All iPads Will the next iPad Air 2 finally have 2 GB of memory?

[Night Spring]

So basically the average user is a power user.

Have you done market research to see how many tabs an average user keeps open? Or what percentage of users want to multitask on an iPad anyway? Or even know that it is possible to multitask on an iPad?

I don't know. Perhaps, like many here, they don't really use tabs. But what is more likely, is that they are not constructing a post in a web forum, switch to another tab to research, then come back to the original tab that is refreshing to lose all they had typed.

In other words, it's an issue that only bothers people who post on forums. Meaning, complaints about this issue is going to be over-represented on internet forums. People who don't post on forums, which I'm guessing probably vastly outnumbers those who do, wouldn't care.

There is BIG hollow area at the top of my iPad Air. They could use that empty space.

That big hollow area contains wifi, Bluetooth, and cellular radios, I believe.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Not arguing about whether or not adding SD slots to iPads are a good idea, but there is one good reason other than profit to leave them out -- they add thickness to the device.

NanoSim Card size: 12.3×8.8×0.67mm
MicroSD Card size: 15×11×1mm

Yes, it's a tiny bit longer & wider than the nano sim in the iPhone: < 3mm longer, <3mm wider, a fraction of a mm thicker. I don't think the thickness of the device would need to change one bit to fit it in if Apple wanted to do so.

It's also another movable part that can be broken.

What's movable. The slot sled or the door? Otherwise, it's no more movable than the sim card Apple already builds into some iDevices.

Plus, those people who desperately scramble to delete space off their iOS devices because they run out of space for their videos have obviously not planned ahead. I bet a majority of them will also arrive at their big events without extra memory cards, even if the iPad had slots for them.

Perhaps, but on my camcorder, I'll capture about 50GB-60GB at one of these events myself. So if I was using an iPad with 64GB, I'd have to pretty much clear it out completely to do that (which is not practical or realistic). On the other hand, an iPad with a slot could take a 64GB MicroSD card now plus onboard storage or I could swap cards between games.

Furthermore, if you know much about these club sports, they are often at distant cities where families will sometimes add a few days before of after to squeeze in some vacation time. If one planned ahead and cleared their iDevice and filled the space with video, they might not have the apps, etc they need on the device to do whatever else they do with it. So then it's a need to bring a computer along for syncing and reloading or going the wifi hard drive route or similar- both of which are much more onerous than a tiny MicroSD card that could sit in one's wallet.

I'm not saying this is needed for everyone, but neither is a sim card slot or Siri or iRadio or iTunes Match. I am saying it would be nice and offer a great amount of utility (and added value) for those where 64GB or 128GB is not enough.

----------

The way people here are defining a power user is one who multi-tasks between apps frequently and has many Safari tabs open simultaneously. If you don't do this, 1GB is sufficient.

I sometimes have just 3 Safari tabs open and little else and it will need to reload those tabs. I often have < 4 apps open at once because I try to be a RAM usage miser. The picture you paint is not my reality. I'd much prefer more RAM.

64bit processor + multitasking in 1GB RAM almost makes no sense technically. The Amiga could do it back in the late 1980s but we've come a long way since then. Even Amiga wasn't driving Retina screens.

 

[Night Spring]

What's movable. The slot sled or the door? Otherwise, it's no more movable than the sim card Apple already builds into some iDevices.

That's the thing -- I have iPads with SIM card slots, and they make me nervous every time I have to open them to swap cards, because they feel so easily breakable.

Perhaps, but on my camcorder, I'll capture about 50GB-60GB at one of these events myself. So if I was using an iPad with 64GB, I'd have to pretty much clear it out completely to do that (which is not practical or realistic).

So then obviously a 64GB iPad isn't the right device for the job.

I feel like people who don't bring along a dedicated camera for a big event aren't really serious about getting photos/videos of that event. Yes, for some usages, having a SIM card slot will make things easier, but still, having extra SIM cards along is something you have to think about and plan ahead about. I don't think Apple envisions its customers that way -- the ideal mobile device Apple has in mind is something where you just bring the device itself and forget about needing any other accessories than the charging cable. Have they hit that ideal? Well, no, it still needs work. But adding a SIM card slot isn't in line with Apple's vision for mobile devices. You can disagree with that ideal, but it's not likely Apple will change their mind.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I don't expect Apple to change it's mind. Apple does whatever Apple wants to do. They spin their view of perfection to us and we each have to decide if it's close enough to our own view of perfection to part with our money or not.

That said, I'm a consumer that would like that option myself. And I have a dedicated camcorder for that kind of purpose. So why would I want it? One less thing to carry. I also have a quality camera too but Apple chose to build a camera into all iDevices that I consider good enough for most camera purposes. So I can leave the dedicated camera at home most of the time and just take the iDevice.

That's the point. Apple builds these "do everything" devices so some want to try to utilize them for everything. However, there are limitations built into them. Some of those limitations like this one could be cheaply solved for users with needs bigger than 64GB or now 128GB without much compromise. And it's already a technology that Apple endorses by building slots into other Apple hardware.

Right now, iDevices are hard capped at whatever size storage you buy. If you find you need more than you bought, you must buy a new iDevice. This option would make the storage part of things more flexible- even scalable to somewhat grow with your needs. In other words, they would give more useful life to iDevices. Apple may not want that because they'd rather motivate us all to buy new as often as possible.

I accept it won't happen. But it doesn't change my mind about wishing for it.

 

[Dmunjal]

I don't expect Apple to change it's mind. Apple does whatever Apple wants to do. They spin their view of perfection to us and we each have to decide if it's close enough to our own view of perfection to part with our money or not.

That said, I'm a consumer that would like that option myself. And I have a dedicated camcorder for that kind of purpose. So why would I want it? One less thing to carry. I also have a quality camera too but Apple chose to build a camera into all iDevices that I consider good enough for most camera purposes. So I can leave the dedicated camera at home most of the time and just take the iDevice.

That's the point. Apple builds these "do everything" devices so some want to try to utilize them for everything. However, there are limitations built into them. Some of those limitations like this one could be cheaply solved for users with needs bigger than 64GB or now 128GB without much compromise. And it's already a technology that Apple endorses by building slots into other Apple hardware.

Right now, iDevices are hard capped at whatever size storage you buy. If you find you need more than you bought, you must buy a new iDevice. This option would make the storage part of things more flexible- even scalable to somewhat grow with your needs. In other words, they would give more useful life to iDevices. Apple may not want that because they'd rather motivate us all to buy new as often as possible.

I accept it won't happen. But it doesn't change my mind about wishing for it.

The lack of RAM and expandable storage is to create better average profit margins for the entire product line. Period. Competition might change this in time.

 

[Plutonius]

You're providing Apple's perspective. What about the users? Everyone complains about the RAM. No one complains about the battery life. In this example, Apple got it wrong.

Of course I'm providing Apple's prospective . They are the ones building / selling the iPads. I myself would like 10GB of RAM but, from Apple's prospective, 1GB is all you need for most users. Apple (and all other companies) run cost analysis and Apple decided that 1GB is the right amount.

As far as the battery, people aren't complaining because Apple picked the right sized battery. If you had a smaller battery that got less life than a previous gen iPad, then you would hear them.

Do you not think Apply might ask for $30 more for that upgrade? You know, like doubling flash for $100 more.

Or, do you not think that the shrinking cost of other things in the platform could wash out a $5 cost increase.

And yes, $100 million in addition cost on 20 million units sold. 20 million units sold at- say- $599 = just under $12 Billion. Even if it would cost Apple that $100M, $100M/$12B = less than 1% of what they make in revenues on that 20 million units.

So yes, when you do the math to only show a big number of units times any cost it can look like a WHOLE lot of money. But then you do the same math on- say- average selling price of each unit sold and it can again look like a dirt cheap amount for a big benefit.

Apple has set prices and margins for it's iPads. They would never add $30 to the price but they could remove $30 worth of cost. Unfortunately, this cost savings would only be applicable when a new design revision is created (i.e. the shrinking cost is only generally applicable when a new design comes out (Apple pre buys much of the parts and board designs do not change after release except for bug fixes)). Once Apple releases a design, the cost (labor, parts, manufacturing, etc) will not change much.

 

[Night Spring]

And it's already a technology that Apple endorses by building slots into other Apple hardware.

I wouldn't call it "endorsing." More like "grudgingly supporting." As far as I can see, they are trying to get rid of slots whenever they can. They got rid of optical drive slots in most newer Mac models -- I can't remember if the latest iMacs have any memory card slots in the back, but they sure don't have them on the sides. The MacBook Air still has slots but the 11 inch model has one less slot than the 13 inch one, and I wouldn't be surprised if the slots went away completely in the next MBA design refresh. And seeing how more and more peripherals are moving to wireless, I expect Apple to be the first to drop USB when enough peripherals go wireless.

 

[Plutonius]

I wouldn't call it "endorsing." More like "grudgingly supporting." As far as I can see, they are trying to get rid of slots whenever they can. They got rid of optical drive slots in most newer Mac models -- I can't remember if the latest iMacs have any memory card slots in the back, but they sure don't have them on the sides. The MacBook Air still has slots but the 11 inch model has one less slot than the 13 inch one, and I wouldn't be surprised if the slots went away completely in the next MBA design refresh. And seeing how more and more peripherals are moving to wireless, I expect Apple to be the first to drop USB when enough peripherals go wireless.

With the cost / size requirements of USB, I doubt they will drop it anytime soon (i.e. small / cheap and used by everyone).

 

[Night Spring]

With the cost / size requirements of USB, I doubt they will drop it anytime soon (i.e. small / cheap and used by everyone).

You are right that it is too much in use to drop, but I bet it's on the top of things they'd like to drop. I imagine every year at hardware design meetings, it's like "Can we drop USB yet? No? Okay, maybe next year, then."

 

[CosmoFox]

Nobody knows, but I think the iPad runs fine with what it currently has.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I wouldn't call it "endorsing." More like "grudgingly supporting." As far as I can see, they are trying to get rid of slots whenever they can. They got rid of optical drive slots in most newer Mac models

Of course. Since they got to get rid of that technology, they cut the price too right? No. So they took out some user utility but they didn't cut the price- just pocketed the extra margin.

And sure they'd like to get rid of SD slots for the same reasoning. They don't get anything out of including it. If they can kick it out, there's a little more savings. Will the price come down though? No.

It's not that they're getting rid of slots for us consumers. It's just more profitable if they can get rid of anything within but still charge just as much after they do it. Spin "thin" like it's some tangible benefit for a desktop, take out a Superdrive, keep the price the same and all is fine because we got "thin" edges while only losing a Superdrive. GREAT!

----------

Apple has set prices and margins for it's iPads. They would never add $30 to the price but they could remove $30 worth of cost.

So in a new design they probably could go 2GB and through design efficiencies pocket an extra $25 while bringing that benefit.

As to "never increase price", how about when a new iPad Mini went retina? How about when MacBooks went from $999 to $1099? Isn't there a recurring rumor about trying to add $100 to the cost of the next iPhone? How about taking a TON of utility out of the Mac Pro then launching a new Mac Pro (mini) for much higher prices?

How about adding 64GB to flash storage at a higher price for the 128GB? So why not add 1GB or more to RAM and charge a bit more for it if that's what it took?

That said, I don't think they would need to increase the price to still get their margins. They simply need to decide that a 64bit processor with a multitasking OS and customers griping about Safari tabbed page reloads could probably use a bit more RAM than 1GB. Then do it.

 

[Plutonius]

So in a new design they probably could go 2GB and through design efficiencies pocket an extra $25 while bringing that benefit.

Yep and I hope they do.

 

[Traverse]

With the cost / size requirements of USB, I doubt they will drop it anytime soon (i.e. small / cheap and used by everyone).

Exactly. The disk drive was already being dropped by competitors, but not even Apple would be foolish enough to drop USB yet.


As for the RAM issue. I'm not sure. With iOS 6 and before 1GB did the job since you were allowed only one app at a time. But with more multitasking and 64bit apps 1GB is becoming inadequate for even Apple's one app limits (Safari ), I could see them putting 1.5 GB, which would be stupid.

 

[Count Blah]

In other words, it's an issue that only bothers people who post on forums. Meaning, complaints about this issue is going to be over-represented on internet forums. People who don't post on forums, which I'm guessing probably vastly outnumbers those who do, wouldn't care.



That big hollow area contains wifi, Bluetooth, and cellular radios, I believe.

the non-cellular models really have a hollow area.

No, the tab refresh effects people who actually want to compare items between tabs.

 

[Night Spring]

the non-cellular models really have a hollow area.

So are you suggesting that they build wifi-only models with memory card slots, while cellular models don't have them? Just imagine the outrage if they did such a thing!

No, the tab refresh effects people who actually want to compare items between tabs.

If you are just comparing two tabs, then a refresh only makes you wait, not lose your work like you do when posting to forums. I think one is vastly more annoying than the other.

 

[Count Blah]

So are you suggesting that they build wifi-only models with memory card slots, while cellular models don't have them? Just imagine the outrage if they did such a thing!.

NO!!! I'm saying the most thin tablet in the history of the universe has a huge void in the non- cellular version. If apple could engineer that, the could work on making up some space in the cellular version given the march of miniturization over time. But apple would NEVER give user more choices, when the other option is to make a product .0001" thinner.

If you are just comparing two tabs, then a refresh only makes you wait, not lose your work like you do when posting to forums. I think one is vastly more annoying than the other.

You also lose your place on the page. If I am reading something, then go to another tAb to look something up, then you come back to the reloaded page. You have to go searching for where you left off. This happens with as few as two tabs and ONLY safari open. That is a pod user experience that you want to excuse away.

 

[HenryDJP]

You also lose your place on the page. If I am reading something, then go to another tAb to look something up, then you come back to the reloaded page. You have to go searching for where you left off. This happens with as few as two tabs and ONLY safari open. That is a pod user experience that you want to excuse away.

I'm certainly not discounting what you're saying because the tab reloading is annoying to me too but I don't experience much issue with only two tabs. That's pushing it a bit. I'll tell you where I've had this happen with only two tabs. At times when I've visited Flickr and viewing photos in two separate tabs. To be fair Flickr is very taxing even on my quad core i7 iMac 3.4ghz with 16GB ram so it's understandable, but you were talking about reading text pages. I've never had reloading issues with text pages unless I've left a tab for 15 to 20 minutes and went back to it but then again it depends on what I was doing in the other tab. For the most part 2 tabs hardly cause tab reloading for me.

 

[mangomind]

Compared to iPads 1 through 4, it costs Apple $36-42 less to make the iPad Air. Apple can absolutely afford the ~$8 needed to increase RAM to 2GB.

32/64/128GB storage was cheaper in summer 2013 than 16/32/64GB was in summer 2011. The time has arrived for Apple to move to a 32/64/128GB lineup.

The aforementioned upgrades are no-brainers. But instead Apple may sit back and watch component prices decline and profit margins grow.

 

[Dmunjal]

Compared to iPads 1 through 4, it costs Apple $36-42 less to make the iPad Air. Apple can absolutely afford the ~$8 needed to increase RAM to 2GB.

32/64/128GB storage was cheaper in summer 2013 than 16/32/64GB was in summer 2011. The time has arrived for Apple to move to a 32/64/128GB lineup.

The aforementioned upgrades are no-brainers. But instead Apple may sit back and watch component prices decline and profit margins grow.

Or keep losing market share. Which is what's happening now.

 

[mangomind]

Or keep losing market share. Which is what's happening now.

Apple is more worried about profit margins than market share. This is better for stockholders but worse for consumers.

 

[HenryDJP]

Or keep losing market share. Which is what's happening now.

But there's no proof that the reason they are losing market share (and it's not really that much) on the iPad is due to the specs not being super awesome. The consumer buying market generally wants something super cool, new and different. I hardly think they are going to jump on the iPad because it has 2GB or more of ram. Apple doesn't even advertise how much ram is in the iPad.
Spec whores are hardly the majority. In fact they are so far in the minority that they are hardly putting a dent in Apple's market share if they were to stop buying iPads.

 

[Dmunjal]

But there's no proof that the reason they are losing market share (and it's not really that much) on the iPad is due to the specs not being super awesome. The consumer buying market generally wants something super cool, new and different. I hardly think they are going to jump on the iPad because it has 2GB or more of ram. Apple doesn't even advertise how much ram is in the iPad.
Spec whores are hardly the majority. In fact they are so far in the minority that they are hardly putting a dent in Apple's market share if they were to stop buying iPads.

IPad share has been declining every quarter for a couple of years now. They still make the best tablet but many are finding better value with other vendors. Price a iPad with 1GB of RAM and 64GB compared to other tablets with 2GB and a 64GB MicroSD card. It's not about being a a spec whore. People have given several examples how they would benefit from more RAM or expandable storage. Practical examples.

Apple will come around if they keep losing share. They finally figured out the big screen iPhone after being in denial for two years.

 

[iSee]

...Apple can absolutely afford the ~$8 needed to increase RAM to 2GB....

More RAM means (two or, more likely, three of these):
- iPad costs more
- iPad weighs more
- iPad battery lasts less
- iPad is bigger (less portable)
- iPad loses something else

So there needs to be a real purpose.
NOT one people make up in their heads (I think I pretty much debunked the idea that iOS Safari reloads are due to RAM -- I noticed zero counter-arguments so I assume you all agree )

There's always something that Apple could be add -- for "$8" -- but they have to draw the line somewhere.

I think 1 GB more RAM that doesn't do anything but make certain people fawn over a spec sheet is a good place to draw the line.

 

[HenryDJP]

IPad share has been declining every quarter for a couple of years now. They still make the best tablet but many are finding better value with other vendors. Price a iPad with 1GB of RAM and 64GB compared to other tablets with 2GB and a 64GB MicroSD card. It's not about being a a spec whore. People have given several examples how they would benefit from more RAM or expandable storage. Practical examples.

Apple will come around if they keep losing share. They finally figured out the big screen iPhone after being in denial for two years.

I understand that but you're missing my point entirely. I'm saying that the majority of people that buy tablets are not sitting around saying "iPad needs more ram or a faster processor or multitasking. Apple giving the "kitchen sink" in the iPad is not going to necessarily raise the market share....and who honestly cares about "market share"? It doesn't define the success of a product. It just gives unnecessary bragging rights and it really shouldn't matter to the end customer. Yeah, sure a computer in General would benefit from better performance specs. When you reminded me how people here gave examples on how more ram would be beneficial you conveniently ignored the rest of the forum mentioning how more ram can eat on the battery life.

While I would realistically love to have it all I would gladly prefer just enough ram to get much better battery life. I mean we are talking about a tablet for goodness sake.

 

[mangomind]

More RAM means (two or, more likely, three of these):
- iPad costs more
- iPad weighs more
- iPad battery lasts less
- iPad is bigger (less portable)
- iPad loses something else

So there needs to be a real purpose.
NOT one people make up in their heads (I think I pretty much debunked the idea that iOS Safari reloads are due to RAM -- I noticed zero counter-arguments so I assume you all agree )

There's always something that Apple could be add -- for "$8" -- but they have to draw the line somewhere.

I think 1 GB more RAM that doesn't do anything but make certain people fawn over a spec sheet is a good place to draw the line.

In the one year from the iPad 4 to the iPad Air, Apple cut $40 in production costs and made the iPad much better.

You need to remember that the technology and components in the iPad get much better and cheaper over time.

This fall will bring (two or, more likely, three of these):
- iPad components cost less
- iPad components weigh less
- Battery technology in the iPad improves
- iPad components are smaller (more portable)
- iPad components improve in a different area

With these technology improvements, Apple can absolutely afford to put 2GB of RAM in the next iPad.