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.
Next iPad to Add Five New Features including USB Port?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree with you. We know it's a marketing term, but substituting the words with something more descriptive simply takes up more room.
It's an Apple forum. We know what it means and what it's about.
No Retina Display on iPad2
Retina display works out to roughly 2530 x 1898, more onscreen pixels than current 27" displays. Impossible and unnecessary.
I know nothing, but maybe
1280 x 960 (current aspect ratio)
1280 x 854 (iPhone4 3:2 aspect ratio)
1366 x 768 (11" MBA resolution)
The last two would require a format change, since they don't match the current iPad's aspect ratio.
Retina display works out to roughly 2530 x 1898, more onscreen pixels than current 27" displays. Impossible and unnecessary.
I know nothing, but maybe
1280 x 960 (current aspect ratio)
1280 x 854 (iPhone4 3:2 aspect ratio)
1366 x 768 (11" MBA resolution)
The last two would require a format change, since they don't match the current iPad's aspect ratio.
That might tend to make sense, and it might explain some of the large font settings that were added to iOS 4.2
Impossible, right now!
But, I agree that they won't put any other resolution, except double the current res; as it'll break all the apps.
In theory, any company can put a retina display in a 9.7 inch screen; however, it'll just be very expensive, the product will need massive processing power (but I can't see a ATI 4850m in the iPad, with good heat management and the same size) and the chance of dead pixels will increase dramatically.
However, in the future (iPad 3/4/5), when GPU's are more powerful, but still have the same efficiency as the current GPU in the iPad; then we will see a retina display.
I think that Apple and customers, want outstanding battery life, good FPS when playing games and no dead pixels on the iPad 2; rather that a retina display.
Apple wouldn't want to say this: "The new iPad, with a retina display, outstanding battery life at 2 hours and the Epic Citadel demo runs at a magical 5 FPS, it also has an inbuilt protection, so if the iPad gets too hot, it automatically shuts down; but it all looks amazing on the retina display."
iRobertM said:
For FaceTime;
For AR apps;
At home, taking a pics / video of random stuff your kids do;
720p / 1080p video recording + iMovie, which is more like the desktop version = awesomeness.
Some people want it, some do; it's all up to Steve Jobs.
Last edited:
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)
Who are you to say somebody elses use of the iPad is wrong? There are many ligitimate ways to put a USB port to use that leverage a tablet format.
For example Ethernet and RS232 adapters would be very handy. Theses can be very useful for attaching to embedded systems especially robotic systems. A portable device like the iPad could be very useful in this context and the drivers would be straight forward.
Support of memory cards and such is already in iPad to some extent via camera connection kit. Of course by selling the kit as as a "camera connection kit" Apple effectively limits peoples expectations. As you indicate this brings up the issue of support for an actual USB port.
Apple does have a few choices as to how to handle the driver / support issues with a standard USB port. One approach would be to call it a charging port and not to actually support USB at all. Another is to simply publish a list of supported device classes. It would be funny if the rumored port is actually a Lightpeak port.
In any event I'm not sure why there is so much negativity here about USB. Let's face it USB should be very easy to support electrically with very little cost on wasted power or SoC complexity. After all they already need USB ports anyways. Combined with the expectation of a new SoC I see USB support as a high priority.
ikir said:If you need USB on iPad probably you are using iPad in a way it should not be used, it is not a computer but a multi-use mobile gadget complimentary to your computer.
Sure an usb could be useful but i don't see it on an iPad... USB means people expect usb drives to work, this mean you need mass storage drivers and maybe other device drivers but especially it means you must have a file system browser... which is not natural on a device like that. i can picture people make confusion with that, iOS must be super simple, with no filesystem. This is my opinion, i can be wrong
Who are you to say somebody elses use of the iPad is wrong? There are many ligitimate ways to put a USB port to use that leverage a tablet format.
For example Ethernet and RS232 adapters would be very handy. Theses can be very useful for attaching to embedded systems especially robotic systems. A portable device like the iPad could be very useful in this context and the drivers would be straight forward.
Support of memory cards and such is already in iPad to some extent via camera connection kit. Of course by selling the kit as as a "camera connection kit" Apple effectively limits peoples expectations. As you indicate this brings up the issue of support for an actual USB port.
Apple does have a few choices as to how to handle the driver / support issues with a standard USB port. One approach would be to call it a charging port and not to actually support USB at all. Another is to simply publish a list of supported device classes. It would be funny if the rumored port is actually a Lightpeak port.
In any event I'm not sure why there is so much negativity here about USB. Let's face it USB should be very easy to support electrically with very little cost on wasted power or SoC complexity. After all they already need USB ports anyways. Combined with the expectation of a new SoC I see USB support as a high priority.
A USB would be good says my neighbor.
I want to run DOS on my iPad and my neighbor said if Apple adds USB we'd be able to hack into the iPad and run this game I haven't played in about 18 years... Street Fighter II. Sweeeeeet!!!! Please Steve!
I want to run DOS on my iPad and my neighbor said if Apple adds USB we'd be able to hack into the iPad and run this game I haven't played in about 18 years... Street Fighter II. Sweeeeeet!!!! Please Steve!
As a games dev, I really hope the next iPad stays the same OR 2x resolution... Call it what you want
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)
Remember the current iPad is a rev one device! That pretty much says it all. If you look closely at the current machine it is pretty obvious that two items (the camera and gyro) where already planned. USB makes sense from the stand point of being competitive. As for a better display that is a piece of cake, better though does not imply the same pixel density as the iPhone 4.
In any event I expect a bunch of new tech in iPad 2 simply to keep momentum going. For example a new processor/SoC to power the thing is likely a high priority as the A4 is to slow for Apple to realize parts of their vision for the device. A replacement for A4 is needed not just for a better CPU, but also to upgrade the GPU which is very important. Other upgrades to the A4 should include USB 3 support and possibly other I/O support. It would be neat if Apples first USB 3 supporting device was iPad2.
I know many seem to think that a replacement for A4 is far to early but honestly I see it as iPads greatest weakness. Also consider the rumors that PA Semi was broken up into teams with one designing handheld devices and one designing processors for tablet devices.
In anyevent what is with all the negativity about the possibility of a decent update? Sure it has only one year but Apple is blazing new trails with iPad.
rdowns said:
Remember the current iPad is a rev one device! That pretty much says it all. If you look closely at the current machine it is pretty obvious that two items (the camera and gyro) where already planned. USB makes sense from the stand point of being competitive. As for a better display that is a piece of cake, better though does not imply the same pixel density as the iPhone 4.
In any event I expect a bunch of new tech in iPad 2 simply to keep momentum going. For example a new processor/SoC to power the thing is likely a high priority as the A4 is to slow for Apple to realize parts of their vision for the device. A replacement for A4 is needed not just for a better CPU, but also to upgrade the GPU which is very important. Other upgrades to the A4 should include USB 3 support and possibly other I/O support. It would be neat if Apples first USB 3 supporting device was iPad2.
I know many seem to think that a replacement for A4 is far to early but honestly I see it as iPads greatest weakness. Also consider the rumors that PA Semi was broken up into teams with one designing handheld devices and one designing processors for tablet devices.
In anyevent what is with all the negativity about the possibility of a decent update? Sure it has only one year but Apple is blazing new trails with iPad.
I'm amazed that people don't think USB is going to happen. New EU laws means USB charging will be a requirement, not an option. Apple is not exempt from this law. Therefore, there will be USB on the iPad at some point in the future. And, given the one year refresh cycle, it's likely that it will happen during the next refresh. Period.
Why would you think they would a resolution change after such a short time on the market. Apple has been working on the iPad for years. If one of the above resolutions was in the cards so soon, it would have happened day one. The current resolution wasn't chosen at a whim, it years of design/testing inside Apple. Apple doesn't make this kind of fragmenting change for such a minor benefit the above changes would bring, at a whim. Also the Aspect ratio wasn't chosen at a whim. A couch surfing device works best with a more squarish aspect. 4:3 is here to stay on iPad.
I think it much more likely that resolution progress will be much more like the iPhone. Years of stability and then a big jump.
They are likely waiting on graphics chip performance to double in the same power envelope, this will likely take another year or two. Once that happens then they can give us about double the pixel count, say 1600x1200, that would actually be a huge jump.
So my resolution prediction. iPad 2= stay the same.
iPad3 or iPad4 will get something like 1600x1200.
Apple will probably not do that, as it will break all the current iPad apps.
EDIT : I am slightly confused; are you saying they are going to increase the resolution by approximately 140%; or double it (200% or 2x the resolution), as 1600x1200, isn't double the resolution of 1024x768 (the current iPad's resolution).
You know what'd be awesome? If they added a bigger hard drive, a fold out physical keyboard, a full array of ports including USB, MDP, optical audio, firewire...
Then they could install OS X instead of the stupidly-limited and DRM-bogged down 'iOS' that you can't even run VLC on, or even multitask effectively
They could even use x86 processors so regular OS X apps could run on it.
Oh wait, this is turning into something else--something I might actually buy.
Then they could install OS X instead of the stupidly-limited and DRM-bogged down 'iOS' that you can't even run VLC on, or even multitask effectively
They could even use x86 processors so regular OS X apps could run on it.
Oh wait, this is turning into something else--something I might actually buy.
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)
I believe it was Samsung that was claiming a 4X improvement in GPU speed in OpenGL on it's new Cortex A9 based SoC. If you look at what Imagination offers you will see that Apple has a couple of avenues to take to better GPU performance.
This isn't to discount real engineering issues but these issues can be over comed. For example the demand on memory band width will be dramatic but there are solutions to that problem. One path to solving the bandwidth problem would be to go to a wider memory array. Another option involves massive on chip memory in the form of a cache or even an on chip frame buffer. Beyound those two Apple could build a chip where the GPU has it's own path to a separate frame buffer. With Apple designing their own chips anything is possible. The point is a 4X increase in pixels does bring issues with it, but honestly I would think that Apple would want to get this update done as soon as possible to minimize legacy issues.
In any event one just needs to look at iPhone 4 to see how far the ARM architecture has come in a couple of years. One can't judge what is possible tomorrow based on the technology of today. What will show up in iPad is tech that Apple has been working on for over two years now.
ChazUK said:
I wonder what crazy powerful, power sipping mobile GPU would be needed to power such a resolution?
That alone is why I very much doubt the iPad would have a "retina display" anytime soon.
I believe it was Samsung that was claiming a 4X improvement in GPU speed in OpenGL on it's new Cortex A9 based SoC. If you look at what Imagination offers you will see that Apple has a couple of avenues to take to better GPU performance.
This isn't to discount real engineering issues but these issues can be over comed. For example the demand on memory band width will be dramatic but there are solutions to that problem. One path to solving the bandwidth problem would be to go to a wider memory array. Another option involves massive on chip memory in the form of a cache or even an on chip frame buffer. Beyound those two Apple could build a chip where the GPU has it's own path to a separate frame buffer. With Apple designing their own chips anything is possible. The point is a 4X increase in pixels does bring issues with it, but honestly I would think that Apple would want to get this update done as soon as possible to minimize legacy issues.
In any event one just needs to look at iPhone 4 to see how far the ARM architecture has come in a couple of years. One can't judge what is possible tomorrow based on the technology of today. What will show up in iPad is tech that Apple has been working on for over two years now.
I just bought the first iPad for my company and it looks like I'll buy a few more when the new one comes out.
It doesn't have to be 4x the resolution, all it does is have the same aspect ratio.
Things can be upconverted automatically. Halo 3 on the Xbox 360 actually runs at a resolution of 560p, but it gets upconverted to 720p, or 1080p or downconverted to 480p based on what tv you have, automatically. And it looks fine. The iPad can do the same.
I expect to see either....
1440x1080
or
1280x960
on the next iPad. It would be higher resolution while retaining the same aspect ratio. It could upconvert everything.
1280x960 is the bare minimum, so the iPad could atleast play 720p quality videos (1280x720) without reducing the quality.
However, a resolution of 1440x1080 would allow apple to (misleadingly) claim that the ipad's resolution is 1080p
Things can be upconverted automatically. Halo 3 on the Xbox 360 actually runs at a resolution of 560p, but it gets upconverted to 720p, or 1080p or downconverted to 480p based on what tv you have, automatically. And it looks fine. The iPad can do the same.
I expect to see either....
1440x1080
or
1280x960
on the next iPad. It would be higher resolution while retaining the same aspect ratio. It could upconvert everything.
1280x960 is the bare minimum, so the iPad could atleast play 720p quality videos (1280x720) without reducing the quality.
However, a resolution of 1440x1080 would allow apple to (misleadingly) claim that the ipad's resolution is 1080p
The great iPad rip-off
As soon as I saw that Murdoch's 'The Times' newspaper hitched up with iPad to make us pay for reading that trash, I knew for certain that iPad is the gadget to make us pay through constant subscriptions, and for everything.
Trash you iPad and stick with what is free.
As soon as I saw that Murdoch's 'The Times' newspaper hitched up with iPad to make us pay for reading that trash, I knew for certain that iPad is the gadget to make us pay through constant subscriptions, and for everything.
Trash you iPad and stick with what is free.
Last edited: