iPad Tech Specs: Cortex A8, 256MB Ram, PowerVR SGX 535

[MorphingDragon]

Oh dear.

So Im going to take your cryptic comment over a demonstration done by one of the University's best hacking professors and years of working with other people in the IT field.

Dont believe me?

Take a gander at this.
http://www.usenix.org/event/sec08/tech/full_papers/halderman/halderman_html/

 

[ranReloaded]

"WE RULEZ! YOU HAS VIRUS LOL " That's the message in the alert. What a ********. "WE RULEZ! YOU HAS VIRUS LOL "? What is that supposed to even mean. <-- LOL @ question without question mark.

It was intended as a joke about the "Poor english" debate and the confusion about the app title. Sorry if it sounded too silly

 

[ranReloaded]

could be an itouch, iPhone, or ipad, OR future device. It would actually be careless to use the phrase ipad if you're a developer.

the other option is something like

if( device == iPod ){
@"Your iPod is low on memory..."
}
else if( device == iPhone ){
@"Your iPhone is low on memory..."
}
else if( device == iPad ){
@"Your iPad is low on memory..."
...
else{
@"Whatever your device, it is low on memory..." // Catch All
}

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

"WE RULEZ! YOU HAS VIRUS LOL " That's the message in the alert. What a ********. "WE RULEZ! YOU HAS VIRUS LOL "? What is that supposed to even mean. <-- LOL @ question without question mark.

It was intended as a joke about the "Poor english" debate and the confusion about the app title. Sorry if it sounded too silly

My reply was a modified quote of Gnashers original rant on the poor English on the low memory popup.?

I don't think your reply sounded silly.

 

[gnasher729]

Man you are really digging yourself into a hole now.

Restarting is better for memory, end of.

I take it you are a fan of cargo cult programming. (Look it up in wikipedia).

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

could be an itouch, iPhone, or ipad, OR future device. It would actually be careless to use the phrase ipad if you're a developer.

the other option is something like

if( device == iPod ){
@"Your iPod is low on memory..."
}
else if( device == iPhone ){
@"Your iPhone is low on memory..."
}
else if( device == iPad ){
@"Your iPad is low on memory..."
...
else{
@"Whatever your device, it is low on memory..." // Catch All
}

Or they could leave it as "device" as I would hope that the person would generally know what they're holding in their hands.

After 30 long years on this blue planet, I can deduce the device in my hands is an iPod touch and If a similar message popped up on my iPod touch It wouldn't have me assuming that my Nexus One was low on memory.

 

[MorphingDragon]

I take it you are a fan of cargo cult programming. (Look it up in wikipedia).

Oh Snap!

I thought Universities and Programming books managed to get Cult Programming to die off!

Unfortunately I have to port macros which have over zealous coding techniques, Im starting to think Its easier to just implement the functionality my way.

 

[tdream]

I take it you are a fan of cargo cult programming. (Look it up in wikipedia).

Oh Snap!

I thought Universities and Programming books managed to get Cult Programming to die off!

Unfortunately I have to port macros which have over zealous coding techniques, Im starting to think Its easier to just implement the functionality my way.

Both of you are overcomplicating things so much you've gone onto a tangential plane that doesn't exist in the realms of reality.

Let me spell it out for you.

R-E-S-T-A-R-T-I-N-G
I-S
B-E-T-T-E-R
T-H-A-N
E-X-I-T-I-N-G
F-O-R
M-E-M-O-R-Y

 

[aaronsullivan]

All I know is the iPad runs super fast. I don't quite get how it pulls it off, honestly. My game runs super silky smooth and I couldn't be happier. So, this number-that-number means very little to me except some small concern about multitasking performance in the future -- I still haven't had any need for multitasking beyond what the current OS already provides, though.

If it's one thing we can all agree on are making a tidy sum on each iPad.

I do agree. That chart is cool and the profit margin seems enormous and it will likely pay off in the future, but it doesn't include a whole lot of numbers.

Apple is selling the iWork apps for $10 each, which is losing money judging from the intense amount of development required to completely refocus the interface on those apps. That wasn't just a couple programmers.

How much are you paying for the new API's and functionality added to the OS?

How about the basic R&D on this that has been going on for decades?

Advertising?

Producing all those "educational" videos to help people understand the decidedly different experience that comes with an iPad.

How about the hiring of new people to streamline the App approval process?

There's a huge amount of support and effort behind this launch and it wasn't free to Apple.

 

[Ries]

Hi @Winni, I've got a few issues to debate in your post.

First, I'm not sure which DSLR you're talking about, but it's going to have to be the highest of the high end. I have a Canon 5Dii (which is a professional grade camera) and the images are about 23MB. I'm sure that there are cameras out there that produce 50MB images, but let's not exagerate.

Next, if you want to creat a collage of six high res RAW images then you are never ever going to want to use an iPad. That's not what it's for. I wouldn't be able to use my 2006 MBP to do that. I would however be able to use my 2008 iMac. The situation you're talking about requires a pro-machine and pro-software. Your argument is invalid.

Most importantly, ignoring the RAM or processor, if you're creating a collage you'll want to do it on something with a big screen to see all the details of your pictures - you won't do it on a 9.7" screen.

It's fine that you're not happy with the RAM or speed or whatever of the iPad (and the iPhone and iPod) - but trying to make your case by first exagerating, and second using an invalid argument really doesn't do much to prove your point.

That because you don't understand how it works. Lets take your image, its a 22mpixel camera, 14bit pr color in RAW. On disk its lossless compressed (file size is not equal memory requirements). Since stuff is stored in multiple of 8bit, to work with a image in code, each color will be stored in 16 bit units. so the memory need to load and work on this image will be:
22M*3(RGB)*2Byte(16bit pr color) = 132mbyte of memory needed.

 

[Shasterball]

Matte screens suck, get over that and the quality of your work will go up.

Funny but Apple is still selling Mac hardware like crazy. Some of the product line is very good value.

Dave

Wow, Dave, you really need to relax. 1/2 your points make a semblance of sense, but your irrational anger clouds them. Also, "[m]atte screens suck"? LOL. There are many reasons people like them -- including the basic one that they reduce glare.

And really, you don't think that Apple's computer line has lagged even just a little bit since they diversified? I'm not saying they shouldn't diversify, but there really haven't been too many break-throughs in their computer line as of late. And a couple need a refresh pretty soon (e.g., mac pro). And please don't give me a unibody mac argument -- I'm not sure what that really does for the consumer, although I bet it reduced Apple's costs quite a bit.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Both of you are overcomplicating things so much you've gone onto a tangential plane that doesn't exist in the realms of reality.

Let me spell it out for you.

R-E-S-T-A-R-T-I-N-G
I-S
B-E-T-T-E-R
T-H-A-N
E-X-I-T-I-N-G
F-O-R
M-E-M-O-R-Y

We were only replying to the tangents you started, which brings us back to the first point. Why should we have to restart the iPad if the Apps were properly coded.

---

Technically anything about software doesn't exist in reality. Mathematics is a concept only viable in the brain, along with infinity and undefined.

 

[Shasterball]

You cant name a bar cost either. For all we know Apple could be selling the iPad at a loss.

Ummmm, absolutely not.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Ummmm, absolutely not.

It was just showing a point.

 

[mrochester]

Wow, Dave, you really need to relax. 1/2 your points make a semblance of sense, but your irrational anger clouds them. Also, "[m]atte screens suck"? LOL. There are many reasons people like them -- including the basic one that they reduce glare.

And really, you don't think that Apple's computer line has lagged even just a little bit since they diversified? I'm not saying they shouldn't diversify, but there really haven't been too many break-throughs in their computer line as of late. And a couple need a refresh pretty soon (e.g., mac pro). And please don't give me a unibody mac argument -- I'm not sure what that really does for the consumer, although I bet it reduced Apple's costs quite a bit.

I definitely agree with this. It appears from a layman that Apple's diversification has been at the expense of their traditional products lines, rather than in addition to. It's either a calculated measure by Apple to move more towards these other products, or they miss-judged how much time and resource these new projects would consume.

 

[tdream]

We were only replying to the tangents you started, which brings us back to the first point. Why should we have to restart the iPad if the Apps were properly coded.

You jumped on the bandwagon. I was replying to gnasher. And I'm sounding like a broken record about memory management. So I'm not going to say any more as you won't get it in a million years.

It was just showing a point.

Which you were wrong and needed to be corrected. I mean did you seriously think were making a loss on iPads?

 

[MorphingDragon]

You jumped on the bandwagon. I was replying to gnasher. And I'm sounding like a broken record about memory management. So I'm not going to say any more as you won't get it in a million years.

Actually, you weren't talking about memory management at all... as you were talking about the hardware no the OS/Software.

Which you were wrong and needed to be corrected. I mean did you seriously think were making a loss on iPads?

The term hypothetical exists for a reason. Look it up.

 

[Hal Itosis]

Honestly not sure what Apple did but this one of the fastest machine I have used. Everything loads really fast and performs great.

To me the specs mean nothing since this OS is blazing fast.

Agreed. This thing loads web pages faster over WiFi than my PowerBook G4 (OS 10.5.8) does, with a direct Ethernet cable connection to the same network.

The iPad is the most polarizing thing in the US since Obama.

Sad but true.

Except multitasking would perform better with 512. Would you like to hold one page of the internet in the palm of your hand or multiple pages?

As if that would matter (see below), since most folks seem to have trouble focusing on one page as it is.

the level of ignorance on this forum is ridiculous.

<snip>

those who say the iPad doesn't need more need to actually buy one and open 4+ tabs in safari then watch the first one reload when you switch to it when the browser runs out of memory trying to keep all the tabs open. Not a big deal to some of you, but when a company claims that the iPad offers a superior browsing experience and can't even keep 5 tabs open at once someone has to call ********.

What are you babbling about? As I post this reply, I have 4 other pages loaded. (wikipedia, versiontracker, macintouch, and macosxhints). I am able to switch back and view all 4 of them instantly. So I call ***** on you. True, those may not be examples of the crap that some sites present (10 megs of crud per page), but they are reasonably representative of worthwhile content.

Anyway, that would be a petty little complaint even if it were true. You trolls must be really frustrated now that iPad is succeeding. I don't have time to read all 28 pages right now... but clearly, NOTHING negative that I've read so far matters in the real world. Sure, I'd like to be running Terminal.app on this iPad right now... but it's simply not designed for that kind of usage.

Some of the "geeks" in here lack perspective, and that's why they fail while Steve Jobs succeeds. Perhaps you simply weren't meant to understand.

Deal with it!

 

[haruhiko]

It does, the 1st gen didn't.

It's not hard to understand 512MB>256MB.

And why has no one referenced my argument about the cost? It only costs Apple $5.95 to add the extra memory which would of made it REALLY magical

People are very happy with 256MB now because Steve told them so. People were very happy with iPhone 3G's 128MB of RAM until last June when Steve told us once again, "1x speed is no good, we want 2x speed by faster CPU and by doubling the RAM to 256MB RAM".

So wait until next March, when Steve tells us once again 256MB RAM is no good.

 

[lethalOne]

Anyone saw this article yet on gizmodo: http://m.gizmodo.com/site?sid=gizmo...r-ipad-is-low-on-memory?op=post&refId=5509384

Even though I defended Apples position earlier in this thread this is a bad sign!
Anyone encountered it yet? Never saw that on my three iPhones!

I get that with "We Rule" every time I play... on my iPhone. Doesn't effect gameplay though.

It's no big deal. Memory management in iPhone development is tricky - you need to re-use memory and it's quite likely the We Rule code needs tweaking.

 

[tdream]

People are very happy with 256MB now because Steve told them so. People were very happy with iPhone 3G's 128MB of RAM until last June when Steve told us once again, "1x speed is no good, we want 2x speed by faster CPU and by doubling the RAM to 256MB RAM".

So wait until next March, when Steve tells us once again 256MB RAM is no good.

Bingo.

If you are not 100% super woo-woo into it, you are a troll. Follow us or begone non believer!!

 

[Dooger]

You mean "We Rule" is the name of the app. That's what quotation marks are there for. Very, very poor English. You need to put the name into quotation marks unless it is clear that it is a name. "We Rule" is not clearly a name.

Anyway, you are missing a very important point: If we are debating here what this message is supposed to mean, then it is unclear, and the UI designer did a poor job.

The use of lazy, verb-less sentences is also considered to be very, very poor English. May I suggest that before you play the pedant card, you should make sure your own house is in order?

 

[matticus008]

The salient reasons also seem escape you as you can't really name any bar COST.

Just out of curiosity, what is your native language?

Your argument holds that 512MB was planned and then cut for margin reasons, irrespective of performance, to achieve a ~1% unit reduction. There is no evidence for this.

There's nothing I have said that warrants conspiracy theory dismissal.

The thing is, you need evidence for the conspiracy theory first.

Your argument is they are doing it because they can manage to get by through resource management and optimizations.

No.

But you do agree with next version will have 512MB and will be better for it.

That's generally how the future works, yes.

My point is they could of added 512MB as there are no logical reasons other than COST as to why they didn't.

Could have, and plainly untrue. There are many possible and completely logical reasons why the decision was made, as previously detailed. You have not demonstrated the requisite elements of your argument.

Just more handwaving. If the difference in utility is greater than the difference in price, it goes in. Your gross oversimplification by your own admission fails to account for non-monetary costs and constraints.

 

[wizard]

That is the whole point!!!

People complaining about Safari reloading tabs must have never used Safari on an iPhone, it does the same thing.

Exactly and is why we where expecting better of a tablet. Let's face it an additional 256MB of RAM is cheap these days but yet would have lead to a much better user experience. Even if they had to implement outside the CPU chip stack there is still plenty of room.

Besides the problem isn't just with Safari, any developer looking at iPad will have to determine if he can meet his goals in well under 200MB of RAM. That does effectively limit what can be implemented on the device. Is 200MB a lot, for some apps yes but for others it results in a tight or impossible squeeze.


Dave

 

[Clown Boy]

LOLZ, I have more than 256mb of RAM in my watch.