It's not surprising, the new iPad is really a leap in technology and performance. When people were suggesting the new iPad should get the retina display there was a chorus of nay sayers who claimed that it couldn't be done.
It can't be done if you're Dell perhaps, because they've never pioneered anything that risky in their entire existence. Apple is a company with a track record of making the seemingly impossible a reality.
However they managed to do it, Apple exceeded all expectations by bringing retina display to market in tablet form, increasing the processing and graphics power, while retaining an incredible 10 hours of battery life.
Any company that can deliver a product that far ahead of the competition deserves the success that Apple is having with the launch of the new iPad.
My hope is that with the arrival of the next iPhone, Apple makes some major improvements to battery life. Aside from amazing displays, battery life is another component in portable devices that stands between them being portable desk tops and actual portable devices that have enough battery life to get through an 8 to 10 hour work day without requiring to be plugged in at every opportunity.
If there's a company that is going to solve the battery problem, I can't really see how it won't be Apple or maybe IBM at this point. But I don't think IBM is particularly concerned with portable devices anymore. It's definitely not going to be Dell, HP, or Samsung. Those three companies are too busy waiting to see what Apple does next so that they can rush out a version of their own.
How is that a leap when:
* IPS "retina" panels have been around for several years now (not to mention the fact that Apple has nothing to do with their design and manufacturing, lets give credit where credit is due - i.e. to Samsung)
* CPU performance is the same as iPad 2 and lower than most competitors (Tegra 3 and many Samsung CPUs - like the ones in Galaxy SII, Note etc.)
* GPU performance is higher but remember that Apple does not even design GPUs. They take design from Imagination Technologies (as do Sony, Intel and many others). All Apple did this time was that they added two more GPU cores. BTW, Sony Vita has the same design (with faster VRAM - and higher overall performance).
Apple did good in combining these technologies. The final product is good although increased size, weight and charging time represent a very high trade-of price - iPad 2 actually is a better tablet in many respects.
And as far as "far ahead of the competition" is concerned, just take a look at the competition. For example, Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 offer SAMOLED screen (orders of magnitude better contrast than iPad), half the weight, same 10 hours battery life time, same LTE, support for SD memory cards, stereo speakers, 2MP front side camera (vs. 0.3 MP for iPad 3). And Samsung is rumored to release a tablet with higher resolution than iPad 3 later this year.