Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If the rumors about iOS 8 having split-screen multitasking are correct, then most certainly, "Yes."

But if those rumors are correct, then most certainly, propel would be complaining that 2GB isn't enough, we need 4!
 
Lets just say in IOS 7 just now we have 1GB RAM - 500Mb for OS leaving 500MB to run the foreground app.

If we got split screen multitasking with 2GB RAM then - 500MB for OS leaving 1.5GB for two foreground apps or 750MB each. A nice 50% increase. Without the split screen, we would have 1.5GB available or a 200% increase.
Either way, I wouldn't expect to go beyond 2GB this time round and it would still be a nice increase available for apps.

The above is very rudimentary and not true of how RAM is used in a system but illustrates why such an increase would be of great benefit.
 
i think the ram and heavy website thing is ********. my 5 year old lenovo netbook with atom processor and 1 gb ram can have 20 tabs open without crashing. apple have seriously screwed something up. shame!
 
i think the ram and heavy website thing is ********. my 5 year old lenovo netbook with atom processor and 1 gb ram can have 20 tabs open without crashing. apple have seriously screwed something up. shame!

What was your resolution? Also, Windows has a swap file, iOS doesn't. Not a fair comparison.

IPad Retina resolution, 64-bit, Safari, no swap file, and 1GB of RAM isn't a good mix.
 
i think the ram and heavy website thing is ********. my 5 year old lenovo netbook with atom processor and 1 gb ram can have 20 tabs open without crashing. apple have seriously screwed something up. shame!

It is because Windows has a swap file - a file on the hard drive to simulate extra RAM.
 
i m guessing people will complain about battery life first, haha

You mentioned this in another post, too. The iPad has gone from 256MB to 512MB to 1GB with no drop in battery life. I think Apple will make sure the 2GB iPad will have the same 10 hour battery life. No one has ever complained about battery life on the iPad.
 
You mentioned this in another post, too. The iPad has gone from 256MB to 512MB to 1GB with no drop in battery life. I think Apple will make sure the 2GB iPad will have the same 10 hour battery life. No one has ever complained about battery life on the iPad.

i m talking about after they have the split screen multitasking
 
i m talking about after they have the split screen multitasking

It might. But I don't see Apple deviating from its 10 hour battery life estimates. Technology should offer more benefits over time, not stand still. More RAM and better multitasking will benefit many users at a minimal cost.
 
It could, if Apple had written iOS that way, but they didn't. I don't know why. Perhaps more knowledgable members can explain.

Most likely because IOS devices use flash ram which have limited write cycles. A swap file continually writing to the free space on flash memory would shorten it's lifespan.
 
Why can´t an iOS-unit have that?

It could, if Apple had written iOS that way, but they didn't. I don't know why. Perhaps more knowledgable members can explain.

Most likely because IOS devices use flash ram which have limited write cycles. A swap file continually writing to the free space on flash memory would shorten it's lifespan.

It is possible for Apple to enable a swap file/paging. In fact, Microsoft recently enabled it on Windows Phone.

Limited write cycles is not the reason why Apple hasn't enabled paging. This reasoning applies to the SSDs in computers just as much as flash storage in phones and tablets. The paging in OS X is just as destructive as paging in iOS. And any storage performance degradation requires so many write cycles that users would not notice anything during and beyond the device's lifetime.

The real reason why Apple has not enabled a paging or a swap file on iOS devices is because flash storage is much slower than SSDs and hard drives. When a user runs out of RAM, the sluggishness and slowdown on iOS devices would be much worse than on computers.
 
RAM is cheap, not sure why Apple will not include a 4GB RAM in their $500 iPads. The upcoming iPad is the 6th generation, they should be having a serious RAM upgrade.
 
RAM is cheap, not sure why Apple will not include a 4GB RAM in their $500 iPads. The upcoming iPad is the 6th generation, they should be having a serious RAM upgrade.

The answers have been given very clearly here in this very thread already.
 
RAM is cheap, not sure why Apple will not include a 4GB RAM in their $500 iPads. The upcoming iPad is the 6th generation, they should be having a serious RAM upgrade.

Planned obsolescence. Apple wants to sell more iPads. Why let them actuall last longer?
 
Planned obsolescence. Apple wants to sell more iPads. Why let them actuall last longer?

+1
Apple's goal is not to make you happy. Apple's goal is to extract as much money as possible from you; while making you believe that you are happy.
 
+1
Apple's goal is not to make you happy. Apple's goal is to extract as much money as possible from you; while making you believe that you are happy.

No one forces you to buy Apple.
I buy them because they are very, very good. But I'm sure they would be so much better if they took the advise of everyone on this forum....
 
What's going to happen if it does have 2GB of RAM and certain websites still crash safari or reload tabs? It could be the biggest human meltdown ever. Then, we can read thread after thread about how the Air should have 5 GB of RAM.

Grab yer favorite popcorn and blanket..... This is gonna be good.... :D

I think that you are 100 % RIGHT !
:)
 
one can only hope :)

With the price of ram getting cheaper, Apple could even more future proof it by adding 3gb ram like the galaxy note 10.1 that i'm currently using
 
iOS is far more memory efficient than Android.
No doubt, at some point in the future, an increase will be necessary but I don't think that time has come yet. Maybe it will with iOS8 but who, apart from Apple, knows.

Seriously? Get off that high horse for Apple. The fact that my $500 tablet constantly crashes and refreshes tabs is a joke. And I'm not in the minority, the time for more RAM is now.
 
Seriously? Get off that high horse for Apple. The fact that my $500 tablet constantly crashes and refreshes tabs is a joke. And I'm not in the minority, the time for more RAM is now.

Seriously?
If the problem is RAM then I'm sure Apple will increase it, but my assertion that iOS is more memory efficient than Android surely is not in doubt.
 
Seriously?
If the problem is RAM then I'm sure Apple will increase it, but my assertion that iOS is more memory efficient than Android surely is not in doubt.

So what? Android does a lot more than iOS and it uses CPU and memory accordingly. MacOS uses more RAM than iOS, too. Does that make it more inefficient?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.