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

[JimEJr]

Not buying it...the report that is

1) Given the headaches & extra costs associated with the Saturday delivery of iPad 1, I don't think Apple will do that again...I expect a typical Thu or Fri release in the first week of April.

2) Given the huge success of the retail channels for Apple...WalMart, Target, Best Buy, etc. and the onslaught of Android devices...I expect all those channels to sell iPad 2 immediately or within a month of release.

3) I still don't see USB happening...Steve has been very clear and devices have shown that info is to be delivered wirelessly...need a USB? Get Dropbox. I use my iPad everyday, extensively for business, dozens of apps live every day...have never needed a USB (just like I haven't needed Flash). Not saying others don't or that I wouldn't find a use, just saying I'm proof that it's not necessary...and if not necessary, Steve's not going to do it.

4) The iPad display is great, but I expect Apple to ride the wave of stellar view of the iPhone 4. I think they will find a way to do so without changing pricing. Remember, Steve's all about the emotional connection...looks, sound, feel. Retina on iPad eventually has got to be high on his list.

5) Phased international rollout is likely. Not as long as first gen, but Apple's been doing that with most device refreshes.

6) I do expect the device to be thinner and lighter, but with no reduction in battery life. No more than a pound would be great.

 

[KnightWRX]

Even in the report had to be pointed out that it won't have the same density.

Of course it won't, you hold an iPad farther from your eyes than you do an iPhone. Hence you need a lesser density to achieve the same effect.

Reporters have to point this out for people who don't understand what Retina actually means.

 

[smiddlehurst]

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.

Uh, as far as I know that law has a loophole to allow maufacturers to provide an adaptor to micro-usb that Apple are expected to utilise so as not to install a redundant port on their devices. So long as you can connect the device to a standard Micro-USB charger then they're in compliance with the agreement.

 

[Gregintosh]

Sounds like the entire wish list is part of these rumors. As with anything Apple-related, I'll believe it when I see it.

I will probably continue using my current iPad which I like and use almost daily and my 3GS. I will save all my money so that by the end of 2012 I can refresh all my equipment at the same time [iMac, iPhone, iPad].

 

[nelmat]

so...

...a year after the original one was released. Why does this come as a surprise to anybody. The iDevices have an annual refresh. Simples.

 

[Mord]

I'll buy one when they're dual-core and have a respectable about of RAM. I don't much care about cameras or a retina display.

 

[GroundLoop]

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?

I think you misunderstood him. 2,048 x 1,536 IS 4x the pixels. Do the multiplication.

GL

 

[aaronsullivan]

A lot. The iPad will become the best video camera/computer editor on the market because it is all in one package and isn't bulky, is portable, and instantly connected to YouTube and the net.

Very true. Although it might look silly to others, the iPad's weight and size will result in much more stable video as well. Watching the huge screen while taking video and being able to focus even more accurately and quickly with a touch will make it a fascinating video camera for some cases. Then, sit down with iMovie for iPad, edit something up, and post online from a coffee shop. It's pretty compelling for casual use.

As others have stated, augmented reality needs a bigger screen than the iPhone offers and "scanning" and OCR is much more useful when it can stay on the same device you scanned with for reading. The big screen as a viewfinder can help you make a better judgement about how big an area to "scan" as well.

I also buy into the FaceTime applications that others have brought up. I know I've probably used FaceTime just as much flipped as the face to face way.

I'd like to see support for file transfer via connected devices that goes beyond cameras and simply allows you to choose an app from a smart list to import a file to. SD or USB can be added on externally or whatever. An on-device USB port might be necessary for Europe, but if you are carrying around cards or USB sticks, you should have no problem carrying around an adapter or two.

All I want is retina, 2x processing speed, 2-4x the RAM, and sharp pressure sensitive stylus support and 3D without glasses and 20 hour battery life and you might as well add 2 more cameras for 3D on both sides. Thanks Apple.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Even if Apple announces the iPad2 late march they would loose all revenues internationally as noone would buy the old iPad then anymore. It never happened before with an existing product and it certainly will not happen with the iPad 2. That would kill the momentum of this device.

So, my beloved Americans, come back to reality and do simply not believe any articles which are obviously false.

Did not seem to hurt momentum of the iPhone, which is always released in the US first then Europe. Also doesn't hurt momentum of other products that are released in Asia or Europe first then the U.S.

The REALITY is that sheer demand dictates that Apple do a phased release. It has to have enough product to serve it's primary market (U.S.) before it goes overseas. I suspect demand for the iPad2 @ launch will be 2x stronger than for the original iPad -- which was limited b/c it was an entirely new product category. Now people know what its about, similar to how the iPhone 3G was more popular @ launch than the original iPhone.

 

[smiddlehurst]

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.

Here's the main reason, uh reasons, for keeping that window relatively short:

1) iOS. The second gen iPad will launch with a version of iOS 4 (it has to if it's launching before May as no dev preview has been issued). Apple have made a commitment to having a single release for all devices going forward (or at least that's what the public think now so it becomes difficult to back away from that) so won't want to wait too long to get iOS 5 onto the device. iOS versions normally roll out with the new iPhone in June / July. It also gives a great PR boost possibility by holding the iOS 5 developer event around the launch window for the iPad 2.

2) If (and it looks likely) Apple are going to transition to dual core processors this year the iPad will almost certainly be the first to receive the new SoC. When that happens everyone is going to have a pretty good idea what'll be powering the new iPhone when it turns up. As such it's in Apple's interests to give the competition as little time as possible to respond to that.

3) The last one is more a matter of not honking off your userbase and could easily be ignored but Apple are pretty good with iOS devices at giving them a year run (more or less) before the new one comes out. Launching in March (assuming worldwide launch or at least a quicker rollout than the first iPad) would not go down too well with existing owners, especially those that got 'em for Christmas.

 

[Padraig]

Of course it won't, you hold an iPad farther from your eyes than you do an iPhone. Hence you need a lesser density to achieve the same effect.

Reporters have to point this out for people who don't understand what Retina actually means.

Out of curiosity, how much further do you hold your iPad vs your Phone, because for me it'd be the same distance.

Didn't Jobs define the RD in his keynote as being over 300dpi?

 

[Lone Deranger]

This is complete ********.

How?
First three months in the US? Not possible

I wouldn't fret it. Let them Ustated Nites folk be the guinea pigs and work out all the first release problems it's bound to have.

 

[Yankee617]

Uh, as far as I know that law has a loophole to allow maufacturers to provide an adaptor to micro-usb that Apple are expected to utilise so as not to install a redundant port on their devices. So long as you can connect the device to a standard Micro-USB charger then they're in compliance with the agreement.

You are correct. But customers don't like carrying adapters. So I think Apple might include a USB port (or some variation thereof, like mico or mini) just to make customers happy. Bigger question for me is whether the USB port will be crippled, so its useful ONLY for charging, or whether its fully functional.

 

[jonnyb]

The rear camera can also be very helpful when using facetime. I regularly use the rear camera on my iPhone to show things to the people I'm using facetime with. Just last night I used it to show some family members some renovations being done to my house. It's a heck of a lot easier to hold the phone up and click the button to use the rear camera than to try to turn the phone around and point the front-facing camera at what I want to show people.

Exactly. I wish more people got this. The other point to make is that tapping the camera switch icon doesn't just mean you don't have to turn the device around, it also means you can see exactly what it is your camera is showing to the caller.

 

[smiddlehurst]

I think you misunderstood him. 2,048 x 1,536 IS 4x the pixels. Do the multiplication.

GL

Yeah, thanks for the snark, now go and read what he wrote again:

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.

It's presented here as two seperate options with going for a 4x option not being good enough and instead quadrupling the pixels being the prefered solution. Now yes, the two mean the same (hence my confusion) but as it's being presented as two seperate solutions the only logical interpretation of quadruple is quadruple the width and quadruple the height, hence the 4,096 question.

Clear now?

 

[smiddlehurst]

Out of curiosity, how much further do you hold your iPad vs your Phone, because for me it'd be the same distance.

Didn't Jobs define the RD in his keynote as being over 300dpi?

For a device held 12 to 18 inches away from the eye if my memory serves. iPad would be further away than that hence the lower PPI requirement.

 

[smiddlehurst]

You are correct. But customers don't like carrying adapters. So I think Apple might include a USB port (or some variation thereof, like mico or mini) just to make customers happy. Bigger question for me is whether the USB port will be crippled, so its useful ONLY for charging, or whether its fully functional.

Umm... when have Apple ever thought about what customers like if they don't want to do it? No, sorry, I honestly don't believe they're going to stick another port on their machines when the FAR simpler option (from their POV) is to say 'here's a charger with a USB / 30 Pin adaptor. If you want to use a regular micro-usb charger just pull the cable apart here >< and you'll find a Micro-USB adaptor". Bear in mind as well that most PC's don't have Micro-USB ports so companies will have to supply adaptors ANYWAY if you're going to connect for data transfer / update reasons.

 

[Padraig]

For a device held 12 to 18 inches away from the eye if my memory serves. iPad would be further away than that hence the lower PPI requirement.

That really allows the marketing team huge leeway. I can't perceive the pixels on my TV, therefore does that qualify it as a Retina Display? I still think the term "Retina Display" was one of the more obnoxious bits of marketing that Apple has come up with in recent years.

 

[GingerHips]

So let me get this straight.....the iPad2 will be distributed using the same pattern Apple used for iPad1. So for those many countries and markets around the world still waiting for iPad1 to arrive, they can expect their markets to be flooded with old stock of iPad1 once the new one arrives in the US, or even worse, they may just never get the iPad ever.
With a whole slew of new tablet devices out there in 2011, Apple really needs to show more respect to their international market and at least allocate some iPads for release further afield than the obvious US, UK and EU markets. Apple may end up alienating an expectant fan base waiting with money in their pockets.
For me, not able to get an iPad in my country yet, the Motorola Xoom is looking mighty fine and I can guarantee that it will hit my country before the iPad1 does, and definitely before the iPad2.

 

[Gaelinic]

Noooooooooo. I asked for nothing but Best Buy gift cards for my birthday and Christmas this holiday season. I can't wait until October?!?!?!

 

[Pink∆Floyd]

But... will it blend?

 

[GroundLoop]

It's presented here as two seperate options with going for a 4x option not being good enough and instead quadrupling the pixels being the prefered solution. Now yes, the two mean the same (hence my confusion) but as it's being presented as two seperate solutions the only logical interpretation of quadruple is quadruple the width and quadruple the height, hence the 4,096 question.

Clear now?

It has always been clear to me...You on the other hand are reading too much into the statement.

He is stating that "4x-ing" (aka "2,048 x 1,536") pixels does not get you to 326ppi. This is true (it is 264ppi).

In the second sentence he is also stating that he believes that Apple will be "quadrupling" (aka "4x-ing" or "2,048 x 1,536") the pixels.

This is exactly what was done with the iPhone to allow easy scaling of existing apps to the new, higher, 4x'd, quadrupled iPhone resolution ("960 x 640").

GL

 

[Tailpike1153]

Uh, as far as I know that law has a loophole to allow maufacturers to provide an adaptor to micro-usb that Apple are expected to utilise so as not to install a redundant port on their devices. So long as you can connect the device to a standard Micro-USB charger then they're in compliance with the agreement.

+1. I read that in a thread a few weeks ago. I can't remember where I saw but there was a artist's rendering of what the adaptor would look like and extras it could have. It may be to late too bundle such and adapter for this year's model. Something may come on the market next year.

 

[Tailpike1153]

Here it was:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1071988/

 

[Yankee617]

Umm... when have Apple ever thought about what customers like if they don't want to do it? No, sorry, I honestly don't believe they're going to stick another port on their machines when the FAR simpler option (from their POV) is to say 'here's a charger with a USB / 30 Pin adaptor. If you want to use a regular micro-usb charger just pull the cable apart here >< and you'll find a Micro-USB adaptor". Bear in mind as well that most PC's don't have Micro-USB ports so companies will have to supply adaptors ANYWAY if you're going to connect for data transfer / update reasons.

OK. We can disagree on this. (Just don't point a Glock 19 at me for disagreeing with you; lets disagree amicably.) It will be interesting to see what Apple really does.