NT1440
macrumors P6
Just like no one was wishing for an iPhone. Apple is extremely talented at making their own segments to fit into, and once people use those devices they often wonder how they ever lived without them before.
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
Just like no one was wishing for an iPhone. Apple is extremely talented at making their own segments to fit into, and once people use those devices they often wonder how they ever lived without them before.
ouimetnick
macrumors 68040
It probably will happen this year as it happened 2 times before. Maybe I want new features. I want cut copy and paste, but I shouldn't have to sacrifice performance to gain that.
No actually, it is quite a real thing that when I get my iPad I will JB it and try to multitask on it and I know what I'm in for because
decided to only use 256MB. I will use the device the way I want to use it. And if it doesn't suit my needs I will explain why it doesn't and how it can be fixed. Multitasking can be fixed with more memory.
Garion
macrumors regular
cmaier
Suspended
No actually, it is quite a real thing that when I get my iPad I will JB it and try to multitask on it and I know what I'm in for because
I will use the device the way I want to use it. And if it doesn't suit my needs I will explain why it doesn't and how it can be fixed. Multitasking can be fixed with more memory.
That will tell you nothing. That type of multitasking is nothing like what apple will do (which will include, among other things, making sure developers finally start properly reducing their footprint and cycle demand as appropriate when their app is sent a "you are no longer the foreground app" message).
BobVB
macrumors 6502a
Actually neither point is true. I don't know if you have been an fan for long but this is very much the way they design their hardware - they carefully tune it so that everything works together well, they don't put in 'more' or something 'faster' merely because its available. They analyze where performance bottlenecks are and work to eliminate those. If having an 'improved' something isn't going to make the system actually run faster they don't put in.
This is a 'netbook killer' for those who get a netbook just as a portable extension of their desktop or some other computer. I mean I have an iMac in my kitchen just to use for kitchen things, cooking videos and the like - obviously if the iPad was available at the time I would have that with the nice keyboard display accessory that I can use anywhere. I slingbox my DirecTV all over the house to every computer and every TV which has a computer connection - with an iPad I will be able be able to have all kinds of media anywhere within wi-fi range of the house.
The earlier story says an estimate of 600-700,000 on the FIRST DAY , if you don't understand how this will be a new paradigm of media consumption you just aren't paying attention and if it does what it promises it doesn't matter if it has a couple of gnomes with etch-a-sketches inside making it work.
vincebio
macrumors 6502a
this thread absolutely makes me cringe...
the iPad was an amazing device 4 hours ago...mindblowing in fact.
4 hours on its lame, slow, outdated by other devices, not enough ram, even though 4 hours ago it wasnt an issue...at all! and now its not even future-proof...
pathetic...
the iPad was an amazing device 4 hours ago...mindblowing in fact.
4 hours on its lame, slow, outdated by other devices, not enough ram, even though 4 hours ago it wasnt an issue...at all! and now its not even future-proof...
pathetic...
I predicted the name iPad when everyone else said no waayyyyyyy........
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/9110224/
ImperialX
macrumors 65816
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. Why did we invent RAM in the first place? Was in not because the write speed of the HDD was too slow? But this is Flash Memory, not a Hard Drive.
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. 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. 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.
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.
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. 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. 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.
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.
Everyone has loved the speed because of the lack of real use.
What is even worst is that it appears that iPad has even less RAM available to user apps than the current Touch. Thus we are actually going to see a regression in performance. Sure in some cases the faster processor Might mask the reloads but that is unlikely on a 3G connection.
So yeah the device is obsolete because of RAM space. Especially if the iPad can't better the Touch in real world net use. Because the reality is that in real world net use, over slow connections, iPad will be reloading pages more than a Touch due to a lack of memory.
I'm not saying iPad doesn't have it's good points, legitimate usage patterns or good processor performance. It has all of these, what it doesn't have is more ram for user apps ( it seems to have less) and that can be a big negative. Personally I don't see a big issue with wanting more RAM, it doesn't cost much in these quanities and power usage likely is not significant.
Dave
Loves the sPeed of WHAT!? Loading programs - of course that is fast as they load from the file system on flash. The bigger problem is app behaviour which will vary dramatically due to the lack of RAM. For example Safari haveing to reload every page as you switch between views. This isn't speculation as the behaviour has already been documented by real users.
What is even worst is that it appears that iPad has even less RAM available to user apps than the current Touch. Thus we are actually going to see a regression in performance. Sure in some cases the faster processor Might mask the reloads but that is unlikely on a 3G connection.
So yeah the device is obsolete because of RAM space. Especially if the iPad can't better the Touch in real world net use. Because the reality is that in real world net use, over slow connections, iPad will be reloading pages more than a Touch due to a lack of memory.
I'm not saying iPad doesn't have it's good points, legitimate usage patterns or good processor performance. It has all of these, what it doesn't have is more ram for user apps ( it seems to have less) and that can be a big negative. Personally I don't see a big issue with wanting more RAM, it doesn't cost much in these quanities and power usage likely is not significant.
Dave
norwaypianoman
macrumors 6502
The iPad really is a stark reminder of the Apple "brand" tax we pay. I understand the magic is in the OS and Apple have squeezed every ounce of performace out of iPad and if it works well then job done, but the cost is simply horrendus
I read a post ealier today where someone decribed the iPad as an "iTunes vending machine" and i have to agree. They just put something small and not too complex out so dev's can churn out cheap and cheerful apps so we can buy them up one after the other.
I read a post ealier today where someone decribed the iPad as an "iTunes vending machine" and i have to agree. They just put something small and not too complex out so dev's can churn out cheap and cheerful apps so we can buy them up one after the other.
No actually, it is quite a real thing that when I get my iPad I will JB it and try to multitask on it and I know what I'm in for because
I will use the device the way I want to use it. And if it doesn't suit my needs I will explain why it doesn't and how it can be fixed. Multitasking can be fixed with more memory.
I get your point and plan to jb my iPad (whenever they release it in Austria) aswell but you can´t really be mad at Apple for not incorporating enough RAM for doing things they don´t want you to do.
I think they had a really hard time designing something like the iPad at such a low price (for Apple that is) and maintaining their "magical" margins so they just omitted things like an USB port (which would be much more worth to me than additional RAM) and other things like the camera.
The nice thing with Apple products: Buy the first generation iPad, sell it a week before the new one gets announced on ebay for a good price and you already have half the money for the new iteration.
Or for the rsikier guys: just buy apple shares and hope they keep performing as they were the last years. They pay for your Apples every year..🙄
Really? strange. When I buy a computer I'm paying for the parts that the company bought from other companies(which you could buy yourself), the assembly (which you could do yourself), and the warranty(which you could get with the parts).
You must've bought a really ****** laptop if you have to replace it in 2 years.
NT1440
macrumors P6
Yes, we need to stop comparing this to netbooks and compare it to other tablets.
Come one people.
Come one people.
This is neither a defense nor bash for the iPad, just honest questions (i.e. forget about the philosophical/morality aspect for now):
I'm wondering if RAM constraint actually makes the device faster as a consequence?
The point being that with tight constraint on RAM, app developers are forced to put more effort into streamlining their code and run as efficiently as possible. More powerful hardware makes developers complacent with resource utilization.
If that's the case, it indirectly hints that the iPad design team likely considered 256MB of RAM "optimal" in the whole hardware package, taking into consideration the capabilities of other parts.
The benefit of more RAM on a computer, if I'm not mistaken, is to reduce the use of virtual memory / swap files. And it seems that unless jailbroken & modified, the iPhone (or iPad) does not enable virtual memory by default)?
Though of course, fast/faster/slow/slower are all relative and objective terms, and something "fast" becoming "slower" doesn't automatically become "slow"...
I'm wondering if RAM constraint actually makes the device faster as a consequence?
The point being that with tight constraint on RAM, app developers are forced to put more effort into streamlining their code and run as efficiently as possible. More powerful hardware makes developers complacent with resource utilization.
If that's the case, it indirectly hints that the iPad design team likely considered 256MB of RAM "optimal" in the whole hardware package, taking into consideration the capabilities of other parts.
The benefit of more RAM on a computer, if I'm not mistaken, is to reduce the use of virtual memory / swap files. And it seems that unless jailbroken & modified, the iPhone (or iPad) does not enable virtual memory by default)?
Though of course, fast/faster/slow/slower are all relative and objective terms, and something "fast" becoming "slower" doesn't automatically become "slow"...
i seriously hope they didn't use the nand flash for vram, it has a limited number of write cycles.
hdd thoughput:
|---|
flash thoughput:
|-----|
ram thoughput:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
parapup
macrumors 65816
cmaier
Suspended
Generally, to make up for lack of RAM, you have to cost yourself speed. Software typically trades space for speed (and vice versa). So more RAM would enable more speed (or, alternately, the same speed but more features).
True, you would prefer a usb port and I would prefer more RAM, and the guy over there would prefer a camera. We could wait until Revison 3 but where's the fun in that 😉
If there's anything magical about Apple, it's the fact they had their highest earning quarter ever during a recession.
VenusianSky
macrumors 65816
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?
The video memory of the GPU is shared from the system memory pool (256MB RAM) just like IGPs on desktops not the Flash memory. And I'm pretty sure Apple explicitly stated that the iPhone OS doesn't allow apps to have virtual memory spill over beyond physical memory which means when you run out of RAM you don't go to the Flash memory, you crash.
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. Only having 256MB of RAM isn't a functionality killer, but having 512MB of RAM, which shouldn't have been too difficult given other smartphones with greater physical space constraints already have it, would have allowed more breathing room for growth.
ouimetnick
macrumors 68040
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.