What the iPad 3 Looks Like

redletterdave writes "If you were expecting a radically different-looking tablet from the iPad 2, prepare for a minor letdown. In the same way Apple upgraded the iPhone 4 into the iPhone 4S, the exterior of the iPad 3 mirrors that of the iPad 2, despite completely renovated and upgraded innards. iLab Factory reportedly provided Sharp with the necessary parts to build the high-resolution iPad 3 display, and in a company blog post, various iPad 3 components are displayed alongside those of the iPad 2 for quick comparison. In addition to a new camera mount that will reportedly match or improve upon the 8-megapixel camera system in the iPhone 4S, the post also revealed that the iPad 3 will be approximately 1 mm thicker than its predecessor to house Apple's upgraded components, including a bigger battery, an improved camera, and a dual-LED lit system to make the 2048 x 1536 display even brighter."

Comments

Cheaper iPad 2

[Overly Critical Guy]

It looks the same? Then surely it will be as big a "disappointment" as the iPhone 4S was according to analysts--which went on to sell 37 million last quarter. In all seriousness, while the so-called Retina Display is the thing I'm most looking forward to (especially for reading text), the most interesting rumor is that the iPad 2 will continue to be sold at $200 to compete with the Kindle Fire. While the iPad is still the most dominant tablet, the Kindle Fire had a decent run over the holidays. By selling the iPad 2 at a cheaper price alongside the iPad 3, Apple will have both the high end and low end covered. This is the same strategy they're using with the iPhone 3GS (in fact, it's often free with contract), which helped Apple close the gap with Android's marketshare in December.

The next few years are going to be really fun to watch as companies fight over this new market. I think it's inevitable that phones and tablets will become the primary computing devices for most users in a matter of years, because they let people do the things that they use PCs for--Facebook, YouTube, email--without the hassle of PC maintenance. Tablets are already outselling the desktop PC market. Some people don't like "appliance computing", but having grown up with handheld consoles, I see appliance computing as a natural evolution and something to look forward to. PCs will still be around for those who need them.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Very quick to post. But than you *ARE* a paid shill, so you've got canned content all lined up.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Tharsman]

I seriously doubt they will shoot so low. At best I expect a price drop to $350 (but most likely $399) for the iPad 2 (and only available Wi-Fi 16 GB without cell data options.)

As for the PC market vs. Tablets... I got to ponder... Many people are defensive saying that tablets can't or should never take over and that PCs must live for us to keep our computing freedom... but what if we are looking at it wrong? What if we look at tablets not as downgraded computers but as the next evolutionary step for consoles and handheld entertainment units?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Baloroth]

The fundamental difference, as I see it, is that a 5 year old PC still works perfectly fine and can run most modern programs now-a-days just fine (so long as you've taken decent care of keeping crud off it). Good luck doing the same thing with the iPad: assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable, and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté. Quite frankly, everyone already has a desktop. It is hardly surprising that the newest toy will sell like hotcakes for a while (anyone else remember the netbook craze a few years back?) until everyone realizes that while the device is cool and useful for some things, a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.

Are tablets cool? Yes. Are they useful for a few things? Yes. Are they more useful than a desktop or laptop? No. Are they as portable as a smartphone? No. Are they as easy to read on as a dedicated e-reader? No. I could go on, but you probably get the point.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[thelexx]

Normally I don't pay much heed to comments like this, but that shit was so canned it still has the ring marks. Cranberry anyone?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[busyqth]

I wish I could be a paid shill.
How much does it pay?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Overly Critical Guy]

...did you even read my post?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

It really is a shame, this is fairly interesting as far as new tech goes but it is just going to be another pissing match between the Apple shills and their haters. Thanks a lot, Apple shills, for pissing in the pool. Now no one gets to enjoy it.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[interval1066]

The next few years are going to be really fun to watch as companies fight over this new market.

Not how I'd put it.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[samkass]

The fundamental difference, as I see it, is that a 5 year old PC still works perfectly fine and can run most modern programs now-a-days just fine (so long as you've taken decent care of keeping crud off it). Good luck doing the same thing with the iPad: assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable, and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Most 5-year-old PCs won't run Windows 7 very well, if at all, and have no chance at Windows 8. Most iOS software doesn't require the very latest version of iOS to run, so it should remain a very useful device. Heck, iPod Touch 1st generation and original iPhones can only run up to iOS 3.x and still sell pretty well on eBay. They are almost 5 years old.

As for battery, just get it replaced for $99 if you still value your device, but I think "barely usable" is an exaggeration. Again, original iPhones are almost that old and retain over 50% of their battery life. A 5 year-old iPad isn't going to be a use-all-day-without-recharging thing, but it will still be a very usable device.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[s73v3r]

assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable

You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.

and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté.

And how is that different than the 90s, when desktop computing really started to take off?

a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.

Depends on your use cases.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[pseudofrog]

Notice that the time-stamp of the response is the same as the time-stamp of when the story came live. Notice the lack of an asterisk, meaning he isn't a subscriber. Notice how quickly it went to +5, and the jabs at Google (much less pronounced than normal, however).

He (and bonch, and a few others) are either shills or fanboys who are waaay too invested.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[mveloso]

Actually, my iPad 1 battery life is just fine. And it runs pretty much all the apps that my iPad 2 does. Same goes for my iPhone 2G - battery life is still good, and it still runs a surprisingly large number of apps, even at iOS 3.1.3.

Quite frankly, you should do some research before you speculate

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I could tell, the big "letdown" on the iPhone 4s was that it wasn't called iPhone 5. If Apple had called it iPhone 5, the critics would have been as happy as the users. As long as they actually call this the iPad 3, I'm sure both the critics and the users will be happy with this as well.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, no. Any computer that could run Vista, can run Windows 7 better, and likely Windows 8 even better. 5 year old PCs were running Core 2s, and that $99 you'd be spending on a battery goes a long way in upgrading RAM these days. If you bought a desktop and a iPad today, both will be likely running in 5 years (although you'd probably be on your third battery), but you'd likely have long since replaced them for the newest thing anyway.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[ColdWetDog]

You're missing the point. Tablets are popular in several niches, the biggest one (probably, pulling out of my netherregions but hold on for a sec) is the demographic that can't keep a PC, either Windows or OS X or whatever, running for 5 years if their lives depended on it. The concept of 'upgrading' anything is foreign. They just want their GBs and Angry Birds and whatnot. Thinking is not part of the experience.

Yes, the battery is going to go south in 5 years (2 years, 3 years) but buying a new Shiny every couple of years is what these folks are designed to do. It beats actually learning about the computer or car or TV or $InsertHiTechItemHere.

This is a totally different 'computing' paradigm. It's not the computer you grew up with. It's probably not something you're much interested in.

But YOU are not THEM. You're a rumor, recognizable only as deja vu and dismissed just as quickly. You don't exist; you were never even born. Anonymous is your name. C++ your native tongue. You're no longer part of the System. You're above the System. Over it. Beyond it. We're "them." We're "they."

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[viperidaenz]

You forgot the best part of owning an iDevice, looking like a douche carrying it around

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[ColdWetDog]

...did you even read my post?

And why would he want to do that? Just to be different?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

You're comparing apples to oranges. Most 5-year-old PCs won't run Windows 7 very well, if at all, and have no chance at Windows 8.

Most 5-year-old PCs will run Windows 7 reasonably well. 5 year old PCs were released with Vista, and Windows 7 runs a lot better on the same hardware. Windows 8 is not any more resource hungry than Windows 7 is in my experience so far.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[romanval]

Even Steve Jobs said that PC's are like "trucks"; they'll never go away, and will always be around people that need them.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[viperidaenz]

When was the last time Apple halved the price of their "old model" to compete on price?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Osgeld]

um yea

"the most interesting rumor is that the iPad 2 will continue to be sold at $200 to compete with the Kindle Fire."

continue? again show me where they are selling the iPad2 at 200$, it sure as shit aint on apple.com

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually we have at least 10, six year old Dell lapops in the office. 2GB RAM with dual core. They work perfectly fine with Windows 7 and I supposed will be just fine with Windows 8. I don't need 15 programs open. Just two of them. Outlook and my sales crm package. Like most people, corporate American will realize the rip-offs that tablets really are.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Black.Shuck]

Fanboys. Anti-fanboys. Two sides of the same irrational coin if you ask me.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Overly Critical Guy]

Okay, you people are retarded. What jabs at Google? And of course it quickly went to +5 (or whatever it's rated now), it was the first post that moderators saw.

Normally, I don't respond to comments like this, but the goofy paranoia on Slashdot whenever anyone dares to--gasp--say positive things about a really popular tech gadget is really nutty.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Has it been 5 years yet? (If so, how did you break into the top secret Apple lab 3 years before they went public?)

Your anecdote is meaningless.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[ganjadude]

if this were 10 years ago and we were saying most 5 year old PCs wont run windows XP I would agree with you. I have machines as much as 7 years old running windows 7 better than they were running xp. Granted they were top of the line or close to top of the line tech from that time period but its not impossible these days

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Fujisawa Sensei]

Cheaper still won't fix the shitty screen resolution, which was a deal breaker for some of us from iPad day 1.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[ganjadude]

Tablets look like they will have more of a cell phone buying mentality. I think people will look at tablets as more of a renew every 2 (3?) years where desktops are at the point where with good maintenance will be good for many many years.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Dog-Cow]

Good old slashdot immaturity. Let me retort that it's better to look than to be.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

You're comparing apples to oranges. ...

Derailment...

I've always wondered about this statement. It's used to say that things are so different that they can't be compared, yet apples and oranges can be compared. They both grow on trees, both are fruit, both contain their seeds in the center... I've heard the words sweet and juicy to describe good ones, bland, bitter, or dry to describe bad ones. They both contain parts we don't eat. Juice can be made from either of them. You would put them in a fruit salad. Anyways, you get the point... Back to the regular discussion /Derailment

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[ganjadude]

this is slashdot, we dont even RTFA's!

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[travisco_nabisco]

Unfortunately Microsoft is likely to make UEFI a requirement for Windows 8 machines. This means a 5 year old PC won't run Windows 8 at all.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Gilmoure]

Has the iPad 3 come out yet? Doubt the iPad 2 price will drop before it does.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[ganjadude]

I wanna say when the switch color displays on the ipod they continued selling the previous gen at a lower price, but other than that I cant recall that happening other than to dispose of stock

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Shilling is bad but blind hating for free is preferred.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

What was canned about my post? I think I made legitimate points. I even hyperlinked them, for crying out loud. What does "cranberry" mean?

I'm looking over my post again, and I don't even get what would be controversial about it since it's just stating commonly known facts. The last part about tablets becoming the dominant computing devices is my own opinion, of course.

I dunno man, I'm confused too. You don't even seem to have an angle to be 'shilling' about. You think the new iPad will sell well even if it doesn't improve much, just as the iPhone 4S did, you've got positive impressions on the Kindle Fire, and you think while tablets will continue to rise there will still be a place for desktops for the future.If you were a paid shill, you must be a pretty bad one, because I can't tell who you'd be shilling for!

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[flimflammer]

Erm, most 5 year old PCs will run Windows 7 just fine, unless you purchased one that was sub-par and already on its way out when you bought it. I have Windows 7 running on an old emachines I purchased for $550 back in 2006 for my child sister and the thing runs fine. No it wont play modern games but that was never even part of the equation when it was purchased with Windows XP.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

First off, I am most assuredly not an Apple shill. I work for a company called DiSTI (www.disti.com). I would be happy if anyone at Apple even knew who the hell we are and what we do, let alone actually PAY me to post on slashdot.

But let me rebut your answer to the question: "Are they [tablets] more useful than a desktop or laptop?"

They most assuredly ARE more useful in a very large number of specific niche markets. Sure for _generic everyday use_ a laptop is better, but when your purpose is to make someone more productive at a specific job, then tablets can be not only better, they are also often much cheaper and more capable.

For instance, laptop computers have been around for a decade and yet not one has been approved for use by pilots in the cockpit as a job performance aid. You've doubtless seen the numerous stories about pilots using tablets as Electronic Flight Bags, replacing pounds of paper? And for $500. And it weighs hardly anything. And it has a 10 hour battery life, enough to have it on the entire time while crossing the Atlantic, though they usually only use them before takeoff and their approach for landing.

There are numerous other niche markets where the iPad is a totally disruptive technology. In the military training field, soldiers are now carrying training with them on an iPad instead of going to a dedicated training center.

I will also personally rebut "Are they as easy to read on as a dedicated e-reader?". I have friends who have Kindles, Nooks, etc. I have an iPad2 and a GalaxyTab 10.1 (my company's products support both). I've read dozens of books on my iPad and see no reason whatsoever to spend extra money or add extra weight to my bag for a dedicated reading appliance.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[danbob999]

As for the PC market vs. Tablets... I got to ponder... Many people are defensive saying that tablets can't or should never take over and that PCs must live for us to keep our computing freedom...

Tablets aren't a threat to computing freedom. iPads are. Most (all?) non-iPad tablet can run your own code for free just fine. And you can develop your code on your platform of choice (Windows/Linux/Mac). I guess someone could even port an IDE and compiler so that they run on the tablet itself.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure if you're stupid or trolling, but the word "continue" modifies the word "sold". Or, to rephrase the sentence, "Rumor has it that Apple will continue selling the iPad 2 after the iPad 3 comes out, but at a reduced price."

By the way, loud, angry and stupid is a bad combination.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[DJRumpy]

I'm still wondering why it's 'flamebait" now. It's relevant to the article, it articulates what he or she likes or dislikes about the topic at hand. The bit about market share is not really relevant, but hardly flamebait. It is what it is.

I used to come to slashdot for tech news, but the nerd rage her is becoming too much of a turn off.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[chispito]

What if we look at tablets not as downgraded computers but as the next evolutionary step for consoles and handheld entertainment units?

Console - Too small. We have large panel TVs now. You can't control most games on a TV with a tablet.

Handheld entertainment unit - Too Big. You can't fit an iPad in your pocket and pull it out when you're in line at the store. Phones fill this role.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[SJHillman]

But here we have a case of a product on the market that we're speculating a price change about, not an upcoming product that we don't know for sure what's in it. Selling the iPad 2 for half its current price or less seems like too huge of a loss even if Apple expected to make a profit off the subsequent app store sales. $349-$399 seems a much more reasonable range, and even then maybe too optimistic, if you look at the price point Apple sells its current stock of refurbished iPads (the original).

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[danbob999]

The iPhone 3GS still sells for $350 in Canada. I mean the real price, without a contract. $550 for the iPhone 4.
If there was a relation between production cost and retail price, I wouldn't see any possibility for the iPad2 to sell for $200 next month.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Dahamma]

Um, the iPhone 3GS (now free w/ contract) and the iPhone 4 (now $100) when the iPhone 4S came out. Which he already said in his post if you would have taken the time to read it...

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[kqs]

It's worded a bit awkwardly, but I read it as "the iPad 2 will continue to be sold, but at $200 rather than $500, to compete..."

I highly doubt that the price will drop 60%, but I think that you are complaining about your mis-reading of the message rather than the actual content.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[jitterman]

Stop bein' overly critical, guy!

;)

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[NeutronCowboy]

At this point I suspect that the original account is bonch, who is a paid subscriber. The shrillness of his anti-Google posts would indicate to me that he isn't getting paid for his opinions.... I can't imagine any PR company thinking that that kind of language would work in moving the discussion.

I've gotta say, someone has to be completely OCD about his Apple/Google position to run multiple accounts over the long term, just so that he can post some nice, long, properly linked post the instant that a story becomes publicly available. Not to mention keeping around several files to troll any Google story that comes up.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[dmesg0]

Apple still gets around 400$ for a "free" iPhone 3gs from the operators. Huge margin for Apple, not much less than from 200$ 4gs.

Non-subsidized iPad 2 for 200$ would hardly be breaking even, which is not the usual Apple strategy.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[chispito]

Quite frankly, you should do some research before you speculate

I can't remember the last time I saw an iPhone 2G in the wild. How was he to research this? Also, congrats on being frugal. It's refreshing in an age when people would rather rush into the next contract for a slightly shinier toy.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Baloroth]

Lithium-ion cells stored at around room-temperature and at full charge degrade at ~20% capacity per year (less if you store it at half-charge, but most people won't), which means after 2-3 years you are looking at about half capacity. After 5 years that will be much less than half. The first iPad came out less than 2 years ago, so they would still have 70% capacity at least. Recharge cycles also degrade performance, so if you charge it every two days or so that will be even worse. Talk to me again in 2 years and see if you are still happy with the battery life of the (unreplaceable) battery.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Hognoxious]

Twelve old pence.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[nbahi15]

The primary demographic for the iPad is people that just want something that does almost everything they ever do, only better. I don't bother dragging a laptop around in favor of my iPad these days, it is lighter and a better tool for reading, email, and surfing the web than my laptop ever hoped to be. The apps are much better in the educational space on the iPad than the computer. An iPad is a better device for viewing videos. In fact, the only thing my laptop or desktop is better at is sophisticated games, typing large texts, and programming. Or for the most part work since I don't spend a lot of time playing games more sophisticated than chess and the iPad version of even that is way better.

I think most people use an iPad because it is a better product for accomplishing the things they want to do. A desktop or laptop is an inferior platform by almost all everyday computing measures.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Markos]

You're comparing apples to oranges. Most 5-year-old PCs won't run Windows 7 very well, if at all, and have no chance at Windows 8.

Most 5 year old PC's are running some variant of the Core 2 Duo, and run Windows 7 just fine.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Tharsman]

The true tablet market right now is composed of iPads, Kindle Fires and Nooks. All have similar lockins. Microsoft's ARM Win8 has already been stated will be similar. True Android Tables (non branched like the Nook or Kindle) are the exception but to be honest, they are not selling well relatively speaking.

People in this site have also vocally criticized those two tablets for the same points.

That's why I don't single out Apple's iPad.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Tharsman]

To be honest, I have not been able to pocket handheld gaming devices... ever. They always been too big and look like tumors in my tight. Handhelds always have been things I keep in the car or by the bed.

Also look at the WiiU, it almost looks like the missing link. Its a tablet used to control a big screen experience. Not too different from mixing up currently an iPad with an AppleTV (although in that case the entire game processing happens in the tablet and just gets streamed to the TV.)

Samsung is also adding similar tech to their TVs, built in, to allow any android device (even tablets) to stream into the TV.

I’d say there is an evolutionary pattern there.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[phayes]

So, just because you refuse to even take the time to google for "ipad battery replacement" that means that it's not possible? Suuuure....

Apple is one of the only companies to have increased production over the past few years, Macs have steadily been gaining market share yet compared to the runaway success of the iPad, it Mac market share seems almost to be standing still & Apple now sells more iPads than they do Macs.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Missing.Matter]

I have to disagree. My iPad 1 is really feeling old after a couple consecutive software updates. After the multitasking update, I experienced many app crashes. Games like Infinity blade won't even load unless I start it after a fresh reboot. The newest iBooks 2 update is exceptionally slow to open even regular ebooks. Safari crashes regulary and especially on longer pages. Were my desktop computer doing these things I would simply upgrade the RAM for $30. Instead I have to buy a new iPad 2 for at least $499 or never update my software.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[TheRaven64]

You know it's possible to have multiple accounts, right? And to use a subscriber account for seeing things in advance then use your normal account for browsing so you don't use up your subscriber credits?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[busyqth]

Wow guys (ain't no girls around here) I really don't think my post is worth either downmodding or upmodding. Crazy that there's mod war on this worthless two-liner.

'course, since my first three posts all got modded +5, I was expecting to be modded +5 all the time, just cause it's little 'ol me, so go ahead and mod up if you want to.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

While you're likely correct about many older machines that came pre-installed with Vista 5-6 years ago (like my ASUS F3JP, which runs Win7 Ultimate quite snappily) won't be able to run Win8 due to potential UEFI issues, Microsoft has already said the following:

***********

Today, we are familiar with a PC experience where hardware that runs Windows built on x86/64 adheres to a set of technical specifications that allow one distribution of Windows code to install and run on a wide variety of PCs. This has enormous benefits of scale. This openness is also the hallmark of the PC revolution and represents the collective work of the industry since about 1980. When new hardware comes along that is broadly supported, these baseline specifications evolve, and the PC architecture moves forward. Absolutely nothing about this approach will change for Windows 8—as millions have experienced with our Windows 8 Developer Preview, Windows 8 will run on every Windows 7 logo PC, and will run all of the existing software and peripherals designed for and supported on Windows 7 (when supported on Windows 8 by the manufacturer, of course).

***********

Source: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/02/09/building-windows-for-the-arm-processor-architecture.aspx

If you own a PC today with the Win7 logo on it, it'll run Win8. Period.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[busyqth]

I've gotta say, someone has to be completely OCD about his Apple/Google position to run multiple accounts over the long term, just so that he can post some nice, long, properly linked post the instant that a story becomes publicly available.

What else is there to do when you're in jail?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Tsingi]

Unfortunately Microsoft is likely to make UEFI a requirement for Windows 8 machines. This means a 5 year old PC won't run Windows 8 at all.

But would it anyway?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Dahamma]

Seriously? He said the rumor was that the iPad 2 will continue to be sold (instead of being discontinued) at $200 (new price). Don't insult him just because your reading comprehension sucks...

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[danbob999]

From what I understand, Kindle Fires don't have the Android Market, but they can still install APKs from unknown source if you enable the option. So the computing freedom is there.
This Amazon CSR seems to confirm this.
http://www.amazon.com/forum/kindle?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1D7SY3BVSESG&cdThread=Tx2H0GQ936Z3LO5

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[atrain728]

"Cranberry" I'm sure refers to the way canned cranberry retains the exact shape of the can even after it is removed from the can, to the point where the rings (another reference) that provide subtle structural integrity to the can are still visible.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Osgeld]

I insult him because his 2 paragraphs whipped out in less than 1 min after the article is an obvious copy and paste, and apparently poorly written

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

You know nothing at all about computers in general. I not only have a 7 year old PC running windows 7 just fine, but I also just bought a 5 years old Macbook pro that will run it beautifully INSIDE of OSX. And I am running Windows 8 right now on a 5 year old Laptop.

I suggest you learning about computers as your comments make us believe that you haven't even touched one.

Finally, learn about iphones as well. MY 3GS has the same battery life as the 4S that I carry. yes I carry TWO iphones daily.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Surt]

Do you want to be a low level shill, or are you going to run the shilling service? The service provider makes 100k-10M per account, vs the low level shills who actually post on websites are at or close to minimum wage.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[viperidaenz]

So they'll continue to sell the $499 iPad2 at $449 and sell the iPad3 at $699?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[travisco_nabisco]

Ah I haven't read that blog post yet. Thanks for the clarification.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[justforgetme]

Judging from your user ID you have been here three times longer than me.
Dude!
You should be accustomed to it by now.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[DigiShaman]

Most 5-year-old PCs won't run Windows 7 very well

Not true. Windows 7 will run on any computer that Vista does, and better (assuming specialized laptop drivers are available). I've seen ten year old Dell OptiPlex units run Windows 7 just fine so long as you upgrade the RAM to 2GB or more.

You don't need Windows aero to make the OS a functional experience. Which is precisely why some features of aero are only enabled depending on the graphic card's capability.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[justforgetme]

shhhhhh!
people might read this!

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[mystikkman]

Unfortunately Microsoft is likely to make UEFI a requirement for Windows 8 machines. This means a 5 year old PC won't run Windows 8 at all.

You have got it totally backwards. The hardware is the one that enforces secure boot, not the software. So if you buy a Windows 8 x86/64 certified PC, you can't install other OSes without turning off secure boot.

But Windows 8 will boot without secure boot enabled or even supported by the system because it supports legacy BIOS.

It makes sense really, use the hardware if it exists, skip it if it doesn't. Don't know why it is so confusing to folks though.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

At this point I suspect that the original account is bonch, who is a paid subscriber. The shrillness of his anti-Google posts would indicate to me that he isn't getting paid for his opinions.... I can't imagine any PR company thinking that that kind of language would work in moving the discussion.

I've gotta say, someone has to be completely OCD about his Apple/Google position to run multiple accounts over the long term, just so that he can post some nice, long, properly linked post the instant that a story becomes publicly available. Not to mention keeping around several files to troll any Google story that comes up.

See my other post re: pissing in the pool. PR firms (first of all there are plenty of truly awful ones, but that's not here nor there) are probably fine turning a pro-Google site (arguably, /. is, given the preference for openness) into a constant pissing match, given that there is not enough spin in the world to make all of /. swallow Apple's brand of bullshit. They are fine with no one here enjoying themselves, and eventually heading over to where the real PR genius work is being done, Apple-fountains like Engadget and AllThingsD...

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[NeutronCowboy]

Also a good point. It's possible this is indeed an elaborate PR campaign to kill Slashdot as a discussion forum, but then again, I've seen the derangement that fanboys can operate under. Either which way, this is one of the few times I'm for an actual IP ban. Nothing constructive is coming from this guy, even when he tries.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[stephanruby]

You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.

Yes, but with an iPad (just like with the locked down iPhone), expect to pay an outrageous price to Apple for changing the battery (or expect the Apple battery to be no longer offered by Apple), so when the time comes, it will probably be cheaper to just buy a new entire iPad for yourself.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[CohibaVancouver]

Don't know why it is so confusing to folks though.

Because the above explanation lacks sufficient Microsoft conspiracy evilness.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[forkfail]

It's just amazing, though, how you and bonch manage to get such a nicely written, spelling and grammar checked, hyperlinked and structured post out so fast (read: exact same time stamp as publish of story) every single time there's a thread about Google and/or Apple.

A dedicated blogger - I could see top 5 posts on a regular basis.

But it defies the laws of probability that you guys are whipping this stuff up off the top of your head on every single thread and getting first post in, even before the inevitable troll who's lost his way from /B/ gets his two cents in...

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[oxdas]

As you point out, this is the price only under a contract with a phone company. Under these terms you are paying full price for the iPhone, but instead of paying for it up front you are paying for it monthly, with interest. Beware of any for profit business that advertises a product for "free."

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

The fundamental difference, as I see it, is that a 5 year old PC still works perfectly fine and can run most modern programs now-a-days just fine (so long as you've taken decent care of keeping crud off it).

Of course the biggest reason for that is that PC CPUs have pretty almost stagnated for the last 5 years, at least compared to mobile CPUs (not notebook CPUs). You are projecting that development into the future, when it could just as well be the other way around.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

If he wanted to criticize the Google creeps he could have pointed out this: http://cpac2012.conservative.org/sponsorship/2012-sponsors/

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[MogNuts]

The metamods rated your post interesting. It really was though. Enjoyed it. But one thing in particular is wonderful but at the same time terrible all in one:

I had a Toshiba Thrive a while back. I've delivered a thorough critique on tablets in general before, but suffice it to say, for anything more than watching a simple movie or reading an e-book, they're terrible. Attempt to actually do anything or use it more than this, it just isn't comfortable, flexible, or featureful enough.

However:

Games. This is it for the consoles. After watching Dead Space and an MMO and Rainbow Six on iOS/Android, the writing is on the wall. I was amazed at playing this on a phone. Granted, a console offers a stable config for developers, a platform for better sales, etc. But when featureful games keep on being released, after a while one will ask themself why bother buying another unit. And it's kind of amazing to have quick aiming in FPS's after being so hampered by a controller (Call of Duty on consoles versus Modern Combat on iOS/Android).

And as a side note, as much as I refuse to ever purchase another Apple product (for a myriad of reasons they're an awful and evil company), the Android situation for games (not the rest--app fragmentation is only a problem games--nothing else) is terrible. iOS gives a stable environment for developers and its app store forces devs to release the full version for download. Gameloft won't let you run it's games on half of android devices, or won't carry them in store, and makes one download them directly thus negating any benefits of the Android Market (auto updates, re-downloading games, etc.). Do they even provide updates? It's a mess.

Though I am curious with the higher res screen how games will perform. Hell my 8800 GTS 512, while old, can't even handle games at that resolution. Though kudos for pushing the resolution forward. Two things are the biggest factors in how good a games graphics are--the texture detail and a higher resolution.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

1. Laptops have user replacable batteries.
2. 20 years different, dumbshit.
3. Agreed, but it's funny how everyone that I know that has a table has a fancy case that basically makes it a netbook.

assuming it still even works 5 years from now, the battery life will have decayed to the point where it will be barely usable

You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.

and if you think you will have the newest version of the OS available on it, excuse me while I laugh my ass of at your naiveté.

And how is that different than the 90s, when desktop computing really started to take off?

a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.

Depends on your use cases.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[MogNuts]

Explain to me why this is something to envy? Why is this good?

We should always advocate to others to learn more about anything and everything. Especially since in this day and age our lives depend on it. I'm sure you know at least one person who has had his or her identity stolen (months to years of work to recover) or bank account drained because they thought it was ok to click on the "punch the monkey ad" or log in to face book on a public computer.

Make no mistake, by promoting and advocating ignorance, these people could have their lives ruined. It's not just from being an idiot for walking through a bad neighborhood wearing diamonds or fancy jewelry anymore.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[TheCouchPotatoFamine]

damn, really? I'm one of posters that merely read the last pieces about " Overly Critical Guy" being a shill (which it tries to deny) but somehow with perfect timing gets in here on time to be completely off topic, saying exactly what it's said before (slightly differently), comparing the product about, without any new insights or opinion.. what is it? Automated, or perhaps automated with a human that just gets the responses back to a central inbox where multiple people can respond a bit, make it seem credible, without any real opinion in the matter?

Cause that's how i'd shill, or close to it, with outsourced indian call center labor. Makes ya think.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[interkin3tic]

I have to ask... why do you have an ipad AND an ipad 2?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

If you strip out the pejorative implications about ordinary people, you're onto something when you say "thinking is not part of the experience". Why should it be? Why should users have to grapple with complexity to accomplish simple tasks? There's no moral superiority in spending time figuring out how your computer works vs spending that time doing paid work, dandling your child on your knee, sitting with a glass of wine and chatting to your other half, or reading a good book.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.
Depends on your use cases.

No use cases, but instead you get reasons:
Speed, screen size, storage, speed,a keyboard that actually allows you to type, a keyboard with cursor keys instead of a stupid cumbersome magnifying glass, a keyboard with tactile feedback, speed, useful programs that do more than just make fart sounds, run modern games instead of games that look like they come from 1993, the ability to customize, and speed.

Tablets are handy at times, but anyone that says they replaced their desktop or laptop with a tablet probably only used their computer to read email and log onto facebook anyways, or they connected a keyboard, mouse, and monitor to their tablet to make it run like a laptop.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[GameboyRMH]

There are a few GNU/Linux tablets out there too if you're looking for something open out of the box. Unfortunately they're running on the lower-end hardware for some reason.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[GameboyRMH]

It is hardly surprising that the newest toy will sell like hotcakes for a while (anyone else remember the netbook craze a few years back?) until everyone realizes that while the device is cool and useful for some things, a regular PC is just straight up better in so many ways.

Ah those were the good ol' days. When the hot new fad gadget was still a fully-functional, open computer, rather than a closed revenue extraction device.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[tomboalogo]

yeah interesting considering that that is not what the F'ing article says.

From the article:
Assuming Apple continues to sell the original iPad, the iPad 3 would cost about $499 (the current starting price of the iPad 2), while the iPad 2 would likely drop to about $399, and the original iPad to $299, or possibly even $199.

The problem is the word "Assuming ". Apple doesn't sell the original iPad.

Maybe instead of an iPad you should get a Speak N Spell!!

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[roc97007]

> You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.

I would not have said that. I would have said "laptop batteries are user replaceable". Although come to think of it, I don't *know* that macbook batteries are user replaceable, was going by just about every other laptop made. (I work on laptops as a sideline.) If they're not, (in a macbook) that would be a good reason not to get one. Especially a used one.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[roc97007]

> Actually, my iPad 1 battery life is just fine. And it runs pretty much all the apps that my iPad 2 does. Same goes for my iPhone 2G - battery life is still good, and it still runs a surprisingly large number of apps, even at iOS 3.1.3.

> Quite frankly, you should do some research before you speculate

What, he should have asked you what your iPad 1 battery life was before he speculates?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[roc97007]

Well yes, but you're an ipad owner, so you should be ok with this. Apple's business model is well known.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[roc97007]

During a long period of unemployment after dot com bust, I bought the special tool to split the ipod case, and made some money replacing batteries, cracked screens and audio jacks. I know Apple will grudgingly do these things, but at the prices they charge (due to repairs going against the business model of forklift upgrade) it's easy to undercut them and still make a profit. It didn't quite pay the bills, but probably helped getting me through a dry stretch. Just sayin'. I'm wondering if I should look into what it takes to get an ipad open.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[gnasher719]

Yes, but with an iPad (just like with the locked down iPhone), expect to pay an outrageous price to Apple for changing the battery (or expect the Apple battery to be no longer offered by Apple), so when the time comes, it will probably be cheaper to just buy a new entire iPad for yourself.

From personal experience: Replacing the battery on my iPod Mini (that's the one before the iPod Nano) cost me the enormous sum of £3.75. These prices do come down.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[LinuxIsGarbage]

The next few years are going to be really fun to watch as companies fight over this new market. I think it's inevitable that phones and tablets will become the primary computing devices for most users in a matter of years, because they let people do the things that they use PCs for--Facebook, YouTube, email--without the hassle of PC maintenance. Tablets are already outselling the desktop PC market. Some people don't like "appliance computing", but having grown up with handheld consoles, I see appliance computing as a natural evolution and something to look forward to. PCs will still be around for those who need them.

Back in the day home users had home computers (simple appliances), while "real" computers were expensive complicated contraptions used at businesses (mini-computers, workstations). Early IBM-PCs (for all the crappy specs) were positioned above home computers in price. Eventually the home computer market got absorbed into the PC/Mac market, which also absorbed in a lot of the higher end market (server, supercomputer). People are using complex computers for their simple home user needs!

Home users would typically be best served by home computers, while workstation-esq PCs will still be a mainstay in businesses, and also in homes (but you might have 1 PC in a house of 5 people.) As it is the refresh cycle is longer in PCs than it used to be (mine is currently 4.5 years old with no plans to replace).

I can see the attraction to tablet/smart phone form factors. Years ago I got a palm pilot. It can crudly play music, and you can keep notes on it, but that's about it. Plus you get to look dorky using it.

After years of not getting a smartphone I finally got an iPod Touch. A lot of the benefit of a smart phone without the contract. It's almost what I'd hope the palm pilot would be.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[bennomatic]

I think "cranberry" refers to the cranberry sauce that some people eat at Thanksgiving. Some people make it themselves, and that's relatively labor intensive, but most people just buy the canned stuff. And of the people who buy the canned stuff, it's pretty common for them to simply put it on a plate, maybe slicing it for some kind of presentation, but it still clearly looks like it came from a can.

It's a stretch--and don't get me wrong, I'm not supporting the insult, just explaining it--but I think the GP is using that term to underscore his/her assertion that your post was canned. It's almost worth it not to get first post just to avoid this sort of attention. Me, I avoid it by posting phenomenally stupid and uninformed pieces on a regular basis so that nobody could accuse me of being a shill. Nobody would ever pay me for what I post on slashdot.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[c 0xFF]

Wouldn't it be hard to make exact change with an irrational coin?

Just my sqrt(2) cents.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[AK Marc]

Most 5-year-old PCs won't run Windows 7 very well, if at all, and have no chance at Windows 8.

My 10 year old PC runs XP great, and would run Vista, which is supposedly worse/harder than Win7&8. But it's relegated to a gaming machine for the 5 year old, mainly free or abandonware games that don't need any new OS or powerful hardware, so it'll likely sit on XP until decommissioned.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[quarmar]

"Tablets are already outselling the desktop PC market."

In related news, toy guns are outselling real guns.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

it's just stating commonly known facts.

In which case it is - by definition - redundant and just a karma-whoring exercise.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[fyngyrz]

Kindle Fires don't have the Android Market, but they can still install APKs from unknown source if you enable the option. So the computing freedom is there.

That is correct. First thing we did was unlock our Fire and then install the marketplace on it; you can install pretty much anything that works under the current OS level at that point.

However, I'm bound to point out that you can jailbreak an iPad and do the same thing... and it's trivial. As an owner of both, first, I'd say that it's a distinction without a difference. Second, as someone who hasn't found it necessary to jailbreak the iPad but has filled one with apps (I don't use it for video at all except for streaming, and I keep my music on an iPod), I'm fairly certain that my computing freedom isn't being significantly impinged upon as yet in the iOS arena.

I'm a lot more worried about the mandatory sandboxing of OS X apps as per the OS X app store rules than I am anything at all to do with iOS. The iPad, at least as long as we're talking about a tablet with 512k of ram, is essentially a very limited one-app-at-a-time machine, and the "filesystem" sucks so badly there's very little sensible file sharing among apps that can be done on it, so most apps simply don't try. My 8-core Mac is something else entirely, and Apple is beginning to have some very bad ideas about "save the children" kind of moron-features such as sandboxing. Here's hoping someone "jailbreaks" that, too. I am NOT looking forward to real computer apps having to jump through hoops -- or worse yet, being unable - to access data files. It'll be the worst of all computing worlds.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[cynyr]

We have been bumping into hardware issues on some dell laptops moving from XP to win7. Serves us right for buying dell, but still. These are 3-5 year old machines with Core2Duos in them, and finding win7 64bit drivers is hard.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[sheddd]

That screen's pricey, I'd bet. $499 I say :)

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[sheddd]

I pad 1 runs Infinity Blade 2 without crashes... but iOS 5 is noticeably slower sometimes. I use mine a lot; yours may be screwed up. I'm gonna keep it as long as it works (and maybe pay someone to replace the battery). It's still a nice device IMO. I reach for it before any other tool when doing some quick surfing or email checking.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Tharsman]

Was there not an article about an update making it harder or impossible to unlock Kindles? Or is the unlocking considered a hack? Because as you say, the same goes for the ipad if it is.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[epyT-R]

PCs will still be around for those who need them.

if they are, they'll be prohibitively expensive and thus restrict access to those interested in more than passive consumption of walled garden media.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[epyT-R]

$99 for a battery? are you kidding??

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[epyT-R]

moderated funny but there is a lot of truth here.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[gmhowell]

Wouldn't it be hard to make exact change with an irrational coin?

Just my sqrt(2) cents.

I suppose you could use it to buy some pi.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[toddestan]

They'll probably be fine with 32-bit Windows 7. Sadly a lot of the early 64-bit machines are pretty much 64-bit in name only, including chipsets that limit you to 3.x GB of ram no matter what OS you install.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[LDAPMAN]

They are not user replaceable in that Apple won't sell you a battery unless your an authorized repair center. However, popping off the bottom of the case and swapping them is trivial. The benefits from making them non-replaceable far outweigh any drawbacks. They are able to pack a lot more battery into a lot smaller laptop.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[LDAPMAN]

CPUs stagnated?!?! You might think that if you only look at clock speed but a current generation Core i7 blows away anything 2 years old, much less five.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Howitzer86]

You mean like a laptop? And before you say something about, "You can work with the laptop plugged in!", remember you can do the exact same with a tablet.

Some tablets... probably most... but not the Nook Color. The device will not boot if the battery doesn't have at least 15 minutes worth of charge in it. At some point, they will become paperweights, because you can't boot them on just power adapter power alone. Then again, what can you expect for just $199?.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Howitzer86]

That's an important distinction to make too. I read an article that said pretty much just that - that the PC isn't going anywhere - we're just keeping them longer because the spec war is pretty much over. Buying a PC is now like buying a TV. If it works - keep it. Hell, you might even keep it ten, maybe fifteen years. So long as it runs why buy a new one?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

CPUs stagnated?!?! You might think that if you only look at clock speed but a current generation Core i7 blows away anything 2 years old, much less five.

Which part of "at least compared to mobile CPUs" did you not understand?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

It really is a shame, this is fairly interesting as far as new tech goes but it is just going to be another pissing match between the Apple shills and their haters. Thanks a lot, Apple shills, for pissing in the pool. Now no one gets to enjoy it.

Come on, just between the two of us: Do you really think he's a shill, or are you just mad he got "first piss in the pool" before you?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[danbob999]

Kindles do not need to be "unlocked" in order to install your own application.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[tehcyder]

He (and bonch, and a few others) are either shills or fanboys who are waaay too invested.

M'lud, the prosecution's case is that the defendant is a cold-blooded, ruthless, murderer. Or at least a rapist. Well, okay, maybe a purse snatcher.... He did once make a girl cry at school by calling her ugly though! All right, plain.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[arkane1234]

What's with the all-or-nothing approach?
They complement each other, just the same as a laptop complements a desktop.
I hate to do this but eh, you forced me.. the speed of a tablet (I'm taking ipad into account since that's the only tablet I use regularly) is by no means slow so we'll call the speed thing a moot point. Screen size is known as purchase and is part of the architecture so we'll call that a moot point as well. Storage is different and is not the same as a desktop so we'll call it apples/oranges. Keyboards are addressed in the next sentence. A magnifying glass when your placing a cursor with your finger is by far not "stupid" nor "cumbersome". Actually, it's the exact opposite, since the lack of the two would be the description you've given. As far as fart sounds.. that has to be a phone app or something... unsure what you're talking about. Most games that have come out for tablets in the last year do not look like anything from 1993... do you even remember 1993?

Besides, to play devil's advocate I could just say that a tablet is better for the user you've described because a bluetooth keyboard is far more flexible and can be put away unless really needed. And uhm, a mouse & monitor are not accessories to tablets but thanks for playing.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[arkane1234]

You know you can buy an iPhone 3GS & iPhone 4S contract-free, right?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[arkane1234]

Why throw out an ipad when you buy an ipad 2?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[arkane1234]

Is that your basis on what you buy? How you look carrying it?
Also, if your carrying it in a way that makes you look like a douche, you're a douche.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[fyngyrz]

There's a checkbox in the settings that, only when checked, which is not the default, allows you to install apps from other than Amazon. It's certainly easy to deal with, doesn't require any hacking, but I think it is fair to call the device "locked" in that sense. The checkbox is the lock.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[danbob999]

Faire enough. As long as it is clear that it's nothing remotely close to the lock of an iPad, which requires jailbreaking.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[roc97007]

They are not user replaceable in that Apple won't sell you a battery unless your an authorized repair center. However, popping off the bottom of the case and swapping them is trivial. The benefits from making them non-replaceable far outweigh any drawbacks.

I'm sorry, I don't understand the answer. A little research shows that macbook batteries are available online from a variety of sources (over 4 million hits) including 22,000 listings on Amazon alone.

Couple this with your own admission that swapping them is trivial, and I'm not sure how this makes it non-replaceable, which is too bad because I wanted to ask you, how does the benefits of making them non-replaceable (never mind they're not for the sake of argument) far outweigh the drawbacks? I mean, to the customer, as one answer might be, it locks the customer into the device-as-consumable mindset and makes it more probable that the customer will simply replace the device instead of maintaining it, which demonstrably works for enough customers for Apple to have more cash on hand than many countries. But I don't think that's what you meant.

They are able to pack a lot more battery into a lot smaller laptop.

I call bullshit. References, please, including how batteries commissioned by Apple made in Chinese factories differ from batteries made for any other electronic device in Chinese factories.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[LDAPMAN]

I guess I wasn't clear. You can replace the battery and you can get them from other sources but Apple does not consider them user replaceable for warranty purposes. The strongly discourage Joe user from messing with them because they can be dangerous and there are issues with disposing of them.

The batteries are different in that all the extraneous packaging thats required for safe handling of the uninstalled battery has been removed. The laptop case itself is the protective packaging. The batteries are not off-the-shelf items. They are custom shaped specifically to fit in the spec available in the case.

Here is your reference http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CKJgaA-ImI

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[roc97007]

I'll get to the rest later, but quickly:

> but Apple does not consider them user replaceable for warranty purposes

Color me puzzled. Firstly, a battery's normal lifespan should far exceed the warranty, secondly, no reasonable user would pay $121 (Amazon) for a Macbook battery while the laptop was still in warranty. I can't think of a reason why anyone would do a user replacement while the warranty was in effect. Did you mean something else?

But hey, it's been awhile since I retired the G4 that was my Photoshop machine, maybe Apple culture is different now. (??)

Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

epyT-R is a known fucktard

2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a larger resolution than my current desktop.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[jellomizer]

Well after apple released the iPhone 4 with its "Retna" Display only a fool would think the next version of the iPad would have one too. Having reached a persons physical limit in viewing is a good thing, because it will allow screen technology/resolution to finally get static in place, and making newer apps run faster. A lot of the issue why it doesn't seem your new PC isn't that much faster then your old one is basically because your new video card can handle higher resolutions and you attach larger resolution screens to it, and the new software and OS are going to use that new screen resolution. Hitting a physical limit will mean improvements in graphic processing will be more noticeable as they are not trying to just keep with with more pixels.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Bert64]

Not always, LCD screens are only just catching up to higher end CRT displays...

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[timeOday]

A lot of the issue why it doesn't seem your new PC isn't that much faster then your old one is basically because your new video card can handle higher resolutions and you attach larger resolution screens to it

That was once true, but desktop and laptop screens have regressed over the past few years towards 1080p (high-def TV) resolutions. There are only a few 2560x1600 desktop displays now - Apple for example no longer sells one. 1600x1200 screens were available on laptops for some time, too, but no longer.

With that resolution and dual backlights, I bet the new iPad screen will look fantastic. Now give me a 'retinal' 30" display for my desktop, please.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Overzeetop]

You need a bigger desktop.

(I'm typing on my 4960x1600 desktop, so I'm safe for at least one more iTeration)

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[poity]

YES PLEASE! Finally high res screens on consumer electronics! I hope the rumor that Apple's computers will get updated with high res screens is also true. Laptop manufacturers need a kick in the butt to get them out of the 1366x768 doldrums.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[viperidaenz]

Its annoying, I was going to buy a laptop last year to replace my 6 year old one. Most of them have 1366x768 or 1280x800 screens. That's hardly better than my old ones 1024x768.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[TheLordPhantom]

I consider myself quite lucky. I own a 15" Sony Laptop with a 1080p screen. Sure, if this was a larger 20" or 25" monitor, I would complain about regression just as much as the next person. On a 15" screen though, the DPI at 1920x1080 is truly fantastic. Always makes me laugh though, when I see someone's giant 60" TV that has the same resolution as my littl 15" laptop. In fact, it truly bothers me that 1080p is considered more or less standard for any size monitor anymore.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[mark-t]

They haven't reached person's physical viewing limit yet. Although they are finally at least within an order of magnitude.

The iPhone4 boasts a resolution of just over 300dpi, which makes each pixel roughly 80 microns in size. This is still more than four times as large as what a healthy human eye is capable of resolving. Of course, even at 20 microns, it isn't really going to be sufficient, because to be completely undetectable it has to pass the Nyquist limit for our resolution, which means that the detail would have to be 10 microns in size or smaller. This requires a resolution of 2400 or more dpi, and on the ipad would require that the screen have a horizontal resolution of 16384, and vertical resolution of 12288.

So we aren't there yet.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Fujisawa Sensei]

My 2+ year old, 15" Sager has 1920 x 1080.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[DreadPiratePizz]

There are only a few 2560x1600 desktop displays now - Apple for example no longer sells one. 1600x1200 screens were available on laptops for some time, too, but no longer.

What? I just got a Macbook Pro from Apple, and its screen is 1680 x 1050. That's reasonably high resolution for 15 inches.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[jellomizer]

Applications are the main issue here.
The reason why there isn't much of a difference, a higher resolution in most OS's will just make everything smaller... I myself love having more space... However for most people they just complain that everything is too small. So for the most part the past decade in a half displays have been staying at the same DPI. The only reason why they increased in resolution is the fact that we have bigger displays.
Back in 1997 a 14" CRT at 1024x768 was a good monitor. If you had a 17" CRT you had a big screen, if you had a 19" or 21" you were like the uber geek with the Huge display.
Today I have a 17" on my laptop and a 21" as a secondary display. And now that is just a normal second monitor.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[ganjadude]

my last monitor had black, and orange, you and your multiple pixels and 8 colors grumble grumble

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

I consider myself quite lucky. I own a 15" Sony Laptop with a 1080p screen.

You're not so lucky; I built a ThinkPad with a 15" 2048x1536 for my kid brother when he went to grad school.

And T221s aren't so pricy on ebay these days, even if they're (sadly) no longer produced.

Hi-res isn't gone -- it's just gone underground.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple does't sell a 2560x1600 display but they do sell a 2560x1440 screen which is pretty close. They basically converted from 16:10 to 16:9.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[19thNervousBreakdown]

At what distance? With your nose on the screen? From the earth to the moon?

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[nbahi15]

My screen on my Macbook Pro, current model 17", is 1920x1200. I love Apple's Cinema Display but it is just too big and too hot. I own one so I ought to know. I see the current screen issue with Apple as being strategic, most people don't buy external monitors, so Apple doesn't waste much time on it. Apple is moving more and more toward mobile computing only.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

What? I just got a Macbook Pro from Apple, and its screen is 1680 x 1050. That's reasonably high resolution for 15 inches.

the 1200 pixels matters. 1050 isn't even 1080p.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[AliasMarlowe]

YES PLEASE! Finally high res screens on consumer electronics! I hope the rumor that Apple's computers will get updated with high res screens is also true. Laptop manufacturers need a kick in the butt to get them out of the 1366x768 doldrums.

Agreed. My 8-year-old laptop has 1920x1200 pixels in its 17" screen. I started looking for a replacement a couple of years ago, but the best screen available was mere HD (1920x1080), which has 120 rows fewer. I was hoping to get something with more pixels, not less! The old laptop still works fine (all praise to Xubuntu), so I'm willing to wait some more.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

> There are only a few 2560x1600 desktop displays now - Apple for example no longer sells one.

Apple's 27" iMac and 27" Cinema display are 2560x1440. While it's true that it's a 16:9 rather than a 16:10 display it's still significantly higher than 1080p.

I do 1080p video editing on my 27" iMac, I appreciate that when I view the video full screen that it uses the entire display.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[dubbreak]

The thing is that 19" CRT (and possibly even 17") could do 1024 lines resolution. With 4:3 aspect ratio latops with 15" 1280x1024 displays were common. Then with the initial wide screen displays (16:10 I assume) you could still get 900 lines resolution. Now anything < $1K seems to be 768 lines.

Sure for your average consumer who is just consuming media it's fine. For someone doing software dev or similar it can be painful. At my last employer I found some reasonably priced Dell's (within the budget I was given) that I could upgrade to 1080P for $100 (which I did). It was a lot better than the "720P" option, but almost a little fine for that screen size (which meant playing with font sizes for the older team members.. totally acceptable). At my new job I'm looking for a laptop for one of our contractors and it's painful. Basically in order to do his work he'll require an external monitor as I can't find anything reasonably priced in a small form factor (13 or 14" screen). It needs to be small for portability (riding coach etc). I can't even find the 15" 1080P laptops I ordered before. Now it looks as though I'd have to jump up to a 17" laptop to get anything above 768 lines.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

My old Dell D810 15.4" notebook has a 1920x1200 display. Stepping down to 1440x900 for a MacBook Pro was a disappointment. Replacing that with a a then-new 1680x1050 MBP was a step in the right direction, but I still wish it was higher-res.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[mark-t]

Between 8 and 12 inches.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Fujisawa Sensei]

When I last looked at Dull, they weren't putting 1920 x anything on any 15" notebooks.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[White Flame]

It was a very common resolution in the CRT days. I, for one, am very happy to see it back.

I'm really not a fan of Apple stuff, but this display being basically confirmed for the iPad 3 is enough for me to put it on my shopping list.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Fujisawa Sensei]

Just checked website, looks like they learned their lesson. Looks like they're back up to 2007ish resolutions.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

You can still get a 15" Thinkpad W520 in 1080P, also DELL15" XPS and Precision and Latitude lines all offer 1080P.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[timeOday]

What? I just got a Macbook Pro from Apple, and its screen is 1680 x 1050.

I have the same. It's OK, but still fewer pixels than the 15" 1600x1200 laptop I had, what, 8 years ago? 4 years ago it was 1400x1050 in a 14" screen, which was a great compromise between resolution and size for a laptop.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[interkin3tic]

I'd rather have an OLED tablet display personally, but then again I've preferred pretty colors over fine details since fingerpainting in pre-school.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

hecks yeah, thats the only thing that piqued my interest.

***incoming rant***

resolution clearly isnt the 'end all be all' feature of a monitor, but im sick of this stagnant resolution crap, and the current shit monitor market itself. let there be no mistake: it fucking sucks. im still using a goddamn CRT because LCDs are so terrible *in comparison* for games and movies. A GODDAMN CRT. thing takes a freaking hour *just to warm up*. once it does its pure glory (2304x1440, 16:10, ~24", black levels so good you cant really tell its on when displaying a black screen), but cmon. ive got a pioneer plasma too, but 1080p doesnt quite cut it. at all.

so the ipad3, in that tiny form factor gets a 2048x1536 screen?

4k cannot reach the consumer fast enough.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

A lot of the issue why it doesn't seem your new PC isn't that much faster then your old one is basically because your new video card can handle higher resolutions and you attach larger resolution screens to it

That was once true, but desktop and laptop screens have regressed over the past few years towards 1080p (high-def TV) resolutions. There are only a few 2560x1600 desktop displays now - Apple for example no longer sells one.

Yeah, those missing 160 vertical pixels lost when going from 16:10 to 16:9 sure means that they are going to regress back to 1080p any time soon now.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

And you paid extra for it for a total of what, $1400? Some people would consider paying $1400 for a laptop painful.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[Anonymous Coward]

uhh the new thunderbold monitors are 2560-by-1440...also, the reason they stopped doing ridiculous resolution on laptops is because all it's going to do is make the apps interface so fucking tiny to be unusable. the way desktop graphics are designed needs to be rethought before there's any point to putting some 4000p screen on a laptop.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[cynyr]

Now anything seems to be 768 lines

You can still get a 15" Thinkpad W520 in 1080P, also DELL15" XPS and Precision and Latitude lines all offer 1080P.

The cheapest W520 on Lenovos website is $1299... That is not less than $1000.

Also this is true for desktop monitors, find me a greater than 1080P res in less than 22" and for less than $250.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[jones_supa]

I myself love having more space... However for most people they just complain that everything is too small. So for the most part the past decade in a half displays have been staying at the same DPI.

This is an important observation and possibly a major reason why the DPI of the displays has stayed low. The operating systems can't be adjusted to it. It kind of works but it's still a hack. I have a good vision but sometimes am annoyed by the small text of my 135 DPI laptop.

It is good though that Apple works as a pioneer to create this kind of hi-res stuff to challenge the problem!

As a bonus, here's a nifty DPI calculator.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[jrumney]

At what viewing distance are you making these claims about whether the screen is or isn't as high resolution as the eye can detect?

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[toddestan]

Yeah, I don't care about the iPad 3. But give me that screen with a DVI port on the back please.

Re:2048 x 1536?!

[mark-t]

8 to 12 inches.

The human eye can detect variations in contrast in as tiny a region as approximately 1/3 of an arc-minute At 8 inches, this works out to just under 20 microns. Even at 12 inches, it's just under 30 microns, and to be below the Nyquist threshold would still require every discrete detail to be under 15 microns in size.

tl;dr

[Anonymous Coward]

tl;dr version
it looks exactly like the ipad 2

It's new and it's Apple

[elrous0]

Even though I have no need for it, I feel a strange compulsion to throw money at it.

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[Dyinobal]

I know what you mean, I have this strange compulsion to laugh at the people who do.

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[Joce640k]

This is for you: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apple

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't practice the politics of envy and class warfare. If you aren't successful enough to be an Apple man that's no ones fault but your own.

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

It must be a fun life, antagonizing people who like a different brand than you.

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[ganjadude]

I see what you did there

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[lexman098]

It must be a fun life, buying grossly overpriced electronics without the nagging feeling like you could be spending much less to get the same functionality and convenience.

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[19thNervousBreakdown]

My response to anyone who suggests I should be an "<anything> man" is "fuck you."

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[roc97007]

I can afford it, I just don't want to be associated with Apple fanatics.

"Hey man, I see you have an iPad 3. How long did you stand in the rain to buy it?"

"Um, I didn't, I walked in the store a week after it came out and bought one off the shelf."

"You're a freak, man."

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry about that. "If you aren't successful enough to be an Apple woman that's no ones fault but your own."

FTFY

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

you know apple juice is only good in small doses right?

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[theunilife]

LULZ I guess the state of delusion does exist.

Re:It's new and it's Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple man, haha you actually used this term. LMAO

Crystal Ball

[Anonymous Coward]

According to Apple, I should just look at what Samsung has already produced! :)

http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/02/13/1415204/apple-launches-new-legal-attack-on-samsung

Why would it be radically different?

[Osgeld]

Apple has a big hard on "protecting" its ingenious design of a rounded rectangle with a flat surface and glossy paint, you really think they are going to waste all that time and money keeping the evil of the world from copying their earth-shattering genius just to release v3 in a translucent round case?

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[thestudio_bob]

Apple has a big hard on "protecting" its ingenious design of a rounded rectangle with a flat surface and glossy paint, you really think they are going to waste all that time and money keeping the evil of the world from copying their earth-shattering genius just to release v3 in a translucent round case?

What changes would you make to it to make it better? Just curious. Personally, I think they hit the sweet spot with the first design, except for the obvious screen density limitations.

p.s. Does the iPad have glossy paint? I thought it was aluminum??

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Overly Critical Guy]

Yes, that's literally the only thing that separates the iPhone/iPad's design from everyone else's, the fact that it's a rounded rectangle with a flat surface and glossy paint. It's certainly not the radius of the corners, the 1-inch black border with chrome backing that peeks over just enough to frame it, the grid of icons, the thievery of artwork, the touchscreen gestures that originated with iOS, etc.

Tablets didn't start looking like the iPad until the iPad came out. That really should clue you into the idea that the design comes from Jonathan Ive's design studio and isn't some obvious thing that has been around forever. Of course it seems obvious now, because the iPad is so successful. There's a cognitive bias going on where the thing that succeeded now seems obvious in retrospect even though it didn't before it came into existence.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Osgeld]

http://www.pcwelt.de/galerien/iPad-Vorgaenger-1008126.html?bild=3

yes no one had glossy black tablets with 1 inch radius corners before iPad, not that 1992 compaq I linked to above

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Osgeld]

the black rim is painted under the glass

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[busyqth]

Ummm... that doesn't look like an iPad.
It looks more an an old Powerbook with the keyboard broken off.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Osgeld]

it meets half of your design requirements

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Doesn't look like an iPad.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Osgeld]

neither does a samsung and yet ...

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Yes, it does actually.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Osgeld]

only in Germany

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[mark-t]

Those touchscreen gestures did not originate in iOS. iOS was only the first commercially available implementation of them that had a wide exposure.

In particular, surface computing had already been utilizing these gestures for quite some time prior to the release of the first iPhone. Apple didn't innovate it... Jobs merely demonstrated, as he repeatedly did through his life, how to take something that somebody else invented that had no apparent potential for commercial viability at the time, and make it into a packaged product that anybody can buy.

As it happened, Microsoft introduced a commercially viable version of their surface computing platform in the same calendar year that the iPhone was released.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I have both an iPad and a Galaxy Tab. I also have an HP Touchpad. I have on a couple of occasions grabbed the Tab thinking I was going for the iPad, and vice-versa. They actually are strikingly similar. I have never mistaken the Touchpad for either of the other two.

You can look at jpegs of the devices in question until you're blue in the face, but when you actually have your hands on them it's embarrassingly clear that Samsung copied the iPad down to tiny little details. That's why the 'rounded corners' bit of the case is only one of twenty five details Apple took issue with.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[rastoboy29]

So...are you defending Apple suing all and sundry over rounded rectangles?

Seriously?

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

The samsung one does look a cheap imitator. Seriously. Were I to see one in a store w/o a Samsung logo on it, I would have thought it was a knockoff.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[spire3661]

Samsung tried selling Pepsi in a Coke shaped bottle, which i think almost anyone will agree would be wrong. Looking at the 2 tablets its plain to see Samsung was trying ot confuse. Im not a huge fan of Apple, but I call out bullshit when i see it. Reducing the argument to lolroundedcorners is childish and ignores the reality that samsung intentionally tried to confuse the marketplace.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, tablets never looked like iPads at all... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Compaq_TC1100

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[spire3661]

NO it doesnt because the devil is in the details. The DETAILS of the samsung design patent case CERTAINLY show they are culpable. Anymore reductio ad absurdum and im gonna puke.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Dahamma]

The original Galaxy Tab was significantly different in many ways, and honestly, people hated it. It barely sold. Hundreds of thousands were returned to Samsung by retailers.

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 (which I assume is what you have?) was an intentional redesign (this is not a secret to anyone in the industry) to make it look as much like the iPad as possible. It's selling a lot better...

Personally, unless it's specifically patented or trademarked, I think Apple should just stop whining, imitation is not a crime (they should know, that's how the Mac came to being, of course). But you are clearly right, there's no question it is imitation...

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[ceoyoyo]

It's specifically trademarked and, in some cases, patented.

And yes, designing your product to look too much like another is a crime. Thus why Apple hasn't gotten thrown out of court and buying a Versacci bag in Venice will net you a $10,000 fine.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[xigxag]

No question that Samsung is trying to piggyback off the success of the Apple design, but CONFUSE? How does that work? I accidentally bought a $500 Samsung tablet with the word "SAMSUNG" printed in all caps on the front and the back, thinking it was an Apple. Those tricksters!!

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[gnasher719]

yes no one had glossy black tablets with 1 inch radius corners before iPad, not that 1992 compaq I linked to above

Can we see a picture from the side as well? I would just bet that it was a teeny bit thicker than the iPad. Thick enough to destroy any similarity.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[gnasher719]

No question that Samsung is trying to piggyback off the success of the Apple design, but CONFUSE? How does that work? I accidentally bought a $500 Samsung tablet with the word "SAMSUNG" printed in all caps on the front and the back, thinking it was an Apple. Those tricksters!!

Well, no. My mum, god bless her, bought me a Samsung tablet as a Christmas present, thinking it was an iPad. She's never heard of Apple or Samsung, she just bought what looked to her like an iPad. (Story made up like the one I responded to).

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[stephanruby]

Hopefully, the iPad will start copying the Android tablets at some point.

Those oversized icons look great on a phone, but they only make the tablet look like an oversized phone -- which it's not.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Dahamma]

Abusing a trademark and/or trying to pass off a product is a crime, sure - but Samsung is not selling an "Appel ePad". Rounded corners and black bezels can't be (and weren't) trademarked or patented. Just because their outer case looks similar (even intentionally) does not make it illegal.

If they used copyrighted Apple software, violated patents on the software or hardware, etc, inside the device, that's another story. But that's not what we were talking about here.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[forkfail]

Actually, yes, that is really about all the Apple has got. This article says it better than I can, though (and with pictures of what Apple thinks that Samsung should build.. basically, a triangular tablet a couple of inches thick with big ugly buttons and a cluttered desktop):

http://www.phonedog.com/2011/12/02/apple-s-design-suggestions-to-samsung-are-moronic-and-hypocritical/

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

What changes would you make to it to make it better? Just curious. Personally, I think they hit the sweet spot with the first design, except for the obvious screen density limitations.

p.s. Does the iPad have glossy paint? I thought it was aluminum??

Easy, I would put an SDXC socket in it like a properly designed tablet. But then they couldn't ass rape their customers for an extra 32GB.

Captcha is "thefts" , how appropriate.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Jesse_vd]

Maybe with the Retina screen they will update the iPad springboard with widgets and things, more like a desktop

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because they were limited by technology earlier, as a concept a thin flat screen with an embedded computer existed long before new Apple.

Grid of icons? Not specific to 'tabs but I think I have seen that before Iphone [Sarcasm]

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Tablets didn't start looking like the iPad until the iPad came out. That really should clue you into the idea that the design comes from Jonathan Ive's design studio and isn't some obvious thing that has been around forever." /facepalm

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/File:PADD.jpg

more

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/PADD

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

it meets half of your design requirements

It doesn't even meet half of your design requirements - which was just one.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[crankyspice]

Tablets didn't start looking like the iPad until the iPad came out. That really should clue you into the idea that the design comes from Jonathan Ive's design studio and isn't some obvious thing that has been around forever. Of course it seems obvious now, because the iPad is so successful. There's a cognitive bias going on where the thing that succeeded now seems obvious in retrospect even though it didn't before it came into existence.

This picture sums it up nicely: http://techviewstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/wpid-samsungvsapple0819111.jpg

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[crankyspice]

(I should also disclaim - I've been an Apple fanboi since a blended family and the addition of a fully loaded Apple IIc made our IIe (later 'enhanced' with the 65c02 / rom upgrade) redundant and a permanent fixture in my childhood bedroom. Then the IIgs, Performa 550 (later motherboard-swapped to a 68LC040 575), PowerBook 180, PowerBook 5300/100. Then a long hiatus, during the Dark Times. During the Empire. Windows NT 4 and 95/98, various Linux distributions (generally Slackware), on hand-cobbled x86 hardware. a VAIO PCG-Z505R dual-booting 98SE and RedHat 6.1. A couple of Suns (SPARCstation 4, Ultra 1/143, Ultra 10/440) and a NextStation mono, for good measure. Eventually, back to Apple, about the time Jaguar made the iBook G3/600 a viable daily driver.)

Today, I'm about as Mac-centric as you can get. Finally swapped my camera less BlackBerry 9650 for an iPhone 4S (though I keep the BB around for those places where cameras are verboten, just like I still have ThinkPad X40 for those times I can't lug my MacBook Air). iPad. Apple TV. MacBook (C2D/2.0), MacBook Pro (C2D/2.16), and MacBook Air (C2D/1.86). At the office I have a Mac mini (C2D/2.4). Etc.

The main reason (besides being a UNIX hack from way back, but needing to use Office and Acrobat Pro on a daily basis)? Design. These things are slickly sick in their design. IBM/Lenovo come close, but nothing quite touches Apple.

Samsung, by comparison... A couple of years ago, when I was still lugging a PalmOS device everywhere and smartphones were just on the horizon, I carried a Samsung SPH-A500. ('3G'?!) http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Repairing-Samsung-SPH-A500-Speaker/2693/1 Note the display -- it's off-center! By design! I know I'm a little OCD, but, symmetry counts...

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[AmiMoJo]

It's certainly not the radius of the corners, the 1-inch black border with chrome backing that peeks over just enough to frame it

You mean like this?

the grid of icons

The early desktops had those 30+ years ago, and actually the iOS home screen "copied" from the Android one as it developed over time (background images, more customisable icon layout etc). I use quotes because actually Android didn't invent those things either, it just happened to do them first on a mobile device. First out of iOS and Android, Windows CE and Symbian predate both again.

thievery of artwork

Those icons look a lot like the standard ones used in operating systems and apps for decades.

the touchscreen gestures that originated with iOS

Actually quite a few originated with graphics tablet / pen input device manufacturers, or with touchpad manufacturers. Drag to scroll, swipe and so forth.

Anyway, all Android devices do those things, as well as Windows Phone 7. Strangely Apple isn't suing Google or Microsoft over them.

Apple's claims are pretty weak. Design in computing and consumer devices in general has always been a massive feedback loop, and undeniably Apple has copied others when it suits them.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it does actually.

Oh yeah except for the 'SAMSUNG' emblazoned on the front, the different aspect ratio, the lack of a physical button on the front. It's about as similar to the iPad as the iPad is to the CrunchPad concept that preceded it.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

The logo is on the back, not the front. The proportions seem different when side by side when seen from a JPEG found on the net, in real life when sitting on a desk the proportional differences are not easy to spot. The iPad's Home Button is the same color as the bezel and has a teeny little icon on it, rendering it virtually invisible.

Meanwhile, the shape is virtually the same. The back casing is a similar metallic color that reaches all the way to the edge. The rounded corners are pretty much the same size. The buttons are in a similar arrangement, etc.

Eh fuggit, look at the pictures.

iPad

Galaxy Tab.

We can argue about how similar it is until the sun comes up, the fact is even Samsung's own lawyers couldn't tell them apart in front of the judge.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[ceoyoyo]

"imitation is not a crime"

Well then no worries, Apple's case is unfounded and the court will quickly find in favour of Samsung... er, whoops, they didn't. Apparently the judge disagrees with you.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Dahamma]

Ok, PLEASE READ THE GODDAMN THREAD before continuing your tangential rant...

It wasn't about patents, it was about the Galaxy looking like an iPad (which I agree with, it does). Everyone (even you?) except for one Apple-hater also agrees with that. No one has said Samsung hasn't infringed on patents, because how the hell would we know that?

And as far as physical imitation/likeness complaints, Apple has already lost that argument in several countries, while it has not definitively won any suits (even for patent infringement, let alone making a similar case). And honestly, I would bet Samsung has violated at least one Apple patent. But again, unless you are actually claiming the Galaxy Tab is literally a *counterfeit* iPad (which no judge has remotely agreed with), then THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[ceoyoyo]

You're the one shouting. Shall I quote you again? Okay, here you go, your words:

"imitation is not a crime"

Yes, it is. If your product imitates a competitor to a certain legally defined point then it is illegal. Anyway, you're wrong about patents too. Apple does own design patents on the iPad and iPhone. Here's one for the iPad: http://www.scribd.com/matt_macari/d/66467658-USD627777S1. IIRC Apple's lawsuit in Germany was mostly based on imitation, not patents, while their suit in California is based on the patents.

I don't really understand you. Are you having trouble with the facts or can you just not admit you're wrong? Are you so strenuously objecting to my example of a Versacci bag? That's clearly not a counterfeit, it has a different name. But it is similar enough to the genuine article that it can easily be confused. My point with that example is that's the origin of laws regarding products that are too similar, even if there isn't an actual design patent involved.

Take a deep breath. Maybe a nice walk. You seem to be getting pretty excited about this.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://lawpundit.blogspot.com/2011/08/samsung-digital-picture-frame-2006-is.html

Not really.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[arkane1234]

p.s. Does the iPad have glossy paint? I thought it was aluminum??
Yeah, the iPad is aluminum. The "glossy paint" thing was a feeble attempt at degrading the iPad.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[arkane1234]

You're that guy at the liquor store that screams incessantly when pabst blue ribbon is $0.50 more than the store down the street, aren't you?

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

No, tablets never looked like iPads at all... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Compaq_TC1100

Thanks for posting a link to something that doesn't look like an iPad.

Re:Why would it be radically different?

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, unless it's specifically patented or trademarked, I think Apple should just stop whining, imitation is not a crime (they should know, that's how the Mac came to being, of course).

Imitation is not a good description of it. The Lisa and Macintosh projects were already underway before the famous PARC tour. The Mac was influenced by what Jobs and some of the team saw at Xerox, but it also wasn't anything like a carbon copy. The GUI didn't look very much like PARC's GUI, and in fact contained a lot of innovations unique to Apple. Also, the implementation was radically different under the hood (Xerox used OOP SmallTalk, Apple used a mix of Pascal and 68K assembly).

This guy has some screenshots which you can use to compare early Xerox GUIs to Apple's Macintosh GUI:

http://toastytech.com/guis/index.html

And this is a really neat sequence showing the evolution of the Lisa GUI, which was the predecessor of the Mac GUI:

http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Busy_Being_Born.txt

Android fanboy response

[Anonymous Coward]

"i don't like ipads because of [shit that ain't true]"

"you know [shit that ain't true] isn't true?"

"MY OPINION BROSEPH"

why do we care about shape?

[Sebastopol]

Why have we grown so accustomed to the style changing radically every new release? Not just apple, but any phone, or gadget, or car... Why do we feel this need to see a new fancy box?

Seems like once we arrive at the thinnest tablets, it will be the ultimate "form follows function": a flat panel. Will we then no longer expect a radical new shape? (circular tablets?)

/scratches head/

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm an ubuntu user

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Anonymous Coward]

Will we then no longer expect a radical new shape? (circular tablets?)

/scratches head/

Wouldn't that be a radial new shape?

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Hijacked Public]

I care about the shape of the phone more than the pad, partly because I don't have a pad but also because these devices need to evolve into something more fit to hold in our hands.

Obviously there is some minimum screen size that people will want for a given device. So once that area is defined, and hardware can be crammed into some very thin space behind it, designers should be free to shape the rest of a device's case in some hand(s) friendly way.

I've seen some anecdotal data suggesting that iphones and other thin, candy bar format touchscreen phones, get dropped more often than older designs. Nokia has a couple of designs that appear to work on that problem.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Lord of the Fries]

Two Words: Social Status

In an increasingly narcissitic society, we look to the gadgets we wield to say something about our social status. The consumer wet dream is that the brand is distinct (I own an Apple, I own a Razr, etc), but that each new version is distinguishable from the previous version so that I can flaunt that "I have the 4S while you only have the 4."

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Kenja]

If it didn't change significantly, people wouldn't throw out there perfectly good iPad 2 and buy the new one.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Sebastopol]

+1 /snort/ ;-)

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same reason you don't have a girlfriend. :)

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Gilmoure]

Or wait for the iPad 3 to come out so they can pick up an iPad 2 when it's price drops to something a bit more palatable.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Where?

Re:why do we care about shape?

[pz]

The idea of appearance creep happened when the US car manufacturers figured out that they could make boatloads of money by taking the same old mechanicals and putting a new body on top each year (back before unibody designs, when it was a trivial amount of engineering and manufacturing adjustments to create new body panels compared with making a completely new car design; nowadays with the body being an integral part of the structural scaffold, changing the appearance is not quite as easy). It happened in the 1950s, the age of prosperity and upward mobility, when the US middle class was created and the need to keep up with Jones firmly established in the national psyche. We, Americans, were told that we needed to buy, buy, buy and having the latest and greatest was always best.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Shark]

I'm with you on that one.

I actually made a mental picture prior to clicking the link of what it might look like, guess what I came up with... It's a display on one side and no display on the other side... Was I surprised? No! It's so amazing... A tablet that just looks like a tablet and I had the great imaginative power to guess figure it out all by myself. Anyone interested in my predictions of what the iPhone 6 will look like?

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because like fashion, consumer technology (has come to a state where it) is never finished.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[roc97007]

> Why have we grown so accustomed to the style changing radically every new release? Not just apple, but any phone, or gadget, or car... Why do we feel this need to see a new fancy box?

I think that's the direction Apple's designers are going. You buy the new box not because it looks any different, or acts any different, but simply because we tell you to.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[swalve]

I love that the new flagship Blackberry Bold 9900 looks just like the 9000. Don't mess with success.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Two Words: Social Status

No kidding. I was amazed to see people all over NYC taking pictures with their iPads. They're far too big and unwieldy to make a good camera, but these people seemed to be looking around to see who was watching them take pictures with their iPads.

In my neck of the woods, lots of people have iPads, but nobody uses them as cameras. We also tend to walk around in the latest fashions from L.L. Bean and Carhardt.

Re:why do we care about shape?

[Meski]

Waiting for a klein bottle shaped iPad...

Essentially looks the same?

[wjcofkc]

Maybe they could sue themselves over it.

Re:Essentially looks the same?

[forkfail]

With the legal precedence they're setting, they'll wind up getting sued if they ever do change the look and feel; they're creating a walled garden from which there will be no escape.

Expectations? Pah.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you were expecting a radically different-looking tablet from the iPad 2, prepare for a minor letdown.

Nope, not in the slightest. As long as it has rounded corners and glossy surfaces I'm sure Apple's rabid fanbase will chuck their iPad 2's away in a hurry for the next big thing.

The biggest question....

[mwfischer]

Will it be 4G or 3G?

3G = who cares.
4G = needs a nuclear reactor for 5 hours of battery life.

There is no clear win.

Re:The biggest question....

[rsmith-mac]

Actually for a tablet it won't make all that huge of a difference. On a tablet the primary power consumer is the screen, not the electronics; the electronics are almost an afterthought compared to trying to light up a 9.7" screen. This is the inverse of phones where the electronics are the primary consumer and the screen is the secondary consumer (although it's not lopsided like it is on tablets).

So Apple could easily throw in a 40nm LTE radio with only a small impact to battery life (~1H). However it's Apple, so they're more likely to use a 28nm radio, in which case the power hit will be noticeably less, and not all that different from a 3G radio.

Re:The biggest question....

[Anonymous Coward]

Will it be 4G or 3G?

3G = who cares.
4G = needs a nuclear reactor for 5 hours of battery life.

There is no clear win.

3G = The ascended Saint Jobs made it very clear that 3G is all we need, and we revere Saint Jobs and hold his name on high.
4G = THE HEATHENS WHOSE PHONE OS DOES NOT DESERVE MENTION WILL FALL BEFORE THE MIGHT AND GLORY OF JOBS AND HIS HOLY AVATAR, APPLE. The "4G" and "LTE" marks of The Green Robot Beast will be the downfall of all who desecrate the perfection of The Apple. REPENT, SINNERS!

There. Fixed that for you.

Re:The biggest question....

[Belial6]

My phone runs 6 hours easily as a 4G hotspot. It has no problem lasting the day not as a hotspot. My screen is still the primary power draw on my phone. The only problem with 4G seems to be a problem with having a crappy carrier.

Re:The biggest question....

[ceoyoyo]

3G/4G - meh, who cares.

High resolution screen - wow.

If it actually has that screen then everything else could be identical to an iPad 2 and it would be a hit.

Re:The biggest question....

[stephanruby]

There is if you're like me, and just use 4G only when you really need it and for just short amounts of time.

Re:The biggest question....

[Anonymous Coward]

3G = The ascended Saint Jobs made it very clear that 3G is all we need, and we revere Saint Jobs and hold his name on high.

I thought Stevie-o said EDGE was all we need?

Re:The biggest question....

[swalve]

Weird. My new 4g phone seems to have better battery life than my old 3g one, and that's with a smaller capacity battery.

Why would they change the design?

[StoutFiles]

It works. People like it. Redesigns are expensive.

Re:Why would they change the design?

[Colonel Korn]

It works. People like it. Redesigns are expensive.

Maybe they'd change it to avoid getting sued by Samsung for copying the Samsung Digital Photo Frame design: http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/47/samsung_digital_photo_frame.gif

Re:Why would they change the design?

[Dog-Cow]

Maybe they'd change it so that your head would spontaneously combust the moment you saw it. But oh well, not even Jobs was that good.

Re:Why would they change the design?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

It works. People like it. Redesigns are expensive.

Maybe they'd change it to avoid getting sued by Samsung for copying the Samsung Digital Photo Frame design: http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/artikelen/47/samsung_digital_photo_frame.gif

Yeah, that looks exactly like an iPad. Especially the back.

Re:Why would they change the design?

[makomk]

The Samsung photo frame got a lot of attention because the design patents Apple are using to sue Samsung don't cover the back of the device. At all.

Re:Why would they change the design?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

The Samsung photo frame got a lot of attention because the design patents Apple are using to sue Samsung don't cover the back of the device. At all.

Ohh sorry. This isn't about the actual back, it's about the side view that is A) covered by the design patent, and B) on the Samsung picture framed dominated by the humpback, not to mention the fuggly stick protruding from it. Yeah, apart from that the Samsung device looks exactly like the older Apple design patent..

All these leaks...

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is carefully leaking information to dilute the new tablets that are going to be presented in the Mobile World Congress 2012 just in a few days. Samsung is rumored to present there a tablet with high resolution like the iPad3 and Apple might not catch up in time, and it seems that they are leaking this and announcing a bit afterwards...

Ok, but why buy it

[obi1one]

I bought an ipad 1 right when it came out, because it was exactly what I had been waiting for, a large screen web surfing/media consumption device. The question is, how is apple going to get me to upgrade it? Sure the ipad 3 will load web pages faster, but I doubt itll be 500$ faster. It may run some applications better, but I just want to consume media. By designing a device that (at least for me) is just about media consumption, the only way I can be driven to upgrade is by some form of media coming out that my ipad cant handle.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[roc97007]

Because 3 > 2. Get with the program!

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[shutdown -p now]

By designing a device that (at least for me) is just about media consumption, the only way I can be driven to upgrade is by some form of media coming out that my ipad cant handle.

Like, say, HD video, which is explicitly mentioned in TFA?

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[AdrianKemp]

It sounds very much like you bought the iPad because it was first, rather than because it was the iPad (which is perfectly reasonable).

If all you're really doing in media consumption, then the upgrades will mean little to nothing to you; you'd also be further ahead to buy a different tablet if you were in the market right now.

The iPad's strength is in all of the other stuff it can do, and everyone I know that owns one (myself included of course) will be buying the 3 if the display is better and the speed bump is 2x or better.

Since the iPad has replaced my laptop, I have no problem paying $500 a year to keep it up to date.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Fallingcow]

The iPad 1 isn't likely to be able to run iOS 6, judging by how badly iOS 5 cut in to its usable (for apps) RAM, so if you want any future OS features and/or newer software that requires them, you'll need a newer machine.

App makers will likely abandon the iPad 1 as soon as they have a decent excuse, due to the aforementioned RAM limitations, so third party software will stop getting updates and newer apps won't work at all.

Not trying to convince you or saying those are sufficient reasons to shell out $500, but the iPad 1 probably won't be supported much longer, if you care about that. It's one way Apple might prod an upgrade.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Anonymous Coward]

They're not trying to sell it to you. They're trying to sell it to people with no iPad. There's still a lot more of those.

Any upgrading is just a bonus.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[nitio]

which is the time you buy a new one and stuff the old in a cabinet door in your kitchen plugged to the power outlet 24x7 and use it as whatever means you want in the kitchen.

people replacing hardware every year is not the problem - the problem is when they replace and leave the other one to eat dust when they could make some cool usage. (or, you know, charity)

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Oswald McWeany]

Wow! I wouldn't even pay $500 a year for a desktop- let alone some neutered "carry around" device.

$500 would get me a machine I would keep for 5 years + and do way more than an iPad can. I can't fathom spending $500 on a device I'll throw away after a year. Presumably if you get a data plan for it- that's another $200 or so a year.

So $700 a year just on a tech-status symbol that does less than a desktop.

Doesn't seem worth it to me.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[viperidaenz]

Don't worry, every new iOS upgrade will make your old device slower and slower. Just a little bit each time though, so you don't notice too much. Then they'll add a fancy new feature that doesn't run on the old devices because "they're not good enough". Even though most of the processing is done in the cloud and its essentially only doing the work of a 15 year old mobile - compressing audio, sending it to a server and waiting for a response.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Anonymous Coward]

"Sure the ipad 3 will load web pages faster, but I doubt itll be 500$ faster."

According to people, the iPad2 is lightning fast. It has no lag and is very performant, and has a Wireless-N connection. I don't see how it would be possible to load web pages faster.

It apparently has a higher resolution, brighter display, which I guess is what you're looking at in terms of an improvement.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

A double-resolution screen doesn't meet that requirement?

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[AdrianKemp]

So aside from the fact that you're trolling extremely poorly:

An iPad/year is a cost of $1.50 a day, you want to talk about expensive "status symbols" (seriously, if you think the iPad is a status symbol get a life) look no further than gourmet coffee.

Now since I actually do things for a living, my iPad is both paid for by my company and even if it wasn't a buck fifty a day to keep something I use several hours a day up to date is a fantastic deal... I use my car less than that and it costs a hell of a lot more.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Overzeetop]

Useless. For a screen size so small, HD doesn't really mean much. For static images, like reading higher definition documents, like manuals in PDF form, it IS a bonus. It's also nicer for map applications, as the screen will be sharper and be able to carry more detail.

For video, upping the resolution is just whipping it out to measure, because when it comes to motion video, sometimes more resolution is just more resolution.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[tooyoung]

There seems to be an assumption that you would need to upgrade. New cars get released every year. Why would I upgrade to the new Honda Civic when the model I bought two years ago is working fine for me?

Apple (and car manufacturers) are going to continue to release new models year after year. Some people are going to immediately get the newest thing (much more so with a relatively inexpensive tablet), but a large member of the user group is going to stick with what they have because it is already working fine for them.

Our tendency is to mistakenly think that this works against Apple. Yes, I'm sure that Apple would love it if everyone who had an iPad 1 or 2 threw it away and bought a 3. However, read your own words - you're saying that you bought version 1 of a device and it is still working out great for you around the time that version 3 comes out. Sounds like you are pretty happy with your purchase. Companies like Apple should be happy about that. It works against them if owners of previous models feel burned when the new version comes out.

Judging from the article's speculations about the iPad 3 (who knows how accurate they are), these are fairly incremental improvements - better battery, better screen resolution, etc. This is similar to what I'd expect with a new car model from year to year.

Only a small segment of the market is going to rush out and buy the latest and greatest. Companies like Apple can succeed by recognizing that and growing a set of repeat buyers out of the remaining field. The fact that consumers aren't feeling burned when new models come out, and feel that old models work fine, makes those consumers more likely to repeat a purchase.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[jeffmeden]

I bought an ipad 1 right when it came out, because it was exactly what I had been waiting for, a large screen web surfing/media consumption device. The question is, how is apple going to get me to upgrade it? Sure the ipad 3 will load web pages faster, but I doubt itll be 500$ faster. It may run some applications better, but I just want to consume media. By designing a device that (at least for me) is just about media consumption, the only way I can be driven to upgrade is by some form of media coming out that my ipad cant handle.

If it doesn't have a complete piece of shit for a camera, you might persuade me that it has value (this is coming from an iPad 2 owner.) To hold a fast, capable device with such a nice big screen, and then to say "wait no I don't want to use this to take a picture, let me get my phone out instead" is just a fucking joke. It's interesting (albeit not surprising at all) to see the Apple marketing machine reverse course on the notion that people holding tablets don't want to take halfway usable pictures, and yet none of the Apple followers even blinked.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[shutdown -p now]

It's useless in a strictly technical sense, but it remains a major marketing feature, and many people are convinced that it actually matters - enough so to create a kind of placebo effect.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Tablizer]

I bought an ipad 1 right when it came out...The question is, how is apple going to get me to upgrade it?

One possibility is Apple's intentionally blocking of certain apps that mirror the newest features. For example, iPhone 4Gs comes with a speech interpreter. But, there is no speech interpreter app for the 4G with the same capabilities, only reduced-functionality ones (that have nothing to do with chip power). Therefor to get full speech, you gotta buy the damned new one. @#&% Apple!

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[spire3661]

It has a wireless 5 Ghz-N connection, to be precise, the 4S is limited to 2.4 Ghz.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Oswald McWeany]

Ahhh... so the iPad is company bought. Well that makes it more worthwhile. I would let my company buy me an iPad every year too with no complains.

There was no trolling intent from me- just a general bewilderment on why anyone would spend so much more on a device that offers less functionality- I admit they are pretty cool and neat toys. Incidentally- I suspect rather than being a seperate group- the "buys expensive gourmet coffee" group on a venn diagram would heavily overlap with the "owns an iPad group".

Both iPads and Gourment coffee consumption serve the same requirement of fulfilling social-bling.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[RocketRabbit]

This is an excellent point. I am also very happy with my original iPad. The newer iPads are a bit thinner, but the battery life is about the same, and I have heard that the iPad 2's glass and metal are both thinner.

My guess is that as with OS X / PPC, they will release a new version of the iOS that will not run on the iPad one, excusing themselves by claiming it needs more ram or multi-core or some such nonsense.

Anyway I use the iPad instead of a laptop. I am writing a book with it, and using a Bluetooth keyboard some of the time. My buddy uses Garage Band and has made some pretty impressive stuff with it. You can do more than consume media with an iPad, and perhaps Apple will emphasize this with the next iteration. A pressure-sensitive screen would go a long way toward doing that.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[WankersRevenge]

As an app developer, I won't abandon the iPad 1 until iOS5 is well out of reach. We're talking three or four years when iOS7 is released. And you know something - even if apps are no longer written for it, it's not like the device will stop working. It will still make for a great email/surfing device.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[shadowrat]

Naturally you want the new upgrades to ios that coincidentally only run on ipads newer than the original ipad.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think an iPad ISN'T a status symbol, get out of the basement.

No matter what any computer users say, getting a shiny new apple product IS most certainly a status symbol. You may not see it as one, and may even vehemently debate that it is not one. But that's irrelevant. The rest of society sees it as one. If you're there with an iPad, that says "oohhh, he's one of those IPAD owners! He's gotta be rich and hip and trendy"

Argue it all you want, but that's what society says, and that's how apple advertises it.

And you know damn well that someone who spends $5 a day or whatever they cost on a Starbucks fancy coffee is NOT going to stop doing that when they get an iPad. They will not change to buying a $3 cheap coffee.

And all of that is besides the point. $1.50 a day (although that only comes to $547.50 a year, so that would probably be closer to $2 a day... or at the bare minimum $2 a day in Canada, where everything is a few hundred more expensive here despite the dollar being virtually at parity) IS expensive. Why? IT'S STILL $700 A YEAR! Of COURSE it sounds not so bad when you decrease the timeline. Hell, that's how I've seen a ton of warrantee or insurance type things advertised.

Guess what else sounds small. One penny. One single penny. What the fuck is a penny? You see one on the ground, most people don't even bother taking the time to bend over and pick it up. It's more hassle than it's worth. It's all but meaningless. But guess what, if the small text said you pay that every minute, that's still over $5000 a year.

So I COULD spend $700 a year on a portable computing status symbol (again... it's a status symbol no matter what you say, remember?) OR... I could have bought and played 10 brand new PS3 games, or bought about 46 books. Wow, that's a helluva lotta books! OR!!! Or, or, or... that amount of money approximately pays for my ENTIRE FOOD BUDGET FOR THE YEAR.

Or let's look at this another way. Let's say I spend $700 on a computer that will last 5+ years (and that'd be a damn nice computer at that price). Well shit... there's 4 years that I'm not spending the extra money. That's $2800 I'm not spending. Now unless you're the 1%, that IS a healthy chunk of change.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Bogtha]

how is apple going to get me to upgrade it?

Why do you think that's a priority for Apple? The number of people who don't have an iPad is far greater than the number of people who do. The more people using an iPad of any version means more money for them through iTunes, the App Store, etc.

If you look at their historical behaviour, they tend to support devices for at least a couple of major iOS revisions. When the iPad 1 was first launched, it was running iOS 3.2. They released iOS 4.2 towards the end of the year, and they've not long released iOS 5.0. Presumably iOS 6 won't run on your iPad.

When iOS 6 is released, people with iPad 2s and 3s will upgrade. When enough of them have upgraded, developers will start to drop support for iOS 5.0. That's when it will start affecting you - there will be apps you won't be able to run, updates to your existing apps won't install, your options will slowly become more and more limited.

Apple also removes support for legacy versions of iOS from their SDK fairly quickly too, so when iOS 7 rolls out, all the developers that have been supporting you won't have the choice any more. At that point, which is probably 2-3 years away, you'll get very little out of the App Store, several of your existing apps will have stopped working, and you'll be eyeing up the iPad 4 or 5.

Apple's business model doesn't rely on people upgrading every year or two. It's true, vast numbers of people do so, but they can quite happily sell new devices to newcomers without relying on you upgrading.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[gorrepati]

You forgot books. Its what they are after next.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[SigNick]

Even better, a quadruple-resolution screen.
1024 horizontal pixels -> 2048 = 2x resolution horizontally.
768 vertical pixels -> 1536 pixels = 2x resolution vertically.
2+2=4 times the resolution.

(1024*768 = 0,786432 megapixels while 2048*1536 = 3,145728 megapixels, or exactly four times as much).

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Anonymous Coward]

my gourmet coffee costs less than a quarter a day. I think you may be overpaying, probably for "atmosphere" and stray, burnt grounds at some trendy shit shop. oh right you are defending the trendy shit shop of a product, the ipad. sweet.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow! I wouldn't even pay $500 a year for a desktop- let alone some neutered "carry around" device.

Those of us who leave our parents' basement from time to time value the "carry around" ability of said device.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[0ld_d0g]

Take the minimum amount of screen size required for a 1:1 output of a display with the maximum amount of pixel density that the eye can manage to see. If the screen is bigger than the area, (which it always is), it is possible to differentiate and enjoy the improvement between low and high-res display. For e.g. At the pixel density of the iPad3 a DVD vs BluRay comparison on an iPad1 vs iPad3 will be a handsdown win for the iPad3. I have the Sony VPCZ2 laptop - 1920x1080 display on a 13" screen and its fricking gorgeous. When I use my 15" MacBook Pro at 1400x900 it feels like going back a generation.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Kjella]

A quick check with a distance calculator says a person with 20/20 vision should be able to see the difference around 2 feet out and get full resolution at about 1 feet. I would think most people hold it closer than 2 feet, that'd really be at arm's length. That said, the order goes contrast, saturation, color accuracy, resolution... it's not the first thing people notice.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[drerwk]

I have an iPad 1. I like it. Bought my wife an iPad 2 and she likes it and I like it a bit more than my 1. I upgraded from a 2001 PowerBook to a 13 inch Air - it is awesome. Not much larger or heavier than the iPad 1 and all the computing I need - anything more is what the servers in the office are for. I just leave it in my bag, which I will not do with the fat ugly Dell work gives out. But if the iPad 3 will work as a nice second screen to the Macbook Air, it will be tempting. For me it will be almost all about how nice the screen looks. I went from an iPhone 1 to a 4 and I could not believe how much nicer it is to read.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[Overzeetop]

At 60 frames per second? I doubt it. My vision is (or was) corrected to my pre-glasses 20:15 and 20:10 level and I can tell you that it matters a huge amount on static images, such as PDFs (as mentioned above "books", though in my case it would be music), but is nearly indistinguishable in full motion video. Watching on an old iPhone 3gs and a newer iPhone4, a properly encoded video has very little additional detail, and a 15-20" ipad viewing length would be difficult to distinguish without a side by side comparison.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[AdrianKemp]

You are so stupid it hurts.

That is all.

Re:Ok, but why buy it

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

I bought an ipad 1 right when it came out...The question is, how is apple going to get me to upgrade it?

One possibility is Apple's intentionally blocking of certain apps that mirror the newest features. For example, iPhone 4Gs comes with a speech interpreter. But, there is no speech interpreter app for the 4G with the same capabilities, only reduced-functionality ones (that have nothing to do with chip power). Therefor to get full speech, you gotta buy the damned new one. @#&% Apple!

And I bet you can explain us how Apple kept those "at least as good" apps from Android.

Get over it

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple has a very successful product. You can't claim that it's all a "rabid fanbase" when they sold 15 million iPads in the first year, and 40 million in the second year. Heck, they sold more last quarter than they did in the first year.

Re:Get over it

[Gilmoure]

Exactly! All Apple does is market to know-nothing hipsters with more money than sense and if all these people would just pay attention to what the smart people on Slashdot have to say they wouldn't be waisting all this money on useless tablet computers that can't even compile a basic python script or run a 3D CAD/CAM controller app.

Re:Get over it

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly! All Apple does is market to know-nothing hipsters with more money than sense and if all these people would just pay attention to what the smart people on Slashdot have to say they wouldn't be waisting all this money on useless tablet computers that can't even compile a basic python script or run a 3D CAD/CAM controller app.

 
Your average user does neither of these things ever. Face facts; computers are no longer exclusive to geeks and production cultures. They haven't been since the mid 90s. In this way they're just as likely to become appliances for the 21st century as anything else.

Re:Get over it

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

Apple has a very successful product. You can't claim that it's all a "rabid fanbase" when they sold 15 million iPads in the first year, and 40 million in the second year. Heck, they sold more last quarter than they did in the first year.

I'm sure he meant "rabbit fanbase".

Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[AdrianKemp]

Anyone who has ever written iOS software knows that the UI scaling is done by float, and can easily take a value of 1.5.

That means that apple could very reasonably put in a display that was a rational density, still be considered retina by it's accepted definition, and not cost a bajillion dollars each.

Now, it's possible that apple has managed to leverage it's supply chains and reserves to push display tech forward so massively, but there is absolutely no reason to assume that they have.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[shutdown -p now]

Anyone who has ever written iOS software knows that the UI scaling is done by float, and can easily take a value of 1.5.

It can technically be done, but results will look like crap, because scaling of bitmaps does not look well if you don't use an integer factor - either you get some pixels larger than other, or you need to use interpolation, resulting in an altogether blurry picture. There's a reason why Apple did 2x upscale with iPhone 4, rather than going for the then industry-standard-already 480x800.

Besides, from TFA, it looks like they have already identified the specific LCD screen that looks like it's tailor made for iPad 3 in dimensional terms - and it's 2048x1536.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple spent a decade trying to get non-integral scaling factors to work in OS X and have pretty much come to the conclusion that it's a bad idea for general-purpose UI layout. You don't want controls aligned to anything but a pixel boundary, and rounding to the nearest pixel creates all kinds of havoc when it comes to using bitmapped artwork on inconsistently sized UI elements. The iPad will jump to 2x when the time is right, and it looks like the iPad 3 is going to be it.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[AdrianKemp]

No, you're talking about bitmap scaling which is not what is happening. When you create an iPhone 4 app you provide separate graphics at the new resolution. The same would be done here. UI elements are also native images for the resolution.

It is true that scaled apps from standard res would look less than stellar, but they already do.

As for them finding the specific LCD screen, you've clearly never paid attention to the lead-up to an apple product release.

The only thing that points to a 2x screen at all is the resources found in iOS5, but they've been there since before the 2 came out... didn't get a 2x screen then either.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[viperidaenz]

They'll probably just buy the LCD's from Samsung

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[shutdown -p now]

No, you're talking about bitmap scaling which is not what is happening. When you create an iPhone 4 app you provide separate graphics at the new resolution. The same would be done here. UI elements are also native images for the resolution.

When you create a new app, or update one, sure. But it won't happen overnight; in the meantime, existing apps should be usable. iPhone 4 can still run apps created for iPhone 3 and below. And the reason why it can do that without them looking like crap is because it scales them up using an integer factor.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[Hatta]

It can technically be done, but results will look like crap, because scaling of bitmaps does not look well if you don't use an integer factor

Why do you assume they are using bitmaps? In this day and age everything from icons to fonts should be vector.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[shutdown -p now]

Why do you assume they are using bitmaps? In this day and age everything from icons to fonts should be vector.

Yeah, well, it plainly ain't so on Apple platforms - no need to assume anything.

Heck, they still use absolute units for UI layout, last I checked (those can be scaled, like dialog units on Win32, but only uniformly - no flexible layouts, only anchors). And neither OS X nor iOS still have any supported way to override DPI to set it to something other than Jobs intended it to be - as I discovered to my dismay after hooking up Mac Mini to my TV, and wanted to scale UI up a bit. That should tell you all you need to know about why people are mostly using bitmaps in OS X and iOS apps.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[ceoyoyo]

Pre-iPhone 4 apps look just fine on an iPhone 4, resolution doubled. There are quite a few of them now, and there were a LOT of them when the 4 first came out. Many developers don't bother including bitmaps for both the pre-4 and 4+.

You're thinking of the fat apps that contain both an iPhone and an iPad version. The iPhone versions do look crappy on the iPad, but it's because they're blown up so much in size, not because they're lower resolution being displayed on the same size screen.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[MogNuts]

I for one am a big advocate for higher resolutions. Though shame it will go to waste on games. My 8800 GTS 512 can't even handle that resolution. An iPad definitely won't. It will upscale, and that will look like crap, just like the consoles do it now on a 1080p TV. And that looks like crap too.

Shame that this resolution for games will go to waste for at least another few years.

Re:Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x

[makomk]

It should be, but in this day and age if you want a scalable UI you need Android and not iOS. Sorry.

When?

[Anonymous Coward]

When will it be available in stores?

Re:When?

[shutdown -p now]

You must be new to that whole "Apple" thing. It will be available in stores when Apple CEO will come out and say "It's now available in stores".

Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[dryriver]

I don't get it... There are x dozen tablet makers out there (Samsung/Android most notably), but each time the tiniest detail about iPhone/iPad "N" is leaked, there is a big bruhaha and Apple gets huuuuuge attention. Apple is overrated and - very often - overpriced. Who cares what iPad 3/4/5 "look like"? Its same-old-same-old from Apple, with a new processor+camera+screen thrown in. Big fucking deal! Apple products, to my mind, are aimed at people who have plenty of money but very little technical knowledge or buying sense. Let the sheeple throw their money at the new iPad 3. Personally, I will be waiting to see what novelties Samsung & Others bring to market.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[Dzimas]

Like it or not, Apple basically defined the tablet market, and their hardware + iOS ecosystem is incredibly profitable. Like it or not, Samsung is perceived as a major clone maker -- the 21st century equivalent of Compaq in the late 1980s.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[Anonymous Coward]

Like it or not, Apple basically defined the tablet market, and their hardware + iOS ecosystem is incredibly profitable. Like it or not, Samsung is perceived as a major clone maker -- the 21st century equivalent of Compaq in the late 1980s.

Like it or not Tablets running Android were out before the iPad. They were out even before Google release an official Tablet version of the OS. Oh and like it or not Tablets existed before even the iPhone if you consider all functional tablets not just ones based on Phone OSes. Apple didn't Invent anything they just have really good Advertising and a huge following of iSheep.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[UnknowingFool]

The OP said Apple defined the tablet not that they had the first ones. MS had Windows tablets long before Apple and Android. But MS' vision of a tablet was a more expensive version of laptop with a touchscreen and a stylus. Little was done to define a tablet as anything different. And these tablets failed to sell in any significant numbers. To this day, MS still declares tablets to be PCs whereas everyone else sees them in a separate category. According to that logic, that would give Apple the largest marketshare of PCs.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[b0bby]

Let the sheeple throw their money at the new iPad 3. Personally, I will be waiting to see what novelties Samsung & Others bring to market.

This is why Apple gets the attention. You (and I) are still waiting to get a decent Android tablet, and Apple is selling the third generation of theirs. My wife & kids are loving their iPad/iPod Touches, while I'm fiddling with the old Droid I bought because I got fed up waiting for "Samsung & Others" to produce something I wanted to actually pay for.

Seriously, what would you tell someone who wanted a tablet within the next month to buy? I'd say wait until next month & get an iPad 3. If they wanted a Transformer they wouldn't be asking my advice, they'd have bought it.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[aiken_d]

The world must be a really confusing place for you, if you actually believe that drivel. And it must be terrifying to see more and more "iSheep", these inferior beings who are sucked in by slick advertising and mindlessly buy crappy products.

On the bright side, with those remarkable powers of self-delusion and reality denial, plus a superiority complex, you may have a promising career in politics.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[Dzimas]

Like it or not Tablets running Android were out before the iPad.

Samsung released a little 7" tablet running Android 2.2 about five months after the iPad. The first commercial hardware running a Tablet version of Android was the Motorola Xoom, released 10 months after the iPad. Prior to that, there were a few utterly forgettable Android tablets from Archos, Dell and MSI. Apple's brand recognition, marketing clout, industrial design and the App Store helped to build a market segment that no one else had been able to crack. I'm not an Apple fanboi, but the products released by Steve and his minions forced other companies to play catch-up. Without the iPad, my non-Apple tablet and non-Apple smartphone would not exist in the form they do now.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[Dog-Cow]

You, in the mind of most people who have been exposed to your silly bigotry, consider you ripe for extinction.

Really, who the hell cares what you think of the market position of Apple products? Millions of people like them, including many developers and engineers. You know... people who have a job to do with computers and want quality hardware to do it with. Apple products are reasonably priced, in the main. Most are comparable to the closest competition. Samsung has yet to innovate, so I'd guess you're going to be waiting for a very long time. Please do us a favor and hold your breath in anticipation.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[oxdas]

I do wonder how much of that lack of defining a tablet as "anything different" was technological. Capacitive touch screens; powerful, energy-efficient consumer processors, advances in battery technology, etc. were important factors in determining the viability of both the iPhone and iPad. The fact that LG was the first to market with a capacitive touch screen smartphone speaks volumes to the direction the market was moving, with or without Apple. Apple did leverage their exceptional ability to make user interfaces for the masses to make the best (or at lease most polished) product to date, but I am not certain the market would not have moved in this direction even without Apple (although Apple may certainly have accelerated the evolution).

Not to nitpick, but HP sold about 62 million computers and 900,000 touchpads in 2011, Apple sold about 40 million ipads and about 17 million macs = 57 million units (close, but not quite).

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[UnknowingFool]

I think the main problem with a Windows tablet was the overwhelming edict that everything must look and act like Windows thus MS never went beyond thinking about a different UI much less implementing one. One thing that would have changed was the stylus. It came about because MS had to replicate a mouse. Since some of the Windows UI elements might be too small to touch with fingers, they adapted a stylus. It seemed that changing all the UI elements to fit fingers was not explored because the it wouldn't be "Windows".

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[oxdas]

I guess this really comes down to how a tablet would have developed without Apple. Capacitive screen smartphones, and non-microsoft UI's, had already arrived. It does seem logical to expand that form factor if there is a market for it (as there is/was for tablet computers). The system that was to become Android (as well as several others) was already well under development (causing many problems between Sun and the Apache Foundation). I think Apple profoundly influenced the direction the market took, but it appears to me that all of the pieces were falling into place for a capacitive touchscreen tablet with or without Apple. Perhaps it is only a matter of semantics, but it seems to me that Apple shaped the market, but didn't necessarily create it.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[UnknowingFool]

My perspective is that others might have gotten there eventually but Apple sped up the development by example and shaped the market. It would be the same for smart phones. Smart phones existed before Apple, but before Apple everyone focused on business needs. Yes some companies put out consumer models but they were just business models slightly modified for consumer use. Apple's main focus was designing a smart phone for consumers first and this drove many of the design decisions. It's not rocket science that consumer technology must be as simple and polished to use as possible but many companies don't put as much emphasis on this instead of adding more features.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

I don't get it... There are x dozen tablet makers out there (Samsung/Android most notably), but each time the tiniest detail about iPhone/iPad "N" is leaked, there is a big bruhaha and Apple gets huuuuuge attention.

That's because its not just you, Samsung and the others also don't get it.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[oxdas]

I have been surfing the internet, playing media, buying stocks, etc. on my cell phone for over 10 years (although it was black and white text when I started). I don't really see any of this (iphone, android, etc) as particularly revolutionary. It seems to me like the natural evolution of the industry. I agree with you that Apple brought this technology to the masses (no condescension intended), but technologically, it doesn't seem surprising to me (the incredible profits Apple has generated from this is a surprise for me, however). It does seem to me like the current advances get undue credit, when both the ideas and technology have been incrementally evolving for decades.

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Like it or not Tablets running Android were out before the iPad.... Apple didn't Invent anything they just have really good Advertising and a huge following of iSheep.

And nobody gave a shit until the iPad came along. Now you know why he said "defined the tablet market" instead of "invented the tablet".

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[epyT-R]

1. ..and if they defined it, they have no right to whine about others following said definition. like ford developing cars with four wheels and then suing a competitor because his car has four as well.

2. what does apple profitability have to do with this issue?

3. perception is not reality, though it is one of the subjective feelgoodisms that've taken over in the last decade or so at least. the others include, consensus, feelings, and 'equality.'

Re:Why does Apple/iPad get so much attention?

[Jerom]

and even when the iPad came out, most of the "experts" on slashdot and pundits elsewhere predicted it to be a huge failure.

Doesn't matter what it looks like

[roc97007]

It'll sell millions just on the "3".

Apple fanboy retort

[Anonymous Coward]

"You know that Apple already has [shit that isnt relevant to the article]"

"Well [samsung/google/HTC] totally stole [shit that is so obvious that a 8 year old could invent it]"

"In another year [crazy, irrelevant extrapolation based on one data point] will mean Apple sells 100% of smartphones!"

"GOOGLE VIOLATED MY DOGS PRIVACY!!!"

These "exclusive" sites have a poor track record

[david.emery]

Of actually knowing (or predicting) what and when the notoriously secretive Apple will release its next product. Swallow any claims not coming from 1 Infinite Loop with a Large Dose of skepticism.

about time

[Fujisawa Sensei]

If it happens, its about fucking time they get a decent resolution on it.

Seriously ppi took a big step back when everything went from CRT to LCD.

Re:about time

[19thNervousBreakdown]

A-fucking-men. I used to be a ... I don't know what you call it, but I cared about visual quality. But, when it was time to retire my dimming CRTs, in order to get any monitor that wasn't absolute shit in a resolution equal to or higher than what I was upgrading from, I found I'd have to pay thousands of dollars per display.

Well, that kind of money turns someone into a pragmatist pretty quickly. I'm now running the cheapest tolerable monitors I could find that did 1920x1200. They're ... okay. 30ms display lag. Brighter at the edges. Terrible viewing angles, poor color reproduction that changes as you look at it from different angles. But, until they get something that's actually good at that resolution or better for $500 or less, forget it. I'd pay even more for increasing values of "good", but what's out there now just isn't worth it.

Re:about time

[Fujisawa Sensei]

The pair of dell's I'm looking at now are fair, but they're still not fucking close to the CRTs I had years ago.

I remember with the IT guys came by and said: "Hey we have these nice plasmas for you, we can upgrade those huge CRTs and get you some more desk space." And they were standardizing on things. Nevermind they didn't actually maintain my systems anyway.

"Umm no, those are about half the resolution I have now, and I don't need the deskspace because everything I need a desk for I do on the computer."

And the fuckers still took them away from me when they moved me when they created the cube farm.

Re:about time

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously ppi took a big step back when everything went from CRT to LCD.

No, no it didn't.

You guys singing the praises of CRT resolution seem to not remember that CRTs had a dot pitch rating. This measured the spacing between holes in the shadow mask of a conventional CRT, or the space between vertical line gaps for a Trinitron technology monitor. While it was possible to drive a CRT with a resolution finer than the dot pitch of its mask, it generally looked terrible, because the mask would undersample the image scanned by the electron beam. It was worst for the exact sort of image where resolution is most important -- anything with lots of sharp, fine details would dissolve into a sea of horrible moire pattern.

IIRC, the expensive, high quality CRTs had dot pitches somewhere around 0.25mm. If you calculate it out, the dot pitch of a 24" 1920x1200 LCD is 0.27mm, and the dot pitch of a 27" 2560x1440 LCD is 0.233mm. These are both common 'high end' desktop LCD sizes, comparable to the high end 21" CRTs of yesteryear. Except that instead of suffering from all sorts of image quality problems as you approach the dot pitch limit, the LCD monitors look perfect right at the limit.

It's the accessories market, stupid.

[romanval]

Everyone knows that the 3rd party accessories market for iDevices are HUGE, and one reason is because Apple sells MILLIONs of devices out of very few form factors. If you've ever been shopping for any iPhone accessory (cases, car holder/radio kits) vs. a typical android phone, you'll see what I mean. Apple knows that being 'different' isn't the same as being 'good', and that changing the design and button placement of their iOS devices just to be 'new' isn't a good enough reason.

Re:It's the accessories market, stupid.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know a lot of people with iPads, but of the ones that do have them, the only accessory they have is the screen cover. So in my anecdotal experience, it is not the accessory market that drives the iPad sales.

Re:It's the accessories market, stupid.

[c 0xFF]

I'll add docks and bluetooth keyboards to the very thin list of accessories, but I know few people that have even those.

Re:It's the accessories market, stupid.

[seinman]

I do know a lot of people with iPads. I work in an environment where I see dozens every day. About half just have a smart cover, but the other half have all kinds of different cases and keyboards. The iPad accessory market is certainly thriving.

I didn't read TFA, but...

[Intropy]

I'm guessing the iPad 3 looks kind of like a rectangle with rounded corners and a screen on one face?

Re:I didn't read TFA, but...

[pipedwho]

I'm guessing the iPad 3 looks kind of like a rectangle with rounded corners and a screen on one face?

Along with, I guess, 25 other distinguishing features that people conveniently forget to mention every time they beat this dead horse.

Re:I didn't read TFA, but...

[AmiMoJo]

Mainly because they are not very distinguishing, and are in fact things that many other similar products had before Apple came along. Take a look at a Samsung digital photo frame from a few years before the iPad and you will notice that it looks exactly the same. Clean, uncluttered, black, thin, no face buttons, silver edging with a thin border, screen in the centre, light weight, hidden ports and devices, logo centred...

People laugh at Apple's design claims because they are laughable.

Re:I didn't read TFA, but...

[subreality]

Yeah, they pretty much ripped off Samsung's design.

Re:I didn't read TFA, but...

[pipedwho]

The design claims may be laughable taken individually, but a design patent is explicitly there to protect the totality of the claimed design elements taken as a whole. You can reduce any design to a subset of laughable 'things that came before', just as you can a work of literature. The theory is that infringement takes place when someone comes too close to the design when taken as a whole.

In the case of the iPad/Galaxy, this includes many things that are part of the software interface - in addition, and not necessarily separate, to the industrial design of the physical product.

I'm absolutely not a fan of vague 'look and feel' copyrights, vaguely 'derivative work' copyright decisions, or broad sweeping patents. And I'm not even sure I agree with any level of copyright or patent protection. For a sane system to work at all, patents, copyrights and trademarks should be protected as a whole work, and not just an umbrella covering every subordinate aspect of the work. They should also only cover whole works (or 95%+ of a whole) that could never have been created coincidentally. Anything less stifles innovation as people are too scared to create something that might vaguely infringe some aspect of a pre-existing patent/copyright, or get financially crushed trying to fight a legal challenge that has but a scintilla of validity - as happens now in many fields.

Trademarks and brand protection is necessary, but should be clearly limited to properly specified logos and names. Again, taken as a whole and not just a sub-element such as the 'font', 'colour', 'shape', etc.

It is obvious that the Galaxy is attempting to copy many aspects of the iPad, the question is whether or not they've gone too far as defined by current legal doctrine (whether or not we agree with it). IMO, the Samsung product is different enough to be clearly distinguished. But, my wife still calls my brother's Galaxy Tab an iPad. This is where the courts step in - as a whole, does it, or does it not infringe on the enumerated claims of Apple's design patent.

This is a fight that could never take place if not for the silliness that is the current state of 'IP' law (in many countries and not just the USA).

Re:I didn't read TFA, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

How could they change the look of the device when viewed from the front, keep the camera and home button, and simplify it? There really isn't much to work with.

Sony has a goofy looking tablet that is heavier and thicker on one side, but I don't see Apple doing anything like that, even if it is more ergonomic.

Can you say...

[geoffball]

iPad 2S.

Re:Can you say...

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope. iPad //e, now with double-hi-res graphics!

what is the point of constant changing?

[alen]

Windows 95 made some huge GUI advances but ever since then when a new version of Windows comes out everyone seems to want it to look different.

same with ipad and iphone. it's like people want a new design every year. if the current one works aesthetically and technically what's the point?

Re:what is the point of constant changing?

[Oswald McWeany]

I don't. It irks me how Microsoft feel the need to shuffle icons and commands around and rename control panel items- just to make it look different.

Pick a name and stick with it! Pick an icon and stick with it. If I don't like the icon I'll make one myself and replace it. I want to scream at Redmond for changing things just for the sake of making it different.

RESOLUTION!!!

[mehrotra.akash]

2048 x 1536 display even brighter

Now, when can I get this resolution on a mainstream laptop (or atleast on one that costs less than $1200-1300

Re:RESOLUTION!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Buy a ThinkPad T61 with any 4:3 15" screen, buy the screen and inverter they used to use for the factory 2048x1536 option (no longer available), and assemble it yourself. With a low-end host machine, this could be as cheap as $300-$400 -- basically, add $150 or so to whatever is the price of the host, which can be as stripped-down or as loaded as you like.

Re:RESOLUTION!!!

[jank1887]

so, I guess does it upconvert when you switch to fullscreen playback? or does HD look blocky? can my eyes see the difference between 1080 and 2048 at that size? when will hollywood and the tv market catch up to Apple?

Re:RESOLUTION!!!

[mehrotra.akash]

I believe thats commonly known as a "Frankenpad" and have heard about it
Most of the T61's in the market would anyways be EOL at this time

Re:RESOLUTION!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

1080p = 1920x1080
(supposed) iPad 3 = 2048x1536

So unless you turn the video sideways, you won't be converting 1080 to 2048 -- you'll either be converting 1920 to 2048, with black bars top and bottom, or 1080 to 1536, cropping left and right.

The former is an insignificant difference. (Except inasmuch as scaling by values near 1 tends to lose detail and/or be computationally expensive -- on my 2048x1536 monitor, I display 1080p content 1:1, with 64px of black on each side and 228px top and bottom.)

The latter is significant, at typical tablet working distances, but unless it's 4:3 content (old TV shows or really old movies), you crop 1/3 of the picture away, so you would never do it. Unless you expect the content industry to go back to 4:3, there's no real point in them upgrading from 1080p to 2048x1152; they've already caught up. (As did the tv/monitor industry -- I picked up a 2048x1536 LCD on ebay for $100 last year -- just not in displays meant for us lowly consumers.) However, "4k" (anywhere from 3840 to 4096+ px horizontally) will eventually come to desktop monitors (10 fucking years after the T220 -- don't mind me being bitter), and they will need to upgrade for that. Of course, 4k is already common in high-end theatres, so movies are designed for that level of detail -- they'll just need a new distribution standard. TV will need another kick up in set design, makeup, and cameras, just like they did when we kicked up from 480i to 1080i/p.

Re:RESOLUTION!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

No time soon, because of all the technologically-illiterate people who think 'bigger text is better'.

Tech Media needs a JPG

[ZombieBraintrust]

We don't expect change. Media is complaining because change == news. A redesign would of resulted in more page views than a spec bump.

The opposite is true

[SuperKendall]

The fundamental difference, as I see it, is that a 5 year old PC still works perfectly fine and can run most modern programs now-a-days just fine (so long as you've taken decent care of keeping crud off it).

Do you not even sense the magnitude of your own bullshit here?

SO LONG AS... you are a technical person who can maintain a PC. Well that only eliminates 95% of the population, but screw them right?

In reality given a PC and an iPad the person with an iPad will be WAY more likely to run modern iPad software five years from now. We're already almost two years in since the launch of the first iPad, there might be one piece of software the original iPad will not run, out of 200k+ iPad specific applications. As an iOS developer, I know for a fact that software I write for at least the next two years will be supporting iOS5.

Furthermore, given a $500 PC you buy today and a $500 iPad you buy today, which do you HONESTLY expect will be running in five years. The $500 PC will be lucky to last TWO years, let alone five, just from a component standpoint! How many people around you do you see running five year old laptops?

Sorry but it just really bothers me that technical people are willing to throw non-technical people under the bus like this. Why can't everyone enjoy the advantages of technology without "taking decent care" of it. Doesn't that sound like exactly the kind of menial chore we as a species prefer to automate?

Are tablets cool? Yes. Are they useful for a few things? Yes. Are they more useful than a desktop or laptop?

You FAIL at perceiving even the simplest and most obvious progression.

And already the answer to your last question is yes. The iPad is superior for drawing than a PC, even with a stylus... Only with an expensive iPad-like screen you can directly draw on is the experience superior.

Fail, nothing like an iPad

[SuperKendall]

That device (and I notice you had to look VERY hard pre-iPad to find something even sort of close) doesn't even have SYMMETRIC borders! They vary from 1-2".

Also it had all kinds of features along the front plate like speaker grills. Basically you were a mile away from anything like the iPad we have now.

Re:Fail, nothing like an iPad

[Osgeld]

I didnt look very hard, literally 1 min on google and considering it was almost 20 years ago do you really expect it to look identical? be honest, rounded rectangle in glossy black, is not rocket science.

I am not going to waste my time arguing with fanboi's who think apple invented the symmetrical boarder, the color black and the fucking rectangle, have fun in your happy land made up of rainbows and unicorns

Re:Fail, nothing like an iPad

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

... literally 1 min on google and considering it was almost 20 years ago do you really expect it to look identical?

Considering that the context of the case is about Samsung creating a tablet that looks almost identical to an iPad... yes.

I am not going to waste my time arguing with fanboi's who think apple invented the symmetrical boarder...

You're not. You're arguing with people who read the f'n articles.

Re:Fail, nothing like an iPad

[exomondo]

That device (and I notice you had to look VERY hard pre-iPad to find something even sort of close) doesn't even have SYMMETRIC borders! They vary from 1-2".

Well to be fair this was before the iPad. Sure it doesn't have symmetric borders, but then the samsung tablet doesn't have a 4:3 aspect ratio. The iPad doesn't have LEDs on the front like the crunchpad concept but then unlike the iPad the Galaxy Tab has branding on the front and doesn't have any physical buttons on the front.

I find these cases to be absurd, particularly when people are arguing that things like symmetric borders matter but aspect ratio doesn't matter, and rounded corners matter but lack of a distinctive physical button doesn't matter, that the front matters but the back doesn't matter, and that branding doesn't matter.

Re:Fail, nothing like an iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow you're thick.

Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[SuperKendall]

In an increasingly narcissitic society, we look to the gadgets we wield to say something about our social status.

Perhaps you do. Apple users just want something that works. That's why Apple doesn't need to change designs between cycles and people still buy them anyway- because they are actually useful and people buy them for that more than for something they display for looks only.

What you say is true of cars and clothes, to give people some reason they might want a new car or new clothes.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[Lord of the Fries]

Our experiences differ I guess. I *am* an Apple user. Currently, no less than 11 Apple products are doing interesting things for my family. To the exclusion of any other for the most part (Apple doesn't make a high end SLR camera yet, do they?). I buy Apple equipment because as you say "it just works." And I've encouraged many others to do the same. The original question was not "why do people buy Apple stuff?" As you can see, we're on the same page there, in fact I may own more real estate of it than you. :)

But being the local go-to-guy in church and school communities about All Things Apple, I can very definitely attest that consumers would have loved it if the 4S looked slightly different than the 4. Same for the 3G and the 3GS. Human nature is human nature. The question was "why do people want to have it look different every time?"

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[Gilmoure]

Um... it's a well known fact that everyone well knows that all Apple users are Penny-farthing riding hipsters with handlebar mustaches who don't even know how to turn on their Apple stuff and in fact most of them never even open the boxes, they just like walking around showing them off to the other Apple hipsters on their bikes and so they never even know that inside there's not even an electronical device but just a piece of clay because Apple doesn't even know how to make anything; they're just marketers.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Perhaps you do. Apple users just want something that works. That's why Apple doesn't need to change designs between cycles and people still buy them anyway- because they are actually useful and people buy them for that more than for something they display for looks only.

What you say is true of cars and clothes, to give people some reason they might want a new car or new clothes.

I love the heck out of my iPhone, but as a generalization your statement is hilarious.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[coinreturn]

Um... it's a well known fact that everyone well knows that all Apple users are Penny-farthing riding hipsters with handlebar mustaches who don't even know how to turn on their Apple stuff and in fact most of them never even open the boxes, they just like walking around showing them off to the other Apple hipsters on their bikes and so they never even know that inside there's not even an electronical device but just a piece of clay because Apple doesn't even know how to make anything; they're just marketers.

We also wear berets and have cup-holders on our penny-farthings to hold our Starbucks lattes.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[spire3661]

To me, my iphone is the first device ive ever looked at and said, "you are the progenitor of the Tricorder". Pocket computing began with the iphone. You may look at the device as a trinket, to me its one of the most powerful tools ever to be created.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[Gilmoure]

Damn it, forgot the berets. That's what makes the chicks with handlebar mustaches so cute!

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[MogNuts]

Except that they don't.

No true multi-tasking that causes certain features to crap out when switching to another app, severe recent battery issues, terrible antenna issues, the list goes on.

They DO choose Apple because of 1 or more combination of:

1) They think it will make them look cool.
2) They want to show that they have money by purchasing an overprice luxury item
3) Fooled by Apple's marketing claims
4) Like shiny things

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[Dutch Gun]

To me, my iphone is the first device ive ever looked at and said, "you are the progenitor of the Tricorder". Pocket computing began with the iphone. You may look at the device as a trinket, to me its one of the most powerful tools ever to be created.

Apple has a design sense that no other company does. Their products ooze style and ease-of-use, but please don't make the mistake of thinking that Apple invented all this stuff. They refined and popularized it, and brought it to the masses. And the phrase "pocket computing began with the iPhone" is sort of silly. That completely ignores the predecessors to smartphones - PDAs, such as blackberry and palm devices, not to mention other smartphones that predated the iPhone by years.

http://smartphone-guide.com/a-short-history-of-the-smartphone.html

Don't take me for an Apple hater, btw. I own an iPad, and while I currently down own a smartphone, I'm leaning towards an iPhone when I do make the plunge. It just bothers me when people tend to mistake the *popularization* of technology with the *invention* of technology.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an iphone and didn't buy it for any of those reasons.

You're an idiot.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[roc97007]

> Perhaps you do. Apple users just want something that works. That's why Apple doesn't need to change designs between cycles and people still buy them anyway- because they are actually useful and people buy them for that more than for something they display for looks only.

...so tell me truthfully: Besides bragging rights, what was the real difference, to actual users, between the 4 and the 4s?

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[forkfail]

Concur, but recall that on the week of Dennis Richie and Steve Jobs passing, there were thousands of articles and millions of comments about Mr. Jobs. For the most part, the passing of Mr. Richie elicited a response of, "Who?" followed by, "So what?"

To a certain group of people, style is substance, I guess.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[crankyspice]

To the exclusion of any other for the most part (Apple doesn't make a high end SLR camera yet, do they?).

Apple used to essentially rebrand other manufacturer's electronics (with some tweaks to make it Apple plug-and-play, of course, like RS-422 support back in the day). The StyleWriter printers were basically Canon BJC printers (Wikipedia tells me they also used some HP DeskJet models as bases, but I never saw me one of them). The QuickTake cameras were Kodak/Fuji. They seem to have stripped out all of that distraction, though; the last of the LaserWriters (which were instrumental in kickstarting "desktop publishing") were released right around the time Jobs returned.

Of course, now that everything's USB or network connected, dedicated hardware for Macs doesn't make sense the way it used to...

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[AmiMoJo]

Multimeters are closer. They meter multiple things, like a tricorder. Hand held, a variety of sensors and so forth.

A smartphone is more like a PADD, if you want to compare with Star Trek technology. A computing device rather than a measuring device.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[jdogalt]

For me it was the Nintendo-DS. Probably the newton came earlier, but I still think the DS w/ 802.11 and enough 3D to do mario64 on a mobile device with all the hardware needed for open source encrypted VoiP calls... But sadly for both of us they are effectively walled software gardens that did not reach their potentials. Both Nintendo and Apple have done ammazingly efficient jobs of stifling the homebrew/end-user-software-developer communities.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[Dutch Gun]

Concur, but recall that on the week of Dennis Richie and Steve Jobs passing, there were thousands of articles and millions of comments about Mr. Jobs. For the most part, the passing of Mr. Richie elicited a response of, "Who?" followed by, "So what?"

To a certain group of people, style is substance, I guess.

Hmm, I think maybe it's more about relevance in that particular example. Ritchie is only known to programmers for his contributions... why would non-programmers know about him? He's several steps removed from their daily lives (it's hard to even explain to a layperson why he's so famous). He received plenty of lifetime awards and accolades as well, so it's not as though he's unacknowledged either. Steve Jobs, on the other hand, was exactly one step removed from many people's daily lives, technologically speaking, of course. Moreover, he was a very dynamic and oftentimes controversial figure, and he also died relatively young. So, I don't think it's quite as simple as "style over substance".

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[spire3661]

I diasgree, since the iphone is already packed with sensors (accelerometers, gyros, several radios and directly receives satellite positional information). A PADD was portrayed as a passive device, like the e-ink readers we have now. Our current phones already do more sensing then what PADDs were ever shown to do.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[epyT-R]

there were plenty of 'pocket computing' devices before the iphone.. you have fallen for the apple cultmarketing..

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[epyT-R]

..or maybe they want a new car because the old one is falling apart? same deal with clothing.. sorry but all three items (apple products, cars, and clothes) are fashion items first and foremost because that's the only way to drive demand beyond what is needed. apple is the computing equivalent of bose. it's a lifestyle brand which basically means the cost is high to create exclusivity, which only matters socially. in a lot of ways, these two brands are not unlike scientology.

Re:Thus the proof that Apple is not about status

[spire3661]

And I owned most of them, so please save the marketing barbs. Palms, Clies, handsprings, WinMo, Palm Pre. They all sucked at computing except the last one. They did useful things like calendering and secretary crap, but they weren't very useful broadly. My winMo phone might as well have been a dumbphone for all the computing i got it to do. I couldnt even get Acrobat to install on the thing.

I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[Shivetya]

and this new iPad to be marketed with the word PRO and be priced higher than existing iPad2 models.

Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[Tharsman]

To be fair, Apple has slashed the price of iPhones by $100 every time they retain a previous generation in the market. That is why I say $399. It's not blind faith or a gut feeling. It's just being based off Apple year to year habits.

Besides, a $100 reduction may be enough to bring the iPad2 into "budget" range. At the same time it's not so much that anyone that bought an iPad2 a month earlier would be annoyed at the insanely lower price.

Slash the price to $200 and even the most rabid Apple fan will knock at Apple's door with torches and pitchforks if they bought a full price iPad 2 one month earlier.

Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[danomac]

Slash the price to $200 and even the most rabid Apple fan will knock at Apple's door with torches and pitchforks if they bought a full price iPad 2 one month earlier.

The most rabid fan would know the iPad3 is coming and wait before making a decision to purchase...

Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[Sancho]

I don't know. Depending upon how much difference there is between the iPad2 and iPad3, $100 might be very appropriate. There's not much difference between the 4 and the 4s, which have a $100 difference.

Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[AK Marc]

Cut it $100, then have sales every once in a while for another $100 off, though the "official" price can remain at just $100 off.

Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[roc97007]

The most rabid fan would buy the iPad2 the first day it came out, and then buy the iPad3 the first day it came out. And he wouldn't care how much it cost if he got it first.

Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[Tharsman]

I have a friend that is a raging Apple fan, but only recently was he able to afford an iPad due to being unemployed until recently. He just got his iPad 2 a few weeks ago. I kept telling him to hold on and wait, but he was not able to resist the temptation to spend his first paycheck on the thing.

Re:I expect the iPad2 to lose at most $50 per tier

[Tharsman]

The computing power difference between the 4 and 4s is huge. It has "only" 2x the cpu power and 7x the graphic power. Try to upgrade a computer to that degree with "just" 100 bucks more.

If rumors are true, the iPad 3's jump may be just as significant.

Re:These "exclusive" sites have a poor track recor

[UnknowingFool]

Indeed. Now some of these designs may actually be Apple prototypes; however, one can never really know if they are the final designs until Apple reveals their products. Remember some of these sites where the same ones suggesting consumers not to buy the iPad 2 because that the iPad 3 would come out in summer 2011. No, they meant fall. No, they meant the holiday season. Also the iPhone 5 released in the summer would definitely have a teardrop design. The iPhone 4S is exactly the same form as the 4? They meant the design is for the 5 which Apple will release in December. No, they meant January. No, they really mean February.

if you used an iPad 1 inch from your face then

[Brannon]

you would be correct.

Do you?

Let me guess...

[unixisc]

No USB slots this time either, so if one wants to plug in a wireless modem or connect to a non-Apple USB printer, one is SOL? Great going. Wonder whether any Android tablets haven't yet figured out an opportunity there?

Re:Let me guess...

[UnknowingFool]

As for printing anybody is SOL that can't use Google or install a printing app.

Re:Let me guess...

[Alioth]

There are plenty of wireless modems that are wireless (I have a 3 Mifi, basically some rebadged Huwei thing, which is a 3G wireless access point). There are probably bluetooth equivalents, too.

Re:Let me guess...

[Windwraith]

My cheap-ass (way under $100) Chinese Wondermedia tablet with shitty resistive screen and incredibly low specs does have such USB port for USB storage, USB HID (keyboards. Pads?) and 3G modems. The only thing it lacks is a camera that can handle QR scanning and a stronger WIFI antenna (can be modded easily, though).
I know other variants of this tablet also have support for Ethernet interfaces besides the USB port.
It's cheap (in a derogatory sense), it's slow, but damn, for the price it's incredibly convenient if you can stand the "bury your finger on it" screen input...and I am even getting used to that after a week.

Re:Let me guess...

[MisterSquid]

No USB slots this time either, so if one wants to plug in a wireless modem or connect to a non-Apple USB printer, one is SOL?

You can't even troll properly. First, there is no such thing as an Apple USB printer. Second, when printing from an iPad, one does so wirelessly using a compatible third-party printer. Third, wireless modem? Your phone is your wireless modem and your iPad connects to it using WiFi. Why would you plug a wire into your iPad to use a wireless modem?

Re:Let me guess...

[unixisc]

You can't even troll properly. First, there is no such thing as an Apple USB printer.

I clearly meant USB printer, and wasn't sure whether Apple offers any for its Macs, so used the redundant phrase to allow for that possibility.

Second, when printing from an iPad, one does so wirelessly using a compatible third-party printer.

Guess what? I don't have a wireless printer, I have an USB printer, which I'd like to connect the iPad to, whenever I need to print. I WONT BUY a separate wireless printer from ANYBODY just b'cos the iPad is too picky about what it can print to, when I have a perfectly functional USB printer. Not to mention your other caveat that the third party printer too has to be a compatible one, not any off the shelf standards compliant one, such as USB, wireless USB, Bluetooth, et al.

Third, wireless modem? Your phone is your wireless modem and your iPad connects to it using WiFi. Why would you plug a wire into your iPad to use a wireless modem?

I don't have an iPhone, so my phone is not a wireless modem. So essentially, to connect while I'm on the go and not w/ any stationary wi-fi, the iPad needs to connect to the phone (which has to have both Wi-Fi and whatever cellular technology it has - UMTS, CDMA2000, et al) by Wi-Fi, which in turn has to connect using UMTS, CDMA2000, WCDMA or whatever standard it uses to connect w/ services. Great! As opposed to using just a single protocol to connect!

Re:Let me guess...

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

No USB slots this time either, so if one wants to plug in a wireless modem or connect to a non-Apple USB printer, one is SOL? Great going. Wonder whether any Android tablets haven't yet figured out an opportunity there?

Errm, if you needed any more proof that Samsung is copying Apple, look no further than the lack of USB on their tablets. Hey, they even sell you the equivalent of the iPad Camera Connection Kit - in black.

Money in hand, maybe

[Overzeetop]

I, for one, am thrilled that they're keeping the form factor, and practically elated that it's going to be closer in thickness to the iPad1.

I say maybe, because I stood ready to drop a grand on the iPad2 on launch day (including accessories), and decided not to pull the trigger and got the original, at about a $300 discount, a few days later. (okay, technically I got a 16GB Wifi for $300, realized that I needed mobile data to make it useful for work, and sold it on eBay for $350 so I could pick up a 64GB GSM version for $530, all of the course of about 3 weeks - but you get the point.)

The original is sluggish at times and using map applications is a bit underwhelming at 1024x768. And it turns out a camera would be useful in my line of work, too.

I guess it depends on what my old one is worth. For net $300, I'm all over the new one. For $500, it's going to have to have something special. Either way, I won't have to re-invest in any cases/holders/gear...unless they f-up the video out again. That will piss me off, mainly because it means I have to re-run the cable behind the dashboard. Maybe I'll pass again...

 

They mirrored it?

[Tyrannosaur]

Why mirror the design when just using the same design looks exactly the same?

What's happening with the moderation?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your post went from +5 to -1 Flamebait in the span of 10 minutes. What's happening with Slashdot's moderation? Where is the flamebait?

Re:What's happening with the moderation?

[CheerfulMacFanboy]

Your post went from +5 to -1 Flamebait in the span of 10 minutes. What's happening with Slashdot's moderation? Where is the flamebait?

Look at all the flames he got - clearly it must be his fault that the haters didn't like what he wrote. From that to actively baiting is just a small step. So you have to give credit to those haters who had modpoints - they felt baited to flame, but managed to control themselves enough to take the mod route instead.

Nice screen

[wishiwascool]

The screen will probably be the biggest selling point of the device. That much resolution is going to be absolutely gorgeous.

I'll tell you why

[Overly Critical Guy]

I'll tell you why. Because troll moderators have taken over the site and are trying to subvert it. Because the IT readership that used to visit Slashdot has been bleeding from the site in the last few years, leaving behind the more extremist posters. Because if you say something that those posters don't like, they abuse the moderation system to drive you off the site rather than reply and explain why you're wrong.

The latest thing is to accuse absolutely everyone of being a "shill" so that others will follow along and do their dirty work. My post didn't go down to -1 Flamebait until someone else accused me of being a shill and got modded +5 Insightful (!). Because of the default filters, +5 comments are automatically expanded while less than +2 is collapsed, so now every moderator reading the comments for the first time will see that post first and likely not even read what I wrote.

CmdrTaco promised a new moderation system for years, and it never arrived before he left the site. This limited moderation pool concept is terrible. It makes it so that a single point in either direction has a drastic effect on karma and effectively restricts people from posting something that's unpopular, even if it's legitimately true.

This is off-topic, and so I'd be justified in getting downmodded for this, but since my karma is getting completely destroyed right now anyway, I may as well post it before I'm limited to two posts a day. Thanks, Slashdot. Thanks, troll moderators.

Re:I'll tell you why

[Tsingi]

I'm curious as to how you could post all that in the very same minute the article went up.

Obviously you didn't read the article, even then, you had a maximum of 60 seconds to formulate, type and post that message.

No flies on you.

Re:I'll tell you why

[lightknight]

Mavis Beacon? But yes, like you, I am noting the time discrepancy.

On the other hand, perhaps because he is such a prolific poster, he's spending time on the Firehose, found an article that he both wanted to promote and comment on. That would give him some time to put together a response.

Re:I'll tell you why

[Tsingi]

Mavis Beacon? But yes, like you, I am noting the time discrepancy.

On the other hand, perhaps because he is such a prolific poster, he's spending time on the Firehose, found an article that he both wanted to promote and comment on. That would give him some time to put together a response.

Can you post a comment on an article in the firehose?

Re:I'll tell you why

[Anonymous Coward]

Overly Critical Guy, also known as bonch, DCTech, TechGZ, insightin140bytes, InterestingFella, SharkLaser, cmdrpony, bogaboga... ...is a shill account employed by a marketing company dedicated to astroturf slashdot with criticism targetting Google.

Re:I'll tell you why

[AK Marc]

Even if he isn't a subscriber, which he says he is, even if the system doesn't show him as one, someone can read the firehose and see what looks like a probable future story and pre-formulate a response to the submission and even read TFA before it's "live".

Re:I'll tell you why

[WankersRevenge]

And JFK wore a flounder on his head to bed every night. I mean ... back that shit up. It goes doubly so when you post as an AC. And really, even if Overly Critical Guy is a paid marketer, I expect a knowledgeable tech orientated community to rebut his arguments instead of suppress them.

Jesus Christ ... these smart phone arguments are really tanking this site.

Re:I'll tell you why

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll tell you why. Because troll moderators have taken over the site and are trying to subvert it.

Oh bullshit, it's because it's a karma-whoring love-fest post that was pre-written or posted in a submission that wasn't even accepted as a story yet (now that is pathetic)!

Re:I'll tell you why

[Anonymous Coward]

He most like is a subscriber, but not with this account, if you are to believe the other comments that he is an astroturfer. He just posted on an account that not a subscriber but he did read on account that is a subscribers.

Re:I'll tell you why

[idontgno]

Wow. I can't assess the sincerity of your statements, but I can definitely tell you...moderation is completely not living up to expectations, yours or mine. At this moment, your comment about moderation is +5 Funny. 40% Funny, 20% Offtopic, and 20% Interesting.

This place is getting very interesting, in a "train wreck" kind of way.

Re:I'll tell you why

[Truedat]

Because troll moderators have taken over the site and are trying to subvert it

A-fucking-men. I only signed up a few weeks ago (was anonymous coward) and already I'm starting to wonder what's the point. I mean at least on cnet people are openly dicks, whereas here it seems more underhand. The endgame of all of this will be a collection of very similar and extreme opinions, doesn't sound very intellectually stimulating to me.

B-bye any chance of good karma :-) not sure I care anymore! Which saddens me because slashdot has been part of my routine for so long.

Re:I'll tell you why

[roc97007]

You're welcome.

Re:I'll tell you why

[Tsingi]

Yeah, maybe that's what happened

Re:I'll tell you why

[mug funky]

the problem with that argument is that people like me browse at -1 so we can see all the nerd rage in it's glory.

the comment threads are unusable at anything but -1.

Re:I'll tell you why

[Anonymous Coward]

As someone who's been here a while and built up plenty of good karma during my stay (on a number of different handles, which I'll decline to reveal):

Posts that stand out from the crowd, that evoke a reaction from people, tend to get moderated. That's a basic fact of life 'round here. However, I've found that it's not at all impossible to hold a very dissimilar and extreme-in-its-own-way opinion, as long as it's cushioned in non-confrontational language and presented as an opinion rather than a fact. Build an argument that you think is convincing, by all means, but don't demand (or expect) everyone else to immediately be converted over by it.

Re:I'll tell you why

[lightknight]

No, but you can read it, and begin typing a response in Notepad, or whatever your OS's equivalent is, then copy / paste it into a comment when the post makes the front page. Not exactly a foreign concept...I've performed something similar when dealing with online classes (textboxen were not re-sizable at the time).

The point is, even without being a /. subscriber, you can see what articles are bubbling in the queue, and have a good 15-30 minutes to fully read the post and begin working on a response.

Re:I'll tell you why

[Tsingi]

So, he searches through the firehose and composes posts to articles that he finds interesting, then loads up a bot that watches for the article to be posted. If it is, the bot makes the post, if not, well, it was worth a try.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Re:I'll tell you why

[BasilBrush]

Your claims would have more weight if they were from an actual logged in username. But I'm rather more tempted to think an AC is a shill.

Smeagol's iPad3 review

[sl4shd0rk]

"We swearsâ¦to serve the master of the Precious, we will swear on...onâ¦the Precious!"

Agreed

[Anonymous Coward]

If cars didn't have to change design for every new model, they'd save a lot of money. I don't know why they keep having to make them look different either.

Why not both?

[Anonymous Coward]

Switching between them based on bandwidth needs seems like a smart thing to do.

flid

[Hognoxious]

continue (to be sold at $200) != (continue to be sold) at $200

Consumers are not Apple.

[SuperKendall]

I can very definitely attest that consumers would have loved it if the 4S looked slightly different than the 4.

I don't disagree with that at all. As you say; human nature.

But note what happened; even though it looked no different a LOT of people still bought them.

If Apple cared at all about fashion, they would have made it look different just to make it look different.

If, to the users, how an Apple product LOOKED were more important than how it WORKED, they would have passed on the 4s. But instead as noted sales were huge.

Thus proving that Apple devices really are about function more than form, even though form is a factor and does matter to people.

Ah yes ipad3. A new trendy device to be seen with

[Anonymous Coward]

Ipad and apple products are funny to me because people LOVE to talk about their apple products and be seen with them.

Ipad- I can go and buy a android tablet for half the price that does everything a ipad does and more because android is more open to its users and allows more versatility in what programs you can use and such. There are dozens of other tablets on the market that do just as much as a ipad but cost half the price. Even a kindle fire is only 200 bucks and it can do a lot of what ipad does at 500+

Ipod- Why would I pay so much for a ipod when I can buy a hundred different types of mp3 players that do the exact same thing for a 3rd of the price? Hell my phone can download and play mp3s already so I dont even need a mp3 player.

Macbook- Again I can buy a laptop that uses a far more extensive (as in virtually all just about) of the programs in exsistence, that is just about universally compatible with everything, I can play just about every game on that meets the systems specs and so on for less than half of a macbooks price.

Iphone- I can buy an android phone that allows me to use a wider range of mostly unblocked aps, does everything an iphone does and again costs half the price. Not to mention I can buy it from the manufacturer of my choice instead of just apple.

Problem is people dont buy apple products because its actually a good product, they buy apple because of the name. People will waste hundreds if not thousands of dollars on products that offer less function simply because of its look and name on it so they can sit in starbucks and think they look cool and tell everyone they know they dont just have a computer or a phone, they have a iphone or a macbook.

Apple is more or less a pretentious persons product. I mean apple does make pretty good products but its their customers that are stupid enough to waste money so they can be a slave to trends.

You are missing my point

[SuperKendall]

To say that all Apple users are some magical class of people devoid of any desire to visibly demonstrate status is pretty damn laughable.

I was not wholly clear when I wrote my point. I am not saying what you think I am saying.

Yes people have an innate desire to visibly display status, I'm not denying that.

What I am saying is that DESPITE that, people still will buy Apple products. For any given person you know that the way an Apple product WORKS is more important than how it LOOKS if they upgrade between two devices that LOOK identical - 4 to 4s. And tens of millions have done so.

From Apple's side, if LOOKS were more important they, like so many other companies, would have introduced some superficial change so people could tell it was different. They did not, therefore proving that for Apple as long as a product is already well designed there is no reason to alter a design simply for the sake of making changes. For Apple there must be a reason beyond mere fashion for a good design to be altered.

Let me guess

[Hognoxious]

Apple's lawyers are so scary they're afraid of infringing against themselves.

So it's brown and tetrahedral.

No, IPad 2 will be discontinued.

[guidryp]

the most interesting rumor is that the iPad 2 will continue to be sold at $200 to compete with the Kindle Fire. While the iPad is still the most dominant tablet, the Kindle Fire had a decent run over the holidays.

You should stop thinking rumor somehow equals reality. $200 is less than the iPad2 costs to build.

iPad 2 will drop $100, and continue until stocks run out, then it will be officially discontinued. Exactly the same thing that happened with iPad 1.

Stilt like an iPad

[SuperKendall]

An iPad has only the single button on front, that has several features on the front plate, and totally different materials/edging, etc.

The Samsung tablet in question looks nearly as identical as it is possible to look given no constraints in copying.

Note that Apple is not suing OTHER tablet makers. They would not sue that one either.

No need but there may be a reason

[SuperKendall]

I would say there's still not a "need" to upgrade from the first iPad for the iPad 3.

I plan on getting one because I do a lot of photography and the higher resolution screen will be really nice for a portable portfolio.

Apple doesn't really care if you upgrade devices or not, they are more about simply expanding the market and doing product updates often enough that the devices stay ahead of the market in capability. At some point it may well make sense for you to buy a newer model, at that time Apple will have revved the iPad a few times and it will make for a pleasant upgrade.

I'll be honest.

[JustAnotherIdiot]

If it weren't for the labels on the pictures, i wouldn't be able to tell which is 2 and which is 3, or hell, if one of them was even an iPad 1.

And so it begins

[RDW]

...the post also revealed that the iPad 3 will be approximately 1 mm thicker than its predecessor to house Apple's upgraded components

They'd never have got that one past Steve.

Re:And so it begins

[MisterSquid]

Yeah, I'm actually surprised by this, but then I realized TFA is based on rumor. I seriously doubt iPad 3 will be thicker than iPad 2.

shill account Re:Cheaper iPad 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Overly Critical Guy,

also known as bonch, DCTech, TechGZ, insightin140bytes, InterestingFella, SharkLaser, cmdrpony, bogaboga

is a shill account employed by a marketing company dedicated to astroturf slashdot with criticism targetting Google.

STORAGE!!!

[wisebabo]

Ok, I know this is about what the iPad 3 LOOKS like but has anyone heard any news about a (hopeful) storage upgrade?

My iPad has 64GB and I long, long ago ran out of room! I use the Seagate Satellite to provide 500GB of wireless storage for my media but it does not help for my Apps (1,000+).

Yes, I realize that Android tablets have removable storage but they don't have the worthwhile media centric Apps that I want. :(

Apple will make it white, or matte, or something.

[Animats]

Apple will make the new model white, or grey, or matte black, or give it a chrome bezel, or something.

My Grammar Made Me Larn Two Spill

[fyngyrz]

"Spelling and grammar checked"?

You do realize that some of us can actually spell, as well as write with proper grammar, don't you? Not to mention that some of us also write HTML for a living, or as an adjunct to our living -- WYSIWYG tools aren't the only way to create HTML, CSS, CGI, etc.

Also, with regard to spelling, many systems provide inline spell checking capability.

I won't be buying and this is why

[gearloos]

I won't be interested in an iPad 3. not because I don't like the ipad, or because I any kind of fanboy for any of the tablets. I had an ipad1 and have used it up until about mid December. I updated to IOS5 in late november and it started crashing. No way to back out. Posted on apples forum and any post I made stating the problem was not related to any software and solely was the os was deleted. They do indeed steer the forum over there. To this day there are hundreds of posts with people still chiming in saying go to a genius and have them wipe it and you'll probably be fine...which does not work. Apple finally acknowledges it and then does nothing now 2 months after the first post of a real actual bug in memory management and it is now a hidden post buried beneath piles of apple seeds saying that a certain program or whatever caused it. I will either buy an Android tablet for my next toy or none. No more of this BS hiding truth. They seriously made it a paperweight. Everytime you went to any web page that used any memory at all it would crash. fill out a for, Crash. Use mail and receive more than 5 emails, Crash. Downgrade back to IOS 4 ? No- they will not allow that. Reload to factory specs, Crash next time just the same as before yet thats what they still recommend. Worse than Windows used to be except reinstalling Windows used to actually fix the problems you had at the time. Why would anyone give another dime to a company that treats customers that way? They think their market share and brand name is so strong that you'll actually go out and buy a new one to fix the problem. No way.. Oh and yes I'm aware of jailbreaking and the alternate market etc... Nope, just gave it to a nephew finally and said have fun. I just use my Nexus S with a Cyan 9 build for everything now. Thank You Apple for showing me I don't need your crappy product service. /end rant.

Ultracaps

[fyngyrz]

What I expect, actually, is to replace the battery with an ultracapacitor system, including an inductive charge transfer device, that obviates the whole battery thing completely, and moves the device into the "works until the hardware breaks" domain, and removes the need for a cable completely. Tech changes. Ultracaps are coming. This whole battery thing... flash in the pan. :)

These Jabs bonchy boy!

[Anonymous Coward]

Overly Critical Guy: This isn't bonch
Overly Critical Guy: This is not bonch.... Signed, NOT bonch

"NOT bonch"? Ha ha. BUSTED!

bonch: Seamless experiences win out in the long term. We saw this when gaming moved from PCs to consoles in the 2000s, and it's happening now in the transition to the post-PC era.
Overly Critical Guy: Seamless experiences always win out over time. We saw it when gaming shifted from PCs to consoles, and now the industry is shifting from desktops to mobile devices.

Overly Critical Guy: Android phones used to look like this [imgur.com]
bonch: Android used to look like this [imgur.com]

Overly Critical Guy: The keyboard looks exactly like Apple's flat keyboard, and the trackpad is the Magic Trackpad that Apple started offering a year or so ago
bonch: The keyboard looks just like Apple's flat keyboard introduced a few years ago, the trackpad is a clone of the Apple Trackpad.

Who does bonch shill for? Let us look at his submissions: Samsung Moves To Reduce Android Dependence , Apple Closes Marketshare Gap With Android , Apple Beats Android In U.S. Marketshare , Apple Closes In On Android Marketshare , Why Android smartphones are larger than the iPhone , Google Admits Wrongdoing In Mocality Scanda , U.S. Carriers Don't Want Stock Android Phones , iOS Closes Gap With Android Marketshare In U.S. , Google Sponsors Blog Posts To Market Chrome , Java ME Surpasses Android As #2 Mobile Internet OS , Galaxy S And Galaxy Tab Won't Get Android 4.0 , No Such Thing As Android, Only Android-Compatible , Android Chief Andy Rubin Deletes Openness Tweet , Android Update Alliance Is Already Dead , App Developers Betting On iOS Over Android , Europe Accuses Google Of Monopoly Abuse , Samsung Smartphone Sales Report Flawed ,

Re:These Jabs bonchy boy!

[Anonymous Coward]

Would that be Donald "Matt" Deatherage who used to work for Apple?

interesting link http://baby.indstate.edu/msattler/_people/matt/

Resolution

[Anonymous Coward]

They're increasing the resolution on stuff like this, but manufactures refuse to produce any 24" or so displays with anything better than 1920x1200, especially under $800. Some of us like better picture quality, and have the GPU to handle it, but there are literally no monitors available for less than the cost of the computer itself.

Siri and Camera

[SuperKendall]

Besides bragging rights, what was the real difference, to actual users, between the 4 and the 4s?

I personally did not upgrade. But the pull of the thing is Siri, because I sometimes have to respond to text messages on the road and, hey future.

Also the camera... the iPhone 4s camera is finally good enough I wouldn't care about having another compact camera (I have a DSLR for real photography). Plus it's very, very quick to activate.

Also of course it's faster blah blah blah, but those are less noticeable to real people since the 4 was pretty fast already. But those two reasons are enough to compel many people, indeed many people I know upgraded...

Re:Siri and Camera

[roc97007]

So, you understand that Siri worked on your 4, up to the point where Apple shut it off, and works fine in A/B comparisons on a rooted 4?

Re:Siri and Camera

[SuperKendall]

So, you understand that Siri worked on your 4, up to the point where Apple shut it off, and works fine in A/B comparisons on a rooted 4?

Yes, I have a rooted 4.

You understand that the camera (physical hardware) cannot be upgraded by Jailbreaking?

And that I listed the camera as one of the two reasons>

And that some non-technical users may not be willing to jailbreak?

Re:Siri and Camera

[roc97007]

I understand about the camera. I'm sure it's important to someone. In my defense, you're talking to a professional photographer; I have very little interest in phone cameras and tend to ignore them. For just one reason, besides my rugged, weatherproof DSLR gear, I own a pocket camera which I use for very specific purposes. It's waterproof. The phone is not.

Parenthetically, although I'm a Photoshop user, I do a lot of my work in Adobe Lightroom (the workflow is better) and for me Lightroom was the killer app for the iPad, that could finally make me buy another Apple product since the old dual proc G4 on which I used to run Photoshop. I borrowed an ipad and downloaded the app, prepared to be amazed.

It's a frakking toy. Of the 30+ adjustments you can make on the PC, you can make only eight on the ipad. And the app assumes that the photos are coming from another Apple device -- the walled garden makes it impossible to get photos from the camera to the ipad without going through an intermediary device, so I'd have to carry a macbook besides, which breaks the paradigm. It's a toy for young hipsters to dress up photos from their iphone, not for serious work. So I gave the ipad back and went back to the PC. Too bad. (I understand this is mostly Adobe's fault, and I've complained bitterly about it on the Adobe forums.)

Parenthetically again, why a PC? I switched when Apple and Adobe started their pissing contest on Flash and certain Adobe-unfriendly changes Apple had made to OSX. Photoshop was the killer app, for me, on the Mac. When it looked like things were going badly, I switched to Windows 7 when it was time to upgrade. The other reason is that I can afford a much more powerful Windows box than I could a Mac, paying Apple boutique prices. I still hate Microsoft but don't see any other practical solution.

Anyway, what I was getting at is that forbidding Siri on the 4 is entirely a marketing decision, as the application (as you know) works fine on that device. It's just another way to lock people into the disposable mindset.

But kudos to you for finding a workaround on your own phone instead of buying into tiny incremental upgrades.

Re:Siri and Camera

[Anonymous Coward]

Parenthetically again, why a PC? I switched when Apple and Adobe started their pissing contest on Flash and certain Adobe-unfriendly changes Apple had made to OSX.

Are you kidding me? Apple hasn't made any changes to OS X to specifically make life harder for Adobe.

Anyway, what I was getting at is that forbidding Siri on the 4 is entirely a marketing decision, as the application (as you know) works fine on that device. It's just another way to lock people into the disposable mindset.

It turns out that this is not entirely true. Some stories came out recently revealing that Apple licensed an advanced audio noise filtering / processing IP core and integrated it into the A5 chip (that's Apple's custom System-on-Chip for current generation iDevices; an older version named A4 is used in iPhone 4 and iPad 1). The iPhone 4 does have an older generation of the technology from the same company, but implemented as a discrete chip rather than integrated into A4.

Long story short, people have done comparisons between 4 and 4S Siri voice interpretation accuracy to try to verify this, and found that 4S Siri does indeed work much better in a noisy environment, or when the phone is held away from your face.

Your argument makes no sense

[SuperKendall]

..or maybe they want a new car because the old one is falling apart?

For 4 to 4s users that argument is silly. The 4 is still quite new, I have had one since launch and it works just as well as ever. What is there to "fall apart" on something that is all metal and glass with almost no buttons?

sorry but all three items (apple products, cars, and clothes) are fashion items first

If that were true Apple would have changed the 4s in some way just for the sake of making it look new. If that were true people would not have upgraded from the 4 to the 4s since there is no way externally to tell them apart at a glance, they just would have bought a new case... instead people upgraded in massive numbers.

Your argument simply makes no sense no matter how you look at it.

Using a pen

[XrayJunkie]

I would really like to use a pen with a tablet. So far, only a few alternatives are available. The Galaxy Note is waaaaay to small - it should be at least 10" and comparable to current tablet models. There is the XOOM, but it is (afaik) not available right now.

Do you have any idea why most companies dont go for the additional input method? Constructive answers much appreciated.

iPad and iPhone resale

[Anonymous Coward]

Omr thing I would like to thank Apple for: high resale value of my Idevices. Prior to the iPhone, no manufacturer was going to upgrade your last gen phone to the latest OS. Not Symbian, not Microsoft. You were lucky (and had to be tech savvy enough) to even get minor updates. iPhone 2Gs even are worth something to this day.

Thank you Steve!

hello ya

[Anonymous Coward]

www.keciorennakliyat.web.tr Ankara keçiören evden eve nakliyat firmalar ........