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.
iPad2 technology purposely held back?
- Thread starter Jackintosh
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Alright, i see i will be unable to fool you all. This group is too smart.
In truth, as an apple skunkworks dev, i have seen things you wouldn't believe. Anti-matter, teleportation, faster than light travel...
Look, you need to understand that the vast majority of what Apple does comes from reverse engineering what was left intact at the crash site. This is hard work! We can't just turn you guys lose with things like personal zero point energy field generation. It would be chaos! So instead we have been slowly seeding what technology our social engineers think you can handle. Naturally some things are held back. You couldn't just give a caveman an airplane, what would he do with it?!?
Things are going well though, and we should be able to intro the best stuff right on time in the summer of 2019, which gives us three full years to complete the building of the ftl-arc, and leave with months to spare before impact. Relax. Things are "purposely held back" sure, but it is all for the greater good.
Anyway, please don't spread this around, if word gets out there may be a panic, and if the thought monitoring subsystems in your iPhone catch this stuff, a Sasquatch hit team will be visiting your house, and they have been known to take certain liberties with prisoners if you catch my drift.
In truth, as an apple skunkworks dev, i have seen things you wouldn't believe. Anti-matter, teleportation, faster than light travel...
Look, you need to understand that the vast majority of what Apple does comes from reverse engineering what was left intact at the crash site. This is hard work! We can't just turn you guys lose with things like personal zero point energy field generation. It would be chaos! So instead we have been slowly seeding what technology our social engineers think you can handle. Naturally some things are held back. You couldn't just give a caveman an airplane, what would he do with it?!?
Things are going well though, and we should be able to intro the best stuff right on time in the summer of 2019, which gives us three full years to complete the building of the ftl-arc, and leave with months to spare before impact. Relax. Things are "purposely held back" sure, but it is all for the greater good.
Anyway, please don't spread this around, if word gets out there may be a panic, and if the thought monitoring subsystems in your iPhone catch this stuff, a Sasquatch hit team will be visiting your house, and they have been known to take certain liberties with prisoners if you catch my drift.
I think I agree with almost every argument it's all true. I mean of course they hold back and of course they meet price too.. Holding back could be to to price or could be due to they want to save things for the next model. It's the whole gotta have the newest thing strategy for customers. Millions will be buying the ipad jsut cause it's the new things with new gadgets. Then thousands more will buy who have waited for the 2nd edition. The list goes on and on.
...
Apple always holds back but mostly with software features and not hardware. The hardware is what is available so they can reach a certain price point and still make money. Software on the other hand they manipulate artificially to get you to buy the newest device because the old one isn't compatible with the coolest features. In other words the new ipad will be marginally better but the OS will limit what the old one can do so people buy the newer model
Apple always holds back but mostly with software features and not hardware. The hardware is what is available so they can reach a certain price point and still make money. Software on the other hand they manipulate artificially to get you to buy the newest device because the old one isn't compatible with the coolest features. In other words the new ipad will be marginally better but the OS will limit what the old one can do so people buy the newer model
i think apples uses what works best for them. no more, no less. they had 0 competition really when it was first released. now with android and the flood of overseas clones for 1/3 of the money they kinda have to make improvements.
i want an ipad 2.0 going by its "guessed improvements". But i am watching all these low cost android devices very closely. especially if they are getting the tegra 2. apple better do somethin good to keep my attention.
i want an ipad 2.0 going by its "guessed improvements". But i am watching all these low cost android devices very closely. especially if they are getting the tegra 2. apple better do somethin good to keep my attention.
This.
It's funny seeing this called as a conspiracy theory, but it's just the reality of how a company releases a long term product. There is a roadmap of several ipads, not just one, and Apple has some kind of plan on what features will go into each of those ipads on the roadmap. Sure things may and probably will change, but there are definitely features which could have made it into the ipad1 but there was a conscious business decision made to leave them for another generation. There is also the business decision of cost, maybe they left out more memory, just as an example, because they knew by the time the next ipad was released the memory would be cheaper and more cost efficient.
Seriously, it's not rocket science.
Not 100% sure about that.
Esp with Nvidea who have in recent years struggled to physically make what they originally designed, and a few times had to lower the specs of the original design at first as they just could not successfully actually make the things.
I always got the feeling the iPad was delayed as it clearly had the "3GS" feature set, with an early outing for the A4 chip. At some point Apple would have "feature-locked" the design so after any delay, new ideas such as more ram, a facetime camera and gyroscope wouldn't have been added if any delays occurred.
As the iPad was an experiment (no one knew if it would take off), I'm guessing they also didn't want to pre-empt new features for the iPhone4. Now the iPad is a success, it'll be interesting to see if the iPad2 introduces any new features which then filter down to the iPhone5.
As the iPad was an experiment (no one knew if it would take off), I'm guessing they also didn't want to pre-empt new features for the iPhone4. Now the iPad is a success, it'll be interesting to see if the iPad2 introduces any new features which then filter down to the iPhone5.
I don't get it - if you think the original iPad was being 'held back' and Apple is overcharging, just don't buy the stupid device.
Personally, I think Apple's strategy is very shrewd and I feel that I benefit as their customer - a strong, profitable, yet constantly innovating company gives me confidence that they have a predictable long term plan that I can count on.
Personally, I think Apple's strategy is very shrewd and I feel that I benefit as their customer - a strong, profitable, yet constantly innovating company gives me confidence that they have a predictable long term plan that I can count on.
Deciding to get or not get the iPad isn't based on whether Apple is holding back technology. The iPad is good no matter what - we all know that as owners. The question was based on totally separate thoughts as to Apple's strategy in how they release their technology, marketing, and profits. Just sharing opinions.
Welcome to the technology industry. This sort of practice goes all the way down to the individual ICs.
For example, a common practice is to have all ICs in a company's product range be exactly the same, but with features reserved for the more expensive parts intentionally locked out. See the CPU market for reference - if you over clock, you'll discover that most of the cheaper parts have the capability to offer better performance, but are intentionally stopped from doing so.
Accept it and live with it. If you think the next product revision will be worth waiting for then wait for it.
For example, a common practice is to have all ICs in a company's product range be exactly the same, but with features reserved for the more expensive parts intentionally locked out. See the CPU market for reference - if you over clock, you'll discover that most of the cheaper parts have the capability to offer better performance, but are intentionally stopped from doing so.
Accept it and live with it. If you think the next product revision will be worth waiting for then wait for it.
Last time I checked Apple isn't a non-profit organisation. They are in it to make money as best they can. This isn't clear by now?
Who exactly put a gun to your head and forced you to buy anything? Don't like it, then don't buy it but dear God give the constant whining and complaining a rest.
What Apple seems to do is a mantra that can be used for a myriad of purposes:
"Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should."
Apple could have put a pair or camera's on the current iPad, yes, but FaceTime wasn't on any other device. The question is even - will Apple put camera's on the iPad at all?
Whether or not you agree with their decision not to put camera's on one or multiple revisions of the iPad does not automatically make them wrong - or evil for that matter. It's perfectly legitimate business not to put all the bells and whistles on a first-gen device, and while consumers might not like seeing the new product be much better than the old one, it isn't a crime or should even be frowned upon.
Pricing concerns, the worry that the iPad might flop, and a lot of other factors come into play when making a new device in a traditionally failed market. The iPad took and still takes a lot of chances with some design decisions and I don't blame Apple for being a little conservative - no matter how much I want them to make the end-all device.
What Apple puts on the next iPad is still anybody's guess, so I'm not going to. Whatever it is, I think we can easily conclude one thing: It's going to be iterative and a safe play almost for sure. Apple does not completely redesign a product for a second generation, that's what third- and fourth-gen products are for. Even the iPhone did not have a complete redesign before the iPhone 4.
Technology being purposefully held back is not a strategy I think Apple wants to use. They have other concerns such as getting enough supply, guaranteeing long battery life, and so on, to worry about and yet they do not ever seem to be standing still. The Macbook Air and the iPad, I think, show that Apple, whether it's smart or not, is always at the front of the curve in terms of technology. They aren't perfect at it - the continued lack of Blu-ray and USB 3.0 or similar standards prove as much - but they don't seem to be into the whole 'follow the rest' strategy, for better or worse.
All in all, I doubt Apple will make huge changes and yet I can see the lines appearing for the new product already.
"Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should."
Apple could have put a pair or camera's on the current iPad, yes, but FaceTime wasn't on any other device. The question is even - will Apple put camera's on the iPad at all?
Whether or not you agree with their decision not to put camera's on one or multiple revisions of the iPad does not automatically make them wrong - or evil for that matter. It's perfectly legitimate business not to put all the bells and whistles on a first-gen device, and while consumers might not like seeing the new product be much better than the old one, it isn't a crime or should even be frowned upon.
Pricing concerns, the worry that the iPad might flop, and a lot of other factors come into play when making a new device in a traditionally failed market. The iPad took and still takes a lot of chances with some design decisions and I don't blame Apple for being a little conservative - no matter how much I want them to make the end-all device.
What Apple puts on the next iPad is still anybody's guess, so I'm not going to. Whatever it is, I think we can easily conclude one thing: It's going to be iterative and a safe play almost for sure. Apple does not completely redesign a product for a second generation, that's what third- and fourth-gen products are for. Even the iPhone did not have a complete redesign before the iPhone 4.
Technology being purposefully held back is not a strategy I think Apple wants to use. They have other concerns such as getting enough supply, guaranteeing long battery life, and so on, to worry about and yet they do not ever seem to be standing still. The Macbook Air and the iPad, I think, show that Apple, whether it's smart or not, is always at the front of the curve in terms of technology. They aren't perfect at it - the continued lack of Blu-ray and USB 3.0 or similar standards prove as much - but they don't seem to be into the whole 'follow the rest' strategy, for better or worse.
All in all, I doubt Apple will make huge changes and yet I can see the lines appearing for the new product already.
We are talking about Apple, a corporation.
It is not some kind of "United Nations Of Technology Development".
If some grocery store holds back some apples today because they want to sell them tomorrow - ok for me, as long as I still get something tasty today if i want to...
Btw.: have my iPad from day one, but just recently start to really, really dig it. Magical, indeed!
Good silent night, everybody!
Frohe Weihnachten!
It is not some kind of "United Nations Of Technology Development".
If some grocery store holds back some apples today because they want to sell them tomorrow - ok for me, as long as I still get something tasty today if i want to...
Btw.: have my iPad from day one, but just recently start to really, really dig it. Magical, indeed!
Good silent night, everybody!
Frohe Weihnachten!
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Apple took a big risk with the iPad. Sure they thought it would be successful but they had no idea how successful it would be. They couldn't afford to over feature this thing.
Apple took a big risk with the iPad. Sure they thought it would be successful but they had no idea how successful it would be. They couldn't afford to over feature this thing.
Apple knows that it has a reputation for high quality products. Even though it would use a host of focus groups in planning the iPad2, in many ways the product would sell itself, and little marketing effort is needed.
I think Apple would take note more depending on how high the iPad's market share is relative to the RIM Playbook, Acer tablet, any follow up Samsung make to the Galaxy Tab, etc. (or even if Google make a tablet, well they've made a smartphone)
I think Apple would take note more depending on how high the iPad's market share is relative to the RIM Playbook, Acer tablet, any follow up Samsung make to the Galaxy Tab, etc. (or even if Google make a tablet, well they've made a smartphone)
I love apple products.I have a macbook,ipad and iphone 4. What I have learned is apple makes products just good enough. There is no reason why the ipad couldnt have a gig of ram or even 2 gig of ram. A 299 netbook comes with 2 gig of ram. If they build it too good you wont update on a very regular basis. Its annoying but I like their products.
But people, a camera could not have been included with iPad1 because Apple had not yet completed development of FaceTime and related iOS technologies and applications. THAT is the reason why the camera was not included - the software hadn't yet caught up to the hardware. What would you have Apple do, ship an iPad with a camera that had no software to actually utilize it?
OK then why not a simply USB port?
I am not blaming Apple for holding back but keeping me shackled to iTunes sucks!
They haven't announced what the iPad 2 is. The longer they hold it back, the more they revise it, I'm certain.
They do have competitors, you know.