No man, this thread is about the RAM size that's all. Will detractors please stop attributing low RAM size to thermostats and world hunger. Maybe you should try multitasking on a 3G then try it on a 3GS. Don't tell me you don't notice the difference. Now scale that up to an iPad sized display. It's fine for the most part. I am still getting an iPad but it could have been much better out of the starting blocks with 512MB of RAM. For sure the next version of the iPad will have 512MB of RAM and people will drop their old iPads for the new ones. For this very reason.
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 Tech Specs: Cortex A8, 256MB Ram, PowerVR SGX 535
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No man, this thread is about the RAM size that's all. Will detractors please stop attributing low RAM size to thermostats and world hunger. Maybe you should try multitasking on a 3G then try it on a 3GS. Don't tell me you don't notice the difference. Now scale that up to an iPad sized display. It's fine for the most part. I am still getting an iPad but it could have been much better out of the starting blocks with 512MB of RAM. For sure the next version of the iPad will have 512MB of RAM and people will drop their old iPads for the new ones. For this very reason.
I think some fear Apple will stop focussing on the Mac platform in preference for what many see to be a toy. Others lament the loss of complexity and thus flexibility.
Some think it represents the future of computing. Many embrace this kind of future of apparent simplification of computing. Yet others detest a future where the platform is locked down and apps have to be approved by Apple.
It is very polarizing.
You don't seem to appreciate any of Apples products, which makes me wonder, why do you use them?
Just guessing what he's talking about, but some people are mistakenly thinking that ifixit says the RAM is on the A4 chip; of course that's not what it says at all - it's just two standard Samsung DRAM dies packaged in the same pacakge as the A4 die.
Is there any way to mute ouimetnick? He is a 14 year old troll that really doesn't add anything to the conversation.
I wouldn't expect a 14 year old to understand why a Macbook Pro at $1200 is worth more to adults with limited time and who get paid for that time than a $1200 Dell laptop running Windows.
I mean... when I was 14 and I had all the time in the world... cheap and painful was always the way to go.
As you get older you realize just how little time you have... and you just want appliances to work. Be it a car, toaster, computer, tablet, DVR, game console... it's all the same. I (and most other adults) don't want to spend our precious time doing _anything_ other than what that device is supposed to be used for. If I have to wait even 30 seconds for a damn virus scan... THAT IS TOO DAMN LONG.
Anyway... I'll agree with another poster... man the iPad sure is polarizing!
I wouldn't expect a 14 year old to understand why a Macbook Pro at $1200 is worth more to adults with limited time and who get paid for that time than a $1200 Dell laptop running Windows.
I mean... when I was 14 and I had all the time in the world... cheap and painful was always the way to go.
As you get older you realize just how little time you have... and you just want appliances to work. Be it a car, toaster, computer, tablet, DVR, game console... it's all the same. I (and most other adults) don't want to spend our precious time doing _anything_ other than what that device is supposed to be used for. If I have to wait even 30 seconds for a damn virus scan... THAT IS TOO DAMN LONG.
Anyway... I'll agree with another poster... man the iPad sure is polarizing!
And what if I say... that the PS3 only has 256 megabytes of RAM, and 256 megabytes of video RAM?
source: http://www.ps3power.com/ps3hardwarespecs.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3 (sidebar)
And that thing is amazingly fast...
The amount of memory is important, yes. But if you are a good developer, you can write your programs good, with a small amount of memory, or bad, where lots of memory are needed...
source: http://www.ps3power.com/ps3hardwarespecs.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3 (sidebar)
And that thing is amazingly fast...
The amount of memory is important, yes. But if you are a good developer, you can write your programs good, with a small amount of memory, or bad, where lots of memory are needed...
Lot of negativity. I really like this iPad. If others don't it's cool with me. Each to their own. Perhaps they feel let down because their expectations were something other than what mine are/were.
I wanted something liie the iPhone only bigger. I got that. I'm tickled pink.
I wanted something liie the iPhone only bigger. I got that. I'm tickled pink.
256mb sufficient for most apps and games
256mb ram is decent for apps. The question is how much of it is available to the app loaded versus how much the os uses for itself. For a typical app using 10mb is sufficient. However for a intense graphics game 256mb will require lots of caching thus slowing down the perfomance.
256mb ram is decent for apps. The question is how much of it is available to the app loaded versus how much the os uses for itself. For a typical app using 10mb is sufficient. However for a intense graphics game 256mb will require lots of caching thus slowing down the perfomance.
Yup, confused the **** out of me, ifixit for some reason has the RAM listed as a sub bullet under the A4
True it's better but no one here at Apple is saying that. We're just saying it's better because of the ease of use
The whole "It doesn't multitask" is actually false.
The iPad and iPhone do multitask with the built in apps, such as browsing the web while listening to music or using Google Maps while on the telephone.
Third party apps don't support multitasking, but the people moaning that iPhone and iPad do not multitask should perhaps look up the definition.
It's not multitasking in the way a desktop computer does it, but then again these devices are not desktop computers.
The iPad and iPhone do multitask with the built in apps, such as browsing the web while listening to music or using Google Maps while on the telephone.
Third party apps don't support multitasking, but the people moaning that iPhone and iPad do not multitask should perhaps look up the definition.
It's not multitasking in the way a desktop computer does it, but then again these devices are not desktop computers.
I understand it. They just make a larger profit. Because Apple uses less powerful hardware, but adds cool bells and whistles, the raw cost is probably equivlent to that of a PC that retails for $800. Apple just wants to make more profit on each unit they sell.
Wellllll... try using Backgrounder on a jailbroken 3G, with its 128MB of RAM. You can barely get a couple of apps to maybe run, but it can get ugly. Try it and you'll readily appreciate why Apple turned off 3rd-party app backgrounding. And if 128MB represents the barest minimum, 256MB is a big step up but still doesn't give a whole hell of a lot of headroom.
And I do acknowledge what another poster pointed out regarding early Unix multi-tasking in some weensy amount of RAM. Sure. It wasn't doing anything near as fancy as an iPhone, though, with any sort of responsive touchscreen interface, glorious full-color screen, GUI, etc etc etc. I would have been happier (and more optimistic about near-term introduction of 3rd-party multitasking) if the iPad and 3GS had more than 256MB of RAM.
I was kind of hoping for 512MB of RAM as most phones are coming out with that now, plus the SGX 535 is pretty low spec'd for a screen that resolution.
Kind of makes me wonder what I should expect from the new iPhone this summer, I don't think they would make it so it was faster than the iPad.
Kind of makes me wonder what I should expect from the new iPhone this summer, I don't think they would make it so it was faster than the iPad.
Actually, having had my hands on one at the Apple store, for people that just use netbooks for internet access and have modest application needs, the iPad does replace the netbook, and this will be true for other tablets on the way.
Netbook sales dropped like a rock last quarter, and many companies are getting out of what was a low margin business. Could be due to the economy improving and buyers upgrading to laptops, or it could be that most netbooks are poorly made and barely functional. With the iPad and tablets from Dell, HP and Android and Chrome based tablets on the way, taking the Netbook market out will be like clubbing baby seals.
Who cares?
As long as all the applications are working; working with a more than acceptable speed?
Apple doesn't bother to advertise any device internal technical numbers anymore apart from the storage size (see iPod/iPhone/iPad) to avoid direct comparison with alternative products. They focus on the usability/ergonomy/design of the device => user-experience.
Fair enough:
At the moment, the power of most computers on the market are completely overblown for the usage of the majority of users anyway. It hardly matters if there's 2 of 4 GB of RAM or the CPU has 2.8 or 3.2 GHz of speed when you use a web-browser (apart from Flash though
), write an email, use a word-processor and so on. Only when using more specialised functionality like picture, film editing etc. additional technical functionality/power are necessary.
Of course the boundary will be moved over time, but the CPU speed for example doesn't increase as quickly as it did ten years ago anymore. (There are not too many mainstream applications that actually use multiple CPU cores at the same time either.)
The consumer decision should be based on "does this device do what I need/want it to do?" and not "does it have 256 or 512 MB of RAM?", because it is irrelevant when the first question is answered.
As long as all the applications are working; working with a more than acceptable speed?
Apple doesn't bother to advertise any device internal technical numbers anymore apart from the storage size (see iPod/iPhone/iPad) to avoid direct comparison with alternative products. They focus on the usability/ergonomy/design of the device => user-experience.
Fair enough:
At the moment, the power of most computers on the market are completely overblown for the usage of the majority of users anyway. It hardly matters if there's 2 of 4 GB of RAM or the CPU has 2.8 or 3.2 GHz of speed when you use a web-browser (apart from Flash though
), write an email, use a word-processor and so on. Only when using more specialised functionality like picture, film editing etc. additional technical functionality/power are necessary. Of course the boundary will be moved over time, but the CPU speed for example doesn't increase as quickly as it did ten years ago anymore. (There are not too many mainstream applications that actually use multiple CPU cores at the same time either.)
The consumer decision should be based on "does this device do what I need/want it to do?" and not "does it have 256 or 512 MB of RAM?", because it is irrelevant when the first question is answered.
I for one am deeply shocked and appalled that a commercial company would encourage people to upgrade to later versions of it's products by providing future versions with improved hardware that copes better with later OS revisions! How scandalous! I agree with you ouimetnick- new versions of software and operating systems should be developed with a focus on compatability with 3 year old hardware rather than the latest hardware revisions- that's the road to enduring progress for sure!
Once JBed you can multitask 3rd party apps no problem on the 3GS. There is also no checkerboarding in safari on the 3GS. There is checkerboarding however on the iPad. This could of been solved with more RAM. It will be very interesting to see how
manage expose like multitasking in 4.0The 3GS is the perfect version of the iPhone, better than the original and 3G. The iPad is like the original iPhone, cool because it's new, but could of been so much more out of the starting blocks.
Ok - we get it - you hate Apple.. that's fine... I'm sure there are several nice netbooks running Windows and Linux you can work on... MS makes mobile phones - so does Google - go buy them and stop complaining....
All I'm trying to say here is simple. iPad comes with 256MB Ram. It is part of the iPhone OS family because it runs iPhone OS 3.2. Apple has the history of making the iPhone OS products run slower when they release a new software update. That $599 phone gets slower in just 12 months. iPad is suppost to be a netbook killer. Its less powerful than a netbook hardware wise. I really think its cool. I enjoyed using one yesterday at the Apple Store. I'm afraid if I spend $699 on a 64Gb iPad when my birthday comes around (November) it won't be long before My $699 computer becomes slower. My proof is going from 1.1.4 to 2.x and 2.x to 3.x on an Original iPhone, and iPod touch. Thats all. Putting 256Mb in a computer doesn't give it much room to grow. Just like when you buy a laptop with 2 GB ram or a laptop with 8GB ram. One will be more future proof. I have a love hate relation ship with Apple. I like the user experience, They are easy to use, and fun. But for a $599 iPhone, why isn't there any QC? Why is the glass not flush. Its not a $59.99 phone, its a $599.99 phone. How do people justify buying a Mac portable now? You can get way more powerful hardware for less.