Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Next-Generation iPad to Launch in the U.S. on April 2nd or 9th?

You know, it's a tablet, it's practically all screen.

Making the screen a thing of beauty by adding high enough resolution to make it acceptable as a retina display is going to differentiate the iPad from the otherPads.

I would expect this at the very least, the tablet market is the hottest thing in electronics right now.
 
Wirelessly posted (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)

Still don't get why they are obssessed of using retina terminology and stick it on the new display or resolution they are going to adopt... They just making confusion or it's just talking rubbish.

Why don't just saying higher resolution display?

I am confused, but if they are going to adopt an higher res I don't see it more than 1920x1080.
 
Sodner said:
I don't "get" the 2 camera's option on a iPad. I see it on the front for facetime. But holding up that thing to take photographs seems silly. Reguarless I better start saving up. :)
Click to expand...

I think its just a matter of standardizing across iPhone, touch and iPad, letting users show things other than their own faces. When I've used Facetime, its more often to show things to people remotely than it is to share my ugly puss. I think LOTs of people are less than crazy about having to look good just for a phone call.
Its main use will probably be for teleconferencing or from a fixed stand.
It'd definitely be useless in something like the basic Apple iPad case, where the 'lid' flips over the back, covering where the camera would be.

Guess we'll find out soon.
 
Fraaaa said:
Still don't get why they are obssessed of using retina terminology and stick it on the new display or resolution they are going to adopt... They just making confusion or it's just talking rubbish.
Click to expand...

Rubbish ? Apple has always said the same thing about Retina Displays. It's not any more confusiing than it was when they released it.

During the first iPhone 4 presentation, Steve said a Retina display was a display that at normal viewing distance, the human eye can't distinguish the individual pixels.

It's always been this convulted logic, it has never meant any particular resolution/ppi. You guys who think otherwise just never understood the concept.
 
When Steve Jobs introduced the retina display it came with the idea that you couldn't perceive pixels at the normal distance one holds the display from your eyes. This is exactly what the retina displays on current devices accomplish. This is all the iPad displays would need to accomplish to gain the same label.

1.5x might be doable for hardware and price, but the automatic scaling of apps could be tricky. It would be no more difficult for developers to update apps than it was for the original retina, however. In fact, most current developers have been through this wringer and should have a much easier go at it this time around. Universal apps could use 2x assets for the 1.5x scaling in many cases to save on disk space, but it could also lead to 3 sets of assets. That part gets annoying.

I'd love for it to happen, though. The res on the current iPad is just low enough to feel it. Especially when reading.

If Apple is doing the retina display it could explain delayed releases and whatnot. The unusual screen could be a huge bottleneck to production.

I find this rumor highly suspect for many reasons, though.
 
yeah... the new iphone, then the new ipad, what about the MBP line.
that is what i care the most, though next-gen ipad is a great gadget to own, i think.
 
callme said:
Agreed.

A release in the UK 3 months after USA would kill iPad sales in the UK for 3 months. What would be the point of that?
Click to expand...

+1

I don't believe they'd do that. There's been time to ramp up supplies, and better to have limited supplies everywhere than lose all sales in some major markets for 3 months. Anyway, hope that's the case...

Tiptopp
 
I can't wait. Fighting my kids for use of my iPad has become unbearable. I almost need one for each member of the family. :(
 
Sales of iPad 1 won't disappear because Apple will likely retain it at a much lower entry price as Apple did with the iPod touch and iPhone. The price will drop on announcement and the unit will sell like crazy at $329.
 
I would like the two cameras. Front for Facetime, back for basic picture & video taking, plus barcode scanning and augmented reality.

I work in a school and there has been talk about maybe getting a tablet or iPad for every student. A lot of classes make iMovies so it would help to have a camera. Hook it up to an LCD projector or something & watch it. Only thing would be how to send the actual movie to the teacher. Plus, with writing papers, just wish there was a more complete form of printing rather than just being able to use some HP printers.

Another use for me in my job would be inventory. Would be useful to have a barcode scanner.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

No way, macnotes has no reputation and they are making **** up, all the time. You don't know them, but they are just link-baiting all the time with pseudo-news and articles.

How come, no credible source like Gruber or WSJ heard this?
 
KnightWRX said:
Rubbish ? Apple has always said the same thing about Retina Displays. It's not any more confusiing than it was when they released it.

During the first iPhone 4 presentation, Steve said a Retina display was a display that at normal viewing distance, the human eye can't distinguish the individual pixels.

It's always been this convulted logic, it has never meant any particular resolution/ppi. You guys who think otherwise just never understood the concept.
Click to expand...

good one, but i still think res on my iphone 4 is way much better than the 3G. Just look at the icons, pretty different.
 
dethmaShine said:
Sure.

1. Retina Display would put the cost of this thing to more than $1000. I suggest a higher resolution but not a retina display. These reports specifically say Retina Display and that's why I felt I caught the bluff.

2. USB: I know Apple loves (or loved) USB but they know that they have better solutions. USB is going to help a lot of people but I don't think Apple is one of those who put things just to satisfy the consumers. After one year (hypo.), if there are better solutions to USB, Apple would not be in a good state to axe out the port and and the architecture. I don't think Apple will do that.

3. With the iPhone in place, android in action and harmony among people :D, Apple will plan out a mass release for iPad 2. It cannot be exclusive to the US for 3 months. A couple of weeks is fine but 3 months (1/4th of a year) is a veryrisky period.
Click to expand...

1. I don't know how many times it must be said before thick-headed clowns like you get it... but retina-display does NOT mean 326 ppi. Instead, it means enough pixel density that you cannot distinguish individual pixels at standard-use distances rom the screen (and Apple decides what standard-use distances are). Stated another way, its so much pixel density that its pointless to further increase pixel density. So, yes, iPad 2 will get a retina display.

2. iPad 2 will also get USB if only to comply with recent changes in European law (which Apple and others helped craft). That law required all cell phones to have a common charging system (so there would not be a proliferation of different chargers) and it was agreed this would be based on USB. Now it can be argued that iPad is not a cell phone (and I'm not sure precisely what devices the European law pertains to) but it makes sense for Apple to make iPad comply even if it doesn't need to. This does not mean the USB port will be good for anything more than charging the iPad, but it probably will be; and I'd bet on Apple using mini-USB (or something similar) as well.

3. This point I agree with you and most everyone else. It makes sense for Apple to release the iPad 2 everywhere as quickly as they can. I'm sure iPad 1 sales are starting to dry up already, in anticipation of iPad 2... even here in the USA. Apple must work hard to get manufacturing up to speed (and large stockpiles in place) as fast as possible now in order to meet demand, and to maintain their first-mover advantage over would-be competitors.
 
Wirelessly posted (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)

KnightWRX said:
Fraaaa said:
Still don't get why they are obssessed of using retina terminology and stick it on the new display or resolution they are going to adopt... They just making confusion or it's just talking rubbish.
Click to expand...

Rubbish ? Apple has always said the same thing about Retina Displays. It's not any more confusiing than it was when they released it.

During the first iPhone 4 presentation, Steve said a Retina display was a display that at normal viewing distance, the human eye can't distinguish the individual pixels.

It's always been this convulted logic, it has never meant any particular resolution/ppi. You guys who think otherwise just never understood the concept.
Click to expand...

I'm not taking it on Apple, I know what retina stands by, I'm talking about the reporters, just say higher res and that's it.

Even in the report had to be pointed out that it won't have the same density.
 
Yeah, I'd be very surprised if the wait in the UK was any more than a month. I suppose they're basing their predictions on the launch of v1, but it's well documented that all that staggering was due to 3G/production issues etc. Launch of v2 is a different beast.
 
Hope this guess is wrong and Apple can get some sales in Q2 (Before end of March). Otherwise the FUDsters will make hay over the "poorish" sales # in Q2 due to the people waiting for Rev 2.

cheers to the longs
JohnG
 
Full of Win said:
4Xing the pixels, e.g. iPhone 3GS --> iPhone 4, still would not make the densities seen in the iPhone 4. I bet they will quadruple the pixels, and give dev''s the option to run apps in 1024 X 768 to save battery life. Any other resolution would add too much fragmentation down the line.
Click to expand...

So let me make sure I have this straight... you think that rather than going from 1,024 x 768 to 2,048 x 1,536 (the same resolution bump as the iPhone received) they'd go to a 4,096 x 3,072 panel? Really?

The more I think about this the more I'm starting to believe that Apple could go to a Retina display on the iPad if they wanted to. I.E. double the pixel density from 132ppi to 264ppi which, at the usual distance from the eyes the iPad is used, would qualify for Apple's definition of a Retina display (i.e. one where the individual pixels aren't visible to the naked eye). It seems almost certain that there'll be a dual core processor on-board, along with a bumped GPU, and that might just give them enough grunt to drive a panel at that resolution (especially as iOS seems very good at utilising the available hardware). They also have enough clout to get that panel made in bulk if they want to (remember the astonishment at the iPad display when it was first announced?).

BUT the key phrase is if they want to. Such a panel is likely to be expensive and draw more power than the current unit. It would also depend on whether or not the SoC has enough grunt to run it at speeds that Apple consider appropriate, especially for gaming. There's also the slight problem that they'd blow the competition out of the water but possibly not have anywhere to go when it came to iPad 3 (a year is enough time for that tech to get integrated into everyone else's product lines).

Who knows, I really think we're just going to have to sit back and wait on this one. Personally I'd expect dual core, expect a big fuss over great multi-tasking support (apparently iOS is already pretty good at that despite only having one core to work with), expect some external revisions, a memory bump and maybe some sort of change to the screen and for it to be available around a year on from the original launch. But really I think everyone is just guessing at this point and all we can do is wait for Apple to announce the thing.
 
Wirelessly posted (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)

currentinterest said:
Sales of iPad 1 won't disappear because Apple will likely retain it at a much lower entry price as Apple did with the iPod touch and iPhone. The price will drop on announcement and the unit will sell like crazy at $329.
Click to expand...

I was thinking this too.
 
So the iPad 2 comes out in April? and the iPhone 5 comes out 2 to 3 months after? I think that's too close, or i could be wrong. I was hoping for an early March release.
 
I'm sorry, but there is no way the international launch will be delayed by 3 months. The scenario I'm guessing will be that there will be a keynote sometime by the end of March (I still believe it will be released earlier though) and it will be available immediately in the US and international might be delayed by a week or two in order to have enough supplies everywhere. But considering Apple now knows what the demand for the iPad will be, they will be prepared with a proper amount of supplies.

As for the hardware, the two cameras should be a given by now. Apple would be shooting itself in the foot if it wouldn't provide FaceTime on it. The resolution of the display will also be improved, and who cares whether they call it Retina or not, it's just a marketing term. The only thing I don't see happening is the USB port. That is, unless they change iOS to actually take advantage of the port since currently it would be kind of pointless.

Edit: it would also make most sense for Apple to release it sometime in March. That way, they have the major mobile devices split nicely with the iPad in March (3rd month), iPhone in June (6th) and iPods in September (9th).
 
Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)

No SD card slot?
 
dethmaShine said:
First three months in the US? Not possible
Retina Display? Not possible
USB Port? Not possible
Click to expand...

First 3 months in the USA: wasn't iPad 1 US-only at first? Apple controls distribution, so they can do it if they see fit.

Retina Display: at exact iPhone resolution, probably not. Then again, you hold the iPad twice as far (or so) from your eyes as the iPhone. Since "retina" is about "exceeding ophthalmic resolution at normal usage distances", not a strict DPI cutoff, the pixel density implied isn't that odd. Kinda screws up the fixed-resolution apps (again), but developers will get over that. We COULD see a "true 1080p HDTV" type display with a 1920x1440 screen - close enough to "retina" to work. So yes, they could go there. (I expected this resolution in the hype leading up to iPad 1.)

USB port: nobody ever discusses which end of the cable - host or device? The arguments for/against including USB are very different for the answer to that question. Is the iPad a "computer" or a "peripheral"? for now, the latter. A huge move could be dumping the iP* proprietary connector entirely, replacing with a Micro-USB device plug (hey, it's more "minimal" anyway!). Putting a host plug on there - which many want so they can plug storage devices in - changes the nature of the device in a subtle yet profound way (to wit: no reason to tether to an iTunes-hosting computer; Apple isn't ready for that yet). Biggest reason to not have the host USB connector is size: there's no "micro" version of that socket.

Got anything beyond "not possible"? All seems possible to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back