Why not? the jump from the iPhone 3g to 3Gs in tech was huge, not just in speed, there was a completely upgraded camera, oliophobic coating, compass, better battery.
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.
Photo of iPad 3 Logic Board with "A5X" System on a Chip
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why not? the jump from the iPhone 3g to 3Gs in tech was huge, not just in speed, there was a completely upgraded camera, oliophobic coating, compass, better battery.
Perhaps Apple's planning on releasing two models, an iPad 2S at $499 with an enhanced A5, and a iPad 3 for a higher price point.
I don't understand your post. What information did you get from this article that helped you make your decision?
Yet a retina display is a huge feature, and a big change in the norm, so Apple will definitely take advantage of that marketing wise, and iPad 3 just sounds better than iPad 2S, more complete.
1+5 = 6
A6!
It depends on your definition of "huge".
Personally, I'd never call this "huge".
The iPhone 3GS looks and feels like pretty much exactly like its predecessor, the 3G - save for the faster processor, which they well indicated with their "S is for speed" slogan. Exactly like the 4S looks and feels like the iPhone 4 (though the "S" might rather stand for "Siri" in this case). Non-Techies will and do hardly notice a difference between these two phones.
But everybody will notice a difference when picking up a retina display in comparison to the previous generation iPad.
Or maybe they're releasing a 7 inch version with an A5 and a full size that's faster...
Or I bet they're releasing one in April with an A5 then another one later on for Christmas sales..
No no, it's going to be an iPad with the A5 then an iPad pro with A6 and retina..
Or maybe, just mayb, Apple is going to do what they always do and release a product with good-not-great specs that still makes for an awesome user experience and a lot of whiny, entitled, bitchy posts (NOT directing this at who I quoted) on macrumors
Other way around. Reduced priced iPad 2 and current price point iPad 3. There simply is no way to justify higher price point iPads. The top end is already approaching the price of an 11" Air. Apple picked those price points for a reason - they represented the "sweet spot" at the time. But the low end isn't so low anymore -- reasonable, but not as impressive as it was in 2010. Way too much competition now to go hiking prices.
No. Tim Cook seems to be following Steve Jobs lead if you read some of his recent comments on smaller screens. No 7" in 2012 for sure.
I'd argue that the iPad 2's specs were great, and still are. Dual-core processor, and still the most powerful GPU in a mobile device today. It's most likely, imo, that we're going to see a higher clocked dual-core iPad 3, but I do hope they've managed to do it with the Cortex A15 and not the A9.
There's no way Apple will absorb the cost of the retina display, we'll be paying for it for sure. It's going to cost more than the other display, that's for sure. I'd be glad if they did manage to keep current price points though. I did think they'll keep the iPad 2 on though, at a lower price point, $399 as you said.
And you know this how? You are a fly on the wall during Apple negotiations? Executive meetings?
Tell me, when the iPhone 4 was announced w/ Retina did Apple increase the price? No. The market wouldn't allow it. Same goes for the iPad. Apple will squeeze the price somewhere, but it won't be consumers wallets. They'd get pounded by the press.
Obviously he cares more about the naming convention than the actual products or what they can do. Apple should call the next one A128, it'll be the best iPad ever. It doesn't matter what the specs are, with that A128 chip, it'll change the world.
Right. Who knows where Apple can save money. They bought that Israeli flash controller company- maybe they figure they can save some $ down the road with that. The case? Maybe it's just a slight retool from the iPad 2 case. Shave off some $ there. Volume? Hmm the highest selling iPad ever for them, maybe they can take another slight profit loss per unit because they know they're going to sell 50% more than last year. etc etc.
A6 (quad-core) beneficial?
Does iOS 5.x even have a Grand Central-like multi-core manager? I know there's the A5, but I don't believe Apple has ever disclosed how iOS manages multi-core hardware. It'd be interesting to know how Apple does it.
Does iOS 5.x even have a Grand Central-like multi-core manager? I know there's the A5, but I don't believe Apple has ever disclosed how iOS manages multi-core hardware. It'd be interesting to know how Apple does it.
Quite possibly.
It would be funny, if we continue to see - seemingly contradicting - leaks for two different products:
- iPad 2S, a slightly upgraded iPad 2, based on Apple A5X
- iPad 3 with an Apple A6 and/or quad-core part.
As for the rumors we've heard until now...
- Quad-Core and/or Cortex A15 architecture AND
- retina display AND
- LTE mobile data AND
- (implicitly) keeping same entry price point
...I find these hard to believe. Wishful thinking, that strikes me as being too good to be true. Retina displays pretty much seem a given now, so does a better graphics core. A better camera might make sense now, to go along with the improved display. If I had to pick, I'd rule out LTE first. Next-generation mobile wireless parts have always been power-hungry and expensive before becoming mature and/or widely adopted. LTE coverage is spotty at best, if not non-existent in many countries. So Apple doesn't really gain much from marketing LTE at the moment. And if history is any indication, Apple weren't exactly the first company to adopt a 3G wireless set in a mobile phone, but rather late to the party.
I can imagine imminent iPad 3 to be all about "graphics", i.e., improved display and camera. This might also also nicely tie in with the recent release of iBooks author. Cause - let's face it - textbooks currently do not look all that great, sharp and crisp and on the iPad's current 132dpi XGA resolution. Especially when compared to an iPhone retina display or real printed textbooks, for that matter. If you're going to sell "amazing textbooks", you better have a device with a great display!
Textbooks, however, do not need much faster processors than currently available. And they make a great demo case for a retina display - unlike games. Gaming and/or 3D apps might neither look nor feel "better" (higher-resolution or smoother & faster), either due to the higher display resolution consuming performance - or due to a simple lack of higher-resolution in-game/in-app graphics. A game running in XGA resolution upscaled to retina resolution shouldn't need much more processing power than on an iPad 2. But they will, once authors will have jumped on the HD/retina bandwagon.
Thus, Apple might then introduce a follow-up iPad 3S (Cortex A15 and LTE) on a "speed" theme at some later point, which very well might coincide with a new version of iOS (6?), bringing new software features to the table.
That would be all not unlike the transition from iPhone 4 to 4S.
Last edited:
While I think you're right about the market perception and how raising the price wouldn't be a wise move, you have to consider that you can't totally compare the iPad screen to the iPhone screen since the cost of making panels at both sizes are very different and the iPad's screen has much more value relatively to the device's total cost.
The iPhone 4's Retina display cost 28.50$ to make, a 48% cost increase over the iPhone 3GS's 19.25$ screen.
Considering it would similarly cost 48% more to make an iPad Retina Display, the price would go from 127.00$ to 187.96$.
The cost of adding a Retina Display in the iPhone represents 1.43% of the sale price of the iPhone.
The cost of adding a Retina Display in the iPad would represent around 12.21% of the sale price of the iPad.
Adding a Retina Display in an iPhone or iPad isn't the same price for Apple. It's almost 10 times more expensive in the iPad's case.
Just something to consider.
I have a hunch that there will only be one line of a next generation iPad (with perhaps the iPad 2 at 349-399 or so), that it will have a dual core ARM A15 on the Samsung 45 or 32nm process, probably close to the best PowerVR series 6 GPU, LTE, and a pixel quadrupled display.
Apple's making about $240 on the $499 iPad, and that's just the hardware the cost of the hardware. It's going to cost money to produce a retina display, and it's not like Apple to absorb it. Unlike with the iPhone 4, the cost for the retina display wasn't that great.
Mmm, I think we're more going to see a transition from 3GS to 4. Oh and unless a game is hard coded for a particular resolution, it should run at the native resolution. As long as the GPU is a 600 series, I'll be happy, because we won't lose "grunt" in any games.
Ah yes, you got me. This would of course rather be like transition from 3GS to 4.
Aren't in-game graphics "hard-coded" to a certain (maximum) dpi?
I am particularly thinking of textures, backgrounds and sprites...
I am not familiar with game development for iPads... did developers provide higher-resolution graphics than needed (for the iPad 1&2) in their titles - and since when have they done so?