unless there is a problem everyone keeps the same basic hardware for a few years with minor upgrades every year. Just like the car companies do.
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
unless there is a problem everyone keeps the same basic hardware for a few years with minor upgrades every year. Just like the car companies do.
my wife was bugging me to buy leapfrog and all the other crap for our 3 year old to teach him to read. convinced her that by the time you buy the add on cards it's the same amount of money as the iPad. so going to buy version 2 when it comes out next year
Great job with your persuasiveness. The only difference with the leapfrog hardware is it can take a beating. If it breaks you replace the device as less cost (and can keep all the accessories). But, the ipad is really turning out to be a great educational tool.
My 4 year old loves the learning games, and actually uses the ifontmaker to practice making his letter shapes. There are a few really good items for young kids. I just wouldn't leave the ipad with them to play with all the time (one drop could mean a very expensive replacement).
Definitive iPad2 wish list ;-)
I don't own an iPad but purchased one for my elderly mother-in-law the day it came out as her first "computer". Curiously my first thoughts were: damn this is heavy! Not heavy in any ordinary sense of the term (1.6 lbs is not heavy!) but it is too heavy for how it was meant to be used. The iPad affords certain styles of use and most of them would benefit greatly from less heft. I am holding out for a lighter device myself, my sole "must have it feature".
So:
Number 1 Requirement: one that Apple ALWAYS does without being asked, even for devices that don't need it (e.g., Mac Mini): Make it thinner and lighter. But NOT smaller. The form factor is perfect as is. Maybe it will be carbon composite back? Or Liquid metal? Who knows. But it WILL be lighter/thinner, and for once, it really will be a good thing.
Number 2 Requirement: Higher density display. This is to compete with the eReaders, of which Apple with the iBookstore clearly wants the iPad to be a contender. A higher density display would be so useful for an e-Reader (more useful for the iPad than for the iPhone, IMHO). But I agree with all of the readers who point out that cost and performance will likely preclude this otherwise natural evolution of the iPad. It is really too bad. (Would also love to view it in broad daylight, too, at the beach like with a Kindle). Would be fantastic, but not likely.
Number 3 Requirement: Front facing camera. Why? Because Apple wants to push Facetime and is upgrading everything for it. NOT because users really desperately need it. But if a camera isn't there, users will act like it is some sort of travesty because it's already expected, without being honest with themselves about how often they'd really use it.
Number 4 Requirement: More memory. Why? Because nothing obsoletes an otherwise very capable iOS device than not enough RAM. Therefore, don't expect to see 512MB. Apple likes obsolescence; it moves more product. This is a near certainty with iPad 3 as it tries to keep pace with the iPhone 5.
Number 5 Requirement: SD card slot. Why? Because it is a natural use for this product and Apple already supports it via an adapter. Even the Mac Mini got a SD reader last time out. Don't expect a generic USB port; it is not required nor needed. The Dock IS a USB port basically that works with thousands of proprietary devices that Apples makes additional money off of. And USB would require a lot of new drivers to make it worth it. Not going to happen.
Number 6 Requirement: Minor speed bump. Maybe the new A5 or A6 with better GPU? Sure. Last time it found its way in the iPad BEFORE it hit the iPhone 4. And the iPhone 5 WILL get a faster CPU/GPU. So expect a little more snap, all the more useful now that the iPad can multitask. Is this critical? Hell no. But it will happen all of the same.
I don't own an iPad but purchased one for my elderly mother-in-law the day it came out as her first "computer". Curiously my first thoughts were: damn this is heavy! Not heavy in any ordinary sense of the term (1.6 lbs is not heavy!) but it is too heavy for how it was meant to be used. The iPad affords certain styles of use and most of them would benefit greatly from less heft. I am holding out for a lighter device myself, my sole "must have it feature".
So:
Number 1 Requirement: one that Apple ALWAYS does without being asked, even for devices that don't need it (e.g., Mac Mini): Make it thinner and lighter. But NOT smaller. The form factor is perfect as is. Maybe it will be carbon composite back? Or Liquid metal? Who knows. But it WILL be lighter/thinner, and for once, it really will be a good thing.
Number 2 Requirement: Higher density display. This is to compete with the eReaders, of which Apple with the iBookstore clearly wants the iPad to be a contender. A higher density display would be so useful for an e-Reader (more useful for the iPad than for the iPhone, IMHO). But I agree with all of the readers who point out that cost and performance will likely preclude this otherwise natural evolution of the iPad. It is really too bad. (Would also love to view it in broad daylight, too, at the beach like with a Kindle). Would be fantastic, but not likely.
Number 3 Requirement: Front facing camera. Why? Because Apple wants to push Facetime and is upgrading everything for it. NOT because users really desperately need it. But if a camera isn't there, users will act like it is some sort of travesty because it's already expected, without being honest with themselves about how often they'd really use it.
Number 4 Requirement: More memory. Why? Because nothing obsoletes an otherwise very capable iOS device than not enough RAM. Therefore, don't expect to see 512MB. Apple likes obsolescence; it moves more product. This is a near certainty with iPad 3 as it tries to keep pace with the iPhone 5.
Number 5 Requirement: SD card slot. Why? Because it is a natural use for this product and Apple already supports it via an adapter. Even the Mac Mini got a SD reader last time out. Don't expect a generic USB port; it is not required nor needed. The Dock IS a USB port basically that works with thousands of proprietary devices that Apples makes additional money off of. And USB would require a lot of new drivers to make it worth it. Not going to happen.
Number 6 Requirement: Minor speed bump. Maybe the new A5 or A6 with better GPU? Sure. Last time it found its way in the iPad BEFORE it hit the iPhone 4. And the iPhone 5 WILL get a faster CPU/GPU. So expect a little more snap, all the more useful now that the iPad can multitask. Is this critical? Hell no. But it will happen all of the same.
No... until you hold an iPhone 4 next to it.
Apple weren't the first to sell a phone with a pixel density advantage. What they did, however, was to put a name on it which turned it into something the average user can relate to. The "Retina Display" buzz created an awareness that Apple raised the bar, but that also means they raised consumer expectations. They also established the iPad as a product with a high-quality display.
They'd have to be crazy to create this kind of awareness and then leave it all to their competitors to take advantage of it. You can already buy tablets with 170ppi (1024x600, 7") today, considerably more than the iPad's 132ppi. Certainly within the next year we'll see 210ppi (1280x720, 7"), possibly more.
The iPad will inevitably get a substantial resolution bump, sooner or later. It's just a question of whether it will happen in the second or third gen. And the only reason they'd decide to wait until generation 3 is manufacturing cost. Power consumption or GPU performance are a non-issue.
I never said or used the word required, what I said is that people expect retina on the iPad as is just being a double resolution or a 300ppi screen, and then again I'm agreeing with you on the resolution/view distance ratio.
Why I Will Or Won't Buy The iPad
I'm waiting to see what the iPad brings for the following reasons:
- My iPod touch is awesssssssomee... And the only thing it can't do for me perfectly, is books (which I still read on the touch, just not "ideal")
- Therefore, I'm thinking between getting a kindle or an iPad
Basically, I'll wait to see what the iPad brings in terms of making for better readability. If they bring a better display i'm diving into the iPad, I'm thinking either some sort of technology that makes reading easier on the eyes, or retina display.
The other features? Don't care much about...
Front Camera ==> Lammmeeeeeee. They'll put one anyway, but its not like someone who didn't buy ipad1, will now buy ipad 2 for the facetime lol
Back Camera ==> on an ipad? loooool, who needs it... very limited uses
Speed bumps ==> Its expected anyway, so nothing impressive about that unless they like triple speeds or something, nobody will even talk about the speed increases
Weight, Thinness ==> Sure, people who own ipad1 and find it a bit heavy, might upgrade to the newer version, but I haven't heard that feature being the make-or-break feature for anyone. Never heard anyone not buy ipad 1 due to weight or thickness.
Usb, MemoryCard,Flash==> Not gonna happen anyway, so...
It is just my opinion, but I honestly think, the only thing that apple can do in order to make iPad 2 attract new customers is changes in display. All of those other possible changes are mere "improvements" which if anything, will mean the ipad2 will only be bought by people who have tons of cash and wanna upgrade their ipad1 for the small improvement.
So, apple has to really come up with something sweet to grow ipad customer base. Maybe price drop? Now that, or change in display, might be really attractive. Not much else though.
I'm waiting to see what the iPad brings for the following reasons:
- My iPod touch is awesssssssomee... And the only thing it can't do for me perfectly, is books (which I still read on the touch, just not "ideal")
- Therefore, I'm thinking between getting a kindle or an iPad
Basically, I'll wait to see what the iPad brings in terms of making for better readability. If they bring a better display i'm diving into the iPad, I'm thinking either some sort of technology that makes reading easier on the eyes, or retina display.
The other features? Don't care much about...
Front Camera ==> Lammmeeeeeee. They'll put one anyway, but its not like someone who didn't buy ipad1, will now buy ipad 2 for the facetime lol
Back Camera ==> on an ipad? loooool, who needs it... very limited uses
Speed bumps ==> Its expected anyway, so nothing impressive about that unless they like triple speeds or something, nobody will even talk about the speed increases
Weight, Thinness ==> Sure, people who own ipad1 and find it a bit heavy, might upgrade to the newer version, but I haven't heard that feature being the make-or-break feature for anyone. Never heard anyone not buy ipad 1 due to weight or thickness.
Usb, MemoryCard,Flash==> Not gonna happen anyway, so...
It is just my opinion, but I honestly think, the only thing that apple can do in order to make iPad 2 attract new customers is changes in display. All of those other possible changes are mere "improvements" which if anything, will mean the ipad2 will only be bought by people who have tons of cash and wanna upgrade their ipad1 for the small improvement.
So, apple has to really come up with something sweet to grow ipad customer base. Maybe price drop? Now that, or change in display, might be really attractive. Not much else though.
Well duh people expect, I've been posting to these people that they are wrong and don't understand what Retina is. If your only goal is to point me to the fact that people think Retina is 300 ppi+ or double resolution, then you haven't been understanding the goal of my posts which is correcting these people. I know they don't understand the concept!
I also think people do not actually associate retina-display with "300 ppi". Jobs did a great job of marketing it is a "fancy display where you don't see individual pixels in regular use from a regular viewing distance". People don't actually remember the technical details of ppi or what not.
The way he defined it, he can expand it to fit much more than just strictly "300ppi". In fact, the explanation was that *for* an iphone retina means 300ppi... Not that retina is always 300ppi.
For iPad they can simply claim you view it from farther away, make the contrast better, increase resolution a bit (doesn't have to be 300ppi) and call it retina.
The way he defined it, he can expand it to fit much more than just strictly "300ppi". In fact, the explanation was that *for* an iphone retina means 300ppi... Not that retina is always 300ppi.
For iPad they can simply claim you view it from farther away, make the contrast better, increase resolution a bit (doesn't have to be 300ppi) and call it retina.
The current definition of the marketing term is quite irrelevant. If they'll substantially increase resolution, they'll probably redefine the meaning of "Retina Display" to match whatever they have.
Actually it does. How about re-reading the marketing description of "Retina display" yourself..
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/retina-display.html
If you can distinguish the pixels, its NOT retina display. Atleast not in the sense apple markets it. You cant distinguish the pixels in iPhone 4 no matter how close you put it to your eye.
(hate bumping threads but just now noticed that post. sorry)
That's not true, at least not for people with above-average eyesight. While it can be uncomfortable to get that close, it's certainly possible.
yeah, the worst thing ever is when people think retina = doubling down on teh pixels!!!
it ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT MEAN THAT. it means >300 ppi. that is all it means. the iphone's screen happens to be 3.5" and 960x480, which is convenient because the pixels were straight up split in four.
the ipad would NOT have a retina display if they did they same thing. it would still have big pixels. the argument that the ipad doesn't need >300ppi in order to have a crisp image MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.
and yes, person who replied to me, i know the screen is 9.7", but since apple liked the pixel doubling on iphone, and the ipad is a bit too large, reducing it to an 8.5" screen and doubling the pixels makes perfect sense. it wouldn't be too small like the 7" samsung galaxy turd, developers would have the same retina transition as they did on iphone 4, and the screen would be 300ppi and therefore they could call it "retina" and it would have an excellent crisp display just like iphone 4.
Actually, not quite. 264 PPI isn't far off 300 and you're much more likely to hold the iPad further away from you than you would with the iPhone -- the further away the device the less PPI required to make the pixels indistinguishable.
This what is and what isn't "retina" is really just semantics, it doesn't matter. If Apple releases a "double resolution" iPad, they aren't going to call it the "almost-retina", they'll call it retina, despite it being 264 PPI.
the arms i use to hold my ipad are not longer than the arms i use to hold my iphone. what makes you think an ipad would be held further away than an iphone?
if apple calls 264ppi "retina" they are looking for a PR sh*tstorm
Don't be rude... it has nothing to do with the length of your arms.
The iPad is quite large, I comfortably hold it ~14" away from my face whilst being able to see it very well, but the iPhone I hold about 6 inches (although it does vary)... why? It's more comfortable for me to stare at the iPhone at that distance.
Fact is, the iPhone is much lighter, smaller, and will thus be used on average closer than the much heavier and larger iPad.
Still Not There Yet
When will Apple address the battery issue and the accept Flash elements in the browser?
Regrets for the first gen, will wait for the 3rd.
When will Apple address the battery issue and the accept Flash elements in the browser?
Regrets for the first gen, will wait for the 3rd.
Yeah, I REALLY need flash because a lot of websites that I frequent require it. The lack of flash was the primary reason that I got rid of my iPad, I just can't do much with it outside of consuming Apple-approved content. You can't tout the iPad as an ultimate web device while blocking half the internet due to a stupid dick holding contest with Adobe, my Evo 4G is can stream live games from atdhe.net for god's sake! The lack of camera is also a show stopper since that makes it useless for Skype, which my wife uses all the time on her $200 netbook.
i'm really looking forward to the next iPad. i hope it has 2 cameras. and it needs to be a lot faster
sorry buddy your hopes are waaaaaaaay too high for an apple device
apple will never get rid of their proprietary connector in favor for a standard one because they make too much money on ripping people off for accessories.
apple did agree to start using micro usb connectors but have they? nope, not a single product they have in the entire line has a standard micro usb connector
its possible they may add a USB Host port (USB A Female) like regular laptops have for cameras to attach but thats also wishful thinking, like every apple refresh its going to be dissapointing.
