I was torn between 16 and 32 GB, eventually I went for the 32. I looked on Ebay and noticed that 32 GB iPad 2 is selling on average for $70 more than the 16 GB, so I figured even if I don't need the extra storage (I am more of a streamer than storer, is that a word?), I can recoup most of my $100 investment when the 4th or 5th generation iPad appears.
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.
Sample Photos and Screenshots from 3rd Generation iPad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was torn between 16 and 32 GB, eventually I went for the 32. I looked on Ebay and noticed that 32 GB iPad 2 is selling on average for $70 more than the 16 GB, so I figured even if I don't need the extra storage (I am more of a streamer than storer, is that a word?), I can recoup most of my $100 investment when the 4th or 5th generation iPad appears.
It's not like they only had two weeks warning, this has been brewing for over a year...
I guess it's worth noting that at least iMovie did not increase in size because of the retina update, but mostly because of the new media (background music) included with the app.
...which of course does not change the fact that the app did increase in size significantly.But for me, the main argument for the 64GB version was the 1080p recording capability of the camera.
Media should be downloadable / removable in app. I use iMovie for quick cuts on set and have never used a stock theme - music etc. Waste of space.
I highly doubt that the lack of a 128GB option was an oversight. It was most likely tied to price point. They had to stick with the original price point, or catch hell with the consumer and Wall Street crowd. With a new high rez screen, camera, additional RAM, and quad core GPU, they probably reached the threshold of price point and margin. Not to mention, no other competitor has 128GB of internal storage, so it leaves something for next year when the prices of flash storage come down.
That said, I would have paid a hundred or so extra for a 128GB option.
I am interested to see if they are now using the retina graphics of iPhone apps if they have them when viewing on the new iPad at 2x mode or are still using the 360x480 version now at 4x?? Shame that RetinaPad hasn't become a standard feature of iOS even on the older iPads.
I really don't understand the massive difference in some of the app sizes - it's not like numbers and pages are graphics heavy.
Don't apple refer to macbook pros/airs by year? like MBP (early 2009) - at least in support documents etc
and the ipad is referred to on the Apple support pages by 'ipad (3rd generation)'
but 2012 is perfectly fine and lets people understand which model you're talking about nice and easily
You need an app for putting your post in the proper thread.
Unless the app has gotten so big and you don't have enough space.
Magic.
I wonder how my iPhone PvZ is going to look on the retina! I preferred it over the actual iPad edition.
Yeahh .. sure, but iPod never had iPod 4S gen, did it? Apple almost fell in cryptic naming system with their iPhone, and it's a good thing that they decided to stop it with "the new iPad".
Hey .. I have iMac 11.1 you know? And also MBA 2.1 .. oh they're both great machines. Oh wait, I meant I have mid 2011 iMac and late 2011 MBA ... But sure it doesn't help explain anything.
Oh yes they are, but not as marketing material, does it? You don't see MBA 3G or iMac 11G on their website. While iPhone was hugely labelled as 4S on their front page, and so did iPad before the new iPad announced last week. Either way it's just easier for us to label it by release year instead of meaningless X gen .. or 5S something. Glad if that helps you identify iPad or any iOS device better.
Last edited:
I highly doubt that the lack of a 128GB option was an oversight. It was most likely tied to price point. They had to stick with the original price point, or catch hell with the consumer and Wall Street crowd. With a new high rez screen, camera, additional RAM, and quad core GPU, they probably reached the threshold of price point and margin. Not to mention, no other competitor has 128GB of internal storage, so it leaves something for next year when the prices of flash storage come down.
That said, I would have paid a hundred or so extra for a 128GB option.
Yeah, but when you consider memory prices over the three years, Apple could have eliminated the 16GB, and made the three version 32,64,128 with the same price point.
That doesn't seem so out of this world to me when they are charging the same for 32gigs as they did when the iPad 1 came out.
What's awesome about them? They're not all that sharp and there's no dynamic range: there's no black levels in them. Those could probably be boosted in post-processing, but natively, those pictures posted aren't actually very good.
Having said that, the best camera to own is the one you have with you, so if the iPad is all you have on you and there's a picture needing to be taken, "there's nothing wrong with that". I was at a friend's house and a kid started playing the violin and the iPad was right there and turned on, so I used it to record video. Did a fine job under those circumstances.
The iPad might do as well as a bottom-of-the-line point and shoot, but once you get above that into the better point-and-shoots or m4/3 cameras, the Sony NEX line, the Nikon 1 line and cameras like it (never mind DSLRs), they all will do better than an iPad (or iPhone).
Can somebody who is smarter than me explain to me if these screenshots have any use in evaluating the screen?
I don't want to seem ungrateful or trollish. I am all in on this iPad. Mine is in a truck in Middletown, PA.
And I thank MacRumors for sharing any and all info they can. That all said.
If you take a pic of higher resolution screen than any monitor that can display it, does it have any real value in terms of screen evaluation?
Can somebody send these guys a macro lens?
I don't want to seem ungrateful or trollish. I am all in on this iPad. Mine is in a truck in Middletown, PA.
And I thank MacRumors for sharing any and all info they can. That all said.
If you take a pic of higher resolution screen than any monitor that can display it, does it have any real value in terms of screen evaluation?
Can somebody send these guys a macro lens?
Forget photos... the bigger story is how crisp and sharp the screen is. Beautiful.
I can't wait to see one in person.
Click for full size:
Oh... and for comparison... can someone share a screenshot from the iPad 2?
um.
how can we discern the quality of the iPad Retina display by viewing a photo on a display with less resolution than the iPad? why not just wait till Friday and look at it IRL?
They're not running pixel-double, that's stretching an app like when you run an iPhone app at 2x on the iPad -- the apps on iPad 3 are scaling up like any app does, it's just they've not been updated with high res images yet.
Exactly! Looking at an image of the new iPad screen on a PC monitor that is several years old is an exercise in futility.
