however, is that today's DSLRs produce RAW images that have 50MB+ in size per photo, that movies in 1080p are easily 4 to 8 GBs big and that an average high quality mp3 also easily has more than 10 MB.

Now you want to actually edit and manipulate one or two or three of those files. Let's say you want to create a collage from six of those high resolution RAW images. Or you want to create an audio file with eight tracks.

And you want to do that on your fancy iPad, which is ah-so capable.

You will quicker run out of those 256MB memory than you can imagine, and the thing will start swapping like crazy. If it even -can- swap memory.

And memory costs nothing these days. The only reason why Apple has not put more memory into that device is that they wanted to squeeze as much profit in those USD 499 as possible. End of discussion.

What really annoys me is this endless circle that somebody compare to the Stockholm syndrom:

Apple releases a product WITHOUT dozens of features that people actually wanted. But you will always have an army of self proclaimed Apple defenders and fanboys who will find millions of excuses why you don't need any of those features. Or why Apple's much weaker features are still okay compared to the competition that's technologically years ahead. For example, a 1 Megapixel camera in a mobile device compared to 5 Megapixel cameras (with Zeiss lenses) that are in competing products - and still everybody will say that Apple's outdated and inferior technology is "just fine".

If Apple was going to release a computer without a CPU, you'd probably still find Apple fanboys who'd defend that.

Apple has products that are worth their price. I just don't think that the iPhone, iPod and iPad are among them - especially not with all the artificial restrictions in those devices that are only there to make the customer a slave to iTunes and the AppStore.

whoa, lighten up there buddy. i was pissed too that the iPad came out with only 1/10th of its potential. but, it's apple's prerogative to release features in the order they see fit, and the iPad performs fantastically for what it says it does. like many posters have referred to already, squeezing that kind of performance from those specs is more technologically advanced than shoving more ram into it, and makes me all the more confident in their current and future products. this cannot be said for their unimaginative competitors. sounds like a dell netbook is the right choice for you.

and use some common sense. the iPad is not meant for the ridiculous tasks you presented, nor does apple intend to make a portable, less expensive product with the same functionality as a full mac.
 
I understand nothing about processors: architectures, platforms, etc... make no sense to me, but apparently Apple managed to build an impressively fast device and made the right choices in CPU and RAM.

For those who say 256 MB of RAM isn't much: we're not talking about a desktop computer here! It runs applications that are very small compared to what we run on our "normal" computers, and even if you consider that multi-tasking may appear in the near future, I think it's still plenty to hold what it needs. My old laptop has 512 MB of RAM and it handles Photoshop CS3, Google Chrome and a Skype video conversation simultaneously without any major problems. I imagine you would do much less than that on your iPad, so 256 should be fine. I also think that when multi-tasking does appear (maybe this summer, if ever), it will be worth waiting for the next revision anyway.

By the way, since it stores data on a Flash chip, maybe it can access virtual memory much faster than if it were on a hard drive anyway. But I'm not sure about that.

Remember that this is a cheap device, and at this time we're not multi-tasking. And just like the iPhone, they will probably make the next revision faster just in time for the new software. Until then, it's going to be blazing fast anyway.
 
I understand nothing about processors: architectures, platforms, etc... make no sense to me, but apparently Apple managed to build an impressively fast device and made the right choices in CPU and RAM.

For those who say 256 MB of RAM isn't much: we're not talking about a desktop computer here! It runs applications that are very small compared to what we run on our "normal" computers, and even if you consider that multi-tasking may appear in the near future, I think it's still plenty to hold what it needs. My old laptop has 512 MB of RAM and it handles Photoshop CS3, Google Chrome and a Skype video conversation simultaneously without any major problems. I imagine you would do much less than that on your iPad, so 256 should be fine. I also think that when multi-tasking does appear (maybe this summer, if ever), it will be worth waiting for the next revision anyway.

By the way, since it stores data on a Flash chip, maybe it can access virtual memory much faster than if it were on a hard drive anyway. But I'm not sure about that.

Remember that this is a cheap device, and at this time we're not multi-tasking. And just like the iPhone, they will probably make the next revision faster just in time for the new software. Until then, it's going to be blazing fast anyway.


You call $500-$829 cheap?
 
Actually, Jobs directly compared the iPad to netbooks when it was announced. A netbook replacement is precisely what it's supposed to be.

I am disappointed in the low amount of RAM. 512 would have made a lot more sense, coupled with the ability to use the flash storage as virtual memory.

That being said, I am really enjoying my iPad quite a lot.

No. Steve said it's better than a Netbook, not a replacement.

And better in this case does not mean it's supposed to do everything a netbook does. It's supposed to do more than a netbook does on the other hand.

Steve sees netbooks are hard to use due to bad design so he said for tasks such as browsing web, watching movies etc, iPad will do much better than a netbook, which are a netbooks primary usage areas. Nobody buys a netbook to actually create even if you can somehow do a bit of creative work on a netbook. People buy them for exactly to do the things an iPad can do much better.

That was the whole point, weird that you missed that. It was pretty clear.
 
Some people will always be waiting for the perfect future device and will never actually enjoy the devices presently available. They are sad people.

Listen up kids...if you stay in school and work hard, you can someday afford to buy new products when they are released AND buy new versions when they are upgraded. Amazing huh :eek:
 
256mb ram , that's plenty!

I love the way people get up in arms about the 256mb ram mark, hello! It's not a desktop so saying my computer back in 2003 had 256mb is frankly stupid. Research the tech before you post and try to understand that the use of that 256mb ram is nothing like a PC. Right now as I type this on my iPad connected to wifi I'm using 9.43mb of that "ram" ( per dev tools) please try and understand that on this platform 1ghz and 256mb ram along with 16-32-64gb space options is just fine, I have a 32 only because I like carrying 10-15 movies with me for train rides......and lunch breaks......

Lol..... I did spend about a Hundred yesterday on apps that I wanted lol but for me still worth it as my Mac mini died , my MacBook pro will take it's place at home and the iPad along with my iPhone will be for on the go.....sweet!
 
I'm going to re-word my thoughts. Apple has a pattern with iPhone OS products. release new software, followed by a new phone, then music device. iPad is an iPhone Os device, so it might be the same as iPhone and iPod touch for product refreshes. They charge $500-$829 for iPad. in one year it might not be as fast, as you should spend $500-$829 to buy the new iPad. If I paid $699 for my pad, I want that wow factor to last more than 12 months.

How often does any wow factor last longer than 12 minutes these days, let alone 12 months? I see people who buy new Nikes every 3 months because a new £80 pair is introduced with slightly different laces or stripes with slightly different tones. When the BMW Z4 came out the Z3 went (in my mind at least) from looking like sex on 4 wheels to something my grandma would drive in the space of a heartbeat.

The iPad is a high-cost consumer gadget. It is not essential to your continuing existence that you either own one, or own the latest, greatest version when it comes out. If you happen to have more money than sense however, a 12 month release window is like Christmas Version 2. I get to hand my old iPad down to my extremely greatful tech-illiterate girlfriend, and I get a shiny new toy. In that context dropping £400-500 (or whatever Steve is planning to charge us over-the-ponders once he makes his mind up about selling it to us) is small change to sate our shiny plaything lust. If that expenditure makes a big difference to your bank balance, skip a cycle (you yanks are so concerned about creeping Socialism you'd think this kind of consumer choice would be appealing). Think how much sweeter that unboxing is going to be if you've spent a year with a clunky out-of-date 1G iPad and get to skip to 3rd gen...
 
Actually, Developers aren't given all 256MB of RAM when they are coding for their apps. Apple has been rejecting apps that use barely more than 100MB, so I don't think that's going to be too much of a problem.

And as I said, the 3GS multitasks quite beautifully.
I remember reading somewhere that the rejection zone is usually between 120MB and 150MB, but I don't think that's Apple preemptively keeping program RAM consumption down in anticipation of multitasking, but because the existing iPhone OS 3 and iPhone 3GS can already crash programs in that range. Current iPhone apps are often backwards compatible with the first and second gen devices and so probably operate within the space constraints of a device with 128MB of RAM. With iPad apps not needing that backwards compatibility they would probably be bigger, hopefully while incorporating more functionality, but may not multitask as well as a result.

Despite all the talk of the power the iPad brings to gaming, in the end, it may well be the iPhone 3GS and third-gen iPod Touch that are capable of the best graphics. While the iPad's PowerVR SGX535 may be clocked higher, it isn't likely clocked 5 times higher to scale with the more than 5 times increase in pixel count, so the iPhone 3GS has more power available per pixel. With the iPad and iPhone 3GS having the same amount of RAM and the GPU sharing system memory, the iPad will also be memory constrained faster than the iPhone 3GS having to accommodate higher resolution textures to fit the larger screen. Luckily, it doesn't seem the SGX535 is fully utilized yet games are still based on code that maintain compatibility with first and second gen devices and OpenGL ES 1.1, but the iPad should peak faster than the iPhone 3GS.
 
With NetBooks you can Consume and create media. The create part of it is less of course than a real laptop, but you can create nonetheless. With the iPad you can only consume. There is no filesystem, you cannot browse your files.
It's a nice device, don't get me wrong, but it's flawed.
The average person has no talent.Can't draw, add, subtract etc. All we do is watch youtube, check out facebook and watch movies and play games. Create my a**.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.