For that there is a bigger Device called the Retina Macbook Pro !
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.
Why did Apple not give 4GB RAM on the 9.7" iPad Pro ?
- Thread starter augustya
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For that there is a bigger Device called the Retina Macbook Pro !
I'm okay for 2GB of RAM if the price stays the same. I was using a 64GB iPad Air 2 with LTE, if I have to upgrade to the equivalent iPad Pro 9.7 I would have to go for the 128GB with LTE which is 21% more expensive, without even considering the price of the Smart Keyboard.
I don't think there is a need. It's not Windows 10 or OS X. I'm pretty sure nothing is running out of space, or at least I haven't heard anything about that. I also haven't heard anything about developers complaining. The only people complaining are spec heads in these forums 
I expect that 1GB devices will be supported for a while longer still. We still have the iPhone 5, 5S, iPad mini 2 and 3 and the iPad 4 and air. They have have a good few years left of support between them. It will be a while before Apple make 2GB of ram the cut off point for continuing OS updates.
[doublepost=1459151750][/doublepost]
They could have updates the design if they wanted to. It wouldn't have taken much to modify the iPod touch design for the SE.
Maybe they wanted to keep it lighter and were worried about adding too much weight.
Agree. I can't understand people going drama queen about page refresh in Safari.
Yes, it's annoying, but still usable.
And by the way with 2 Gb of ram I still have to see page refresh...
[doublepost=1459158260][/doublepost]
And Tim Cook mailed it to you directly?
Because since the screen is smaller it does not read that much RAM. With the IOS optimisations its performance will be really good.
How much would a 4GB RAM from 2GB RAM weigh ? I have seen how a RAM looks it is hardly any weight ? I dont think it would have added to any weight infact zilch had they ramped it up from 2GB to 4GB ! Weight was certainly not the issue from 2GB to 4GB ! Hardly any weight !!
I keep seeing this argument, but it simple doesn't stand up. The 9.7 retina display takes up 12MB of memory while the 12.9 takes up 22MB. Assuming you need two additional frame buffers to smooth things out you're looking at the 12.9 inch needing an extra 30MB in RAM, which is less than 2% extra RAM usage of 2GB. As the PPI is the same between the two devices the memory needed for textures etc will not change.
That being the case I believe the small pro does not have the 4GB because it has a smaller screen and users will be far less likely to run two apps side by side in split view. It isn't needed when users predominately use just one app at a time.
Why? Because it costs Apple less and they can get away with it.
For end users 4GB of ram would have only brought positives - (Better long term performance, ability to open more tabs, device longevity).
Apple's choice will almost definitely make the 9.7 inch Pro have a shorter life than the 12.9 inch model. Given the price rise, I find that unacceptable. However as I say, people don't really pay attention to this stuff. They will however realise in the future.
[doublepost=1459164775][/doublepost]
That is a clear example of Apple defence in action.
This is not some cheap Android or Windows tablet we're talking about. This is a top of the line (supposedly) iPad that Apple has just jacked the price up on. If you think page refreshes are ok then thats fine, but for a premium device it is not really acceptable, especially when Apple promotes these as 'PC replacements'. Plenty of people have workflows that involve a lot of tabs and constant reloading ruins that experience. I personally will often have 20-30 open while doing research essays, as you need lot of sources.
iPads with 2GB of ram are Much improved on the pitiful 1GB of ram in the earlier iPads, where page reloading was a fact of life, but at a 'pro' level, the improvements should be top of the line.
And this is not some hate on every apple decision comment, it is an expression of my disappointment that Apple has decided to save money, instead of ensuring the long term usability and longevity of a very expensive product it sells. I would have probably bought one to replace my iPad 2, but given I know it will probably not last as long as the 12.9 inch model, it is extremely hard to justify handing over around the same amount I paid for my Macbook Pro (which will definitely last longer than an iPad).
[doublepost=1459164937][/doublepost]
Yes but every other year apple has made improvements to the iPad, adding new features etc, and the price hasn't risen. They;ve just used the excuse of branding it as a 'pro' product to jack up the price.
For end users 4GB of ram would have only brought positives - (Better long term performance, ability to open more tabs, device longevity).
Apple's choice will almost definitely make the 9.7 inch Pro have a shorter life than the 12.9 inch model. Given the price rise, I find that unacceptable. However as I say, people don't really pay attention to this stuff. They will however realise in the future.
[doublepost=1459164775][/doublepost]
That is a clear example of Apple defence in action.
This is not some cheap Android or Windows tablet we're talking about. This is a top of the line (supposedly) iPad that Apple has just jacked the price up on. If you think page refreshes are ok then thats fine, but for a premium device it is not really acceptable, especially when Apple promotes these as 'PC replacements'. Plenty of people have workflows that involve a lot of tabs and constant reloading ruins that experience. I personally will often have 20-30 open while doing research essays, as you need lot of sources.
iPads with 2GB of ram are Much improved on the pitiful 1GB of ram in the earlier iPads, where page reloading was a fact of life, but at a 'pro' level, the improvements should be top of the line.
And this is not some hate on every apple decision comment, it is an expression of my disappointment that Apple has decided to save money, instead of ensuring the long term usability and longevity of a very expensive product it sells. I would have probably bought one to replace my iPad 2, but given I know it will probably not last as long as the 12.9 inch model, it is extremely hard to justify handing over around the same amount I paid for my Macbook Pro (which will definitely last longer than an iPad).
[doublepost=1459164937][/doublepost]
Yes but every other year apple has made improvements to the iPad, adding new features etc, and the price hasn't risen. They;ve just used the excuse of branding it as a 'pro' product to jack up the price.
There is a level of future proofing you can do - choosing models that have upped the CPU and GPU and are the first to have a higher level of ram. This is why for example the 3GS lasted longer than the 3G significantly. Or the iPad 2 vs the iPad 1. Or the iPod Touch 5 vs the 4.
The example of the iPod Touch 4 vs the iPhone 4 is a great one. They both had pretty much the same GPU and CPU performance, but the Touch 4 was already struggling by iOS 6, (arguably iOS 5), but the iPhone 4 was pretty ok with iOS 5 and 6, and got a year extra of support. The difference? The Touch 4 had 256MB of ram, and the iPhone 4 was the first to have 512MB of ram.
One of the things that annoys me about this move is that while iOS doesn't need 4GB and runs great on 2GB and for the most part with 1GB on newer devices, some apps really could use the extra RAM.
I'm citing Aerofly 2 as an example. Now granted, a flight simulator is not the norm and is in many ways an extreme example but the jump in performance between the Air (1GB) and Air 2 (2GB) is clearly evident and the developers are saying RAM is their biggest limitation with iOS devices which is frustrating them because the graphics performance truly is great for a mobile device. Given the further performance increases with the iPad Pro, sticking with 2GB will hurt development of resource hungry apps. One of the reasons I'll be sticking with the Air 2 for the time being.
I'm citing Aerofly 2 as an example. Now granted, a flight simulator is not the norm and is in many ways an extreme example but the jump in performance between the Air (1GB) and Air 2 (2GB) is clearly evident and the developers are saying RAM is their biggest limitation with iOS devices which is frustrating them because the graphics performance truly is great for a mobile device. Given the further performance increases with the iPad Pro, sticking with 2GB will hurt development of resource hungry apps. One of the reasons I'll be sticking with the Air 2 for the time being.
Regardless of Apple's marketing guff if you want to be doing all of that and have 25+ tabs open you need to buy a computer period. Even if it had 4GB ram you're not going to be able to run 25 tabs on an iPad running iOS.
My argument there was that a certain person was essentially saying that tab reloading wasn't an issue, and I was just giving an example of a situation where tab reloading would be annoying. There are many examples where tab reloading would be annoying for far fewer tabs.
The iPod touch is extremely thin and would not have fit the internals of a phone and camera
And yes, they could have updated the design, BUT THAT COSTS $$$, which is my point, they're are just getting rid of years old spare iPhone 5 parts
YES to ALL OF THIS lol.
My thoughts exactly. It was everything people wanted, until a report about 2GB vs 4GB came out of nowhere. I'm getting it because it's everything I need it to be for the next 2 years.
And personally I think people are buying this "Pro" tablet for all the wrong reasons. I cringe when someone says "I bought it for Netflix". This version of the iPad is for PRO-artists, not PROductivity (although it can) or PROsumers (although they can buy it). They purchase something not even meant for them, and then complain about every little thing. This is NOT a Netflix viewing tablet, and I think people are insane to spend $1000+ just for things like that.
lol, 20-30 tabs open on a tablet...
And blame Apple for using a tablet like that...
This is a clear example of Apple bashing in action (incidentally by the same people on the forum).
My advice: buy a MacBook. With 8 Gb of RAM and a blazing fast SSD you could enjoy 20-30 tabs with no refresh.
[doublepost=1459171618][/doublepost]
indeed, but with 4 Gb he could rant about it not having 8 Gb
[doublepost=1459171773][/doublepost]
you can take it backwards: 2 Gb of ram on the iPhone 6S and iPad Pro are granting you that lazy developers will optimize their apps without wasting resources.
I used to run much more complex flight simulators on PC with less than 2 Gb of RAM....
Agreed. But are people really arguing against the fact that more RAM increases the longevity of a device?
nope.
And 8 Gb would have been even better than 4 Gb...
But the point is: was it really necessary as of today ?
I don't think anyone expected us to see the jump from 2GB to 4GB so soon in an iOS device but it was welcome with the iPad Pro 12.9". The problem is the Pro 9.7" only having 2GB causes fragmentation as any app created for a Pro iPad will need to work on a 2GB device instead. An app that requires the 4GB will need to clearly state not all Pro devices are supported and this then leads developers to create Pro apps that are targeting 2GB as a requirement instead of 4GB. It doesn't make a lot of sense to both the developers and the consumer.
Pro-artist? My worry would be how well this thing is going to handle, for example, Affinity Designer or Affinity Photo or even Procreate running split-screen. 2GB isn't an awful lot when running two pro-level, fully featured creative tools side by side. Especially if you're creating artwork with a large number of layers. I'd say the 9.7 may struggle with it, while the 12.9 inch would handle it with aplomb.
True that.
Bottom-line, Apple didn't need to and they weren't going to of their own volition...so we'll likely have to endure one more iteration of the iPad before we get to the promised land.