Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

What the iPad 3 Looks Like

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the take-a-look dept.

China 471

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."

cancel ×

471 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Cheaper iPad 2 (1, Interesting)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021045)

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 [nytimes.com] . 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 [reuters.com] 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 [businessinsider.com] . 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.

Android fanboy response (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021135)

"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"

Apple fanboy retort (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021547)

"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!!!"

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021159)

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

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (4, Insightful)

thelexx (237096) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021233)

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 (3, Interesting)

pseudofrog (570061) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021549)

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 (5, Funny)

Black.Shuck (704538) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021979)

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

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (1, Insightful)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021279)

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

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021319)

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 (5, Interesting)

Tharsman (1364603) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021197)

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 (-1, Troll)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021251)

I seriously doubt they will shoot so low.

To be fair, everyone also thought the original iPad would be $1,000. I can absolutely see the iPad 2 going for $200-$250.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (1)

romanval (556418) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021705)

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 (0)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021213)

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 (1, Informative)

samkass (174571) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021499)

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 [apple.com] 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 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021619)

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 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021697)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021817)

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 (3, Insightful)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021503)

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 (4, Interesting)

mveloso (325617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021559)

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 (4, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021671)

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 (0, Troll)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021685)

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

The opposite is true (0)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021851)

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.

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (-1, Troll)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021219)

ok bullshit shill, where can I get a ipad2 for 200 bucks, I cant seem to find any under 400, fuck even the Apple site says "starting at 499"

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (2, Informative)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021297)

...did you even read my post?

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021691)

...did you even read my post?

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

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021731)

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

Re:Cheaper iPad 2 (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021741)

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 (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021497)

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 (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021599)

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.

Will You? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021047)

I feel poopy. Will you change me?

but wil it run... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021079)

...Android?

2048 x 1536?! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021091)

That's a larger resolution than my current desktop.

Re:2048 x 1536?! (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021223)

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?! (2)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021391)

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

Re:2048 x 1536?! (5, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021563)

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?! (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021827)

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?! (1)

TheLordPhantom (2527654) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021865)

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?! (1)

DreadPiratePizz (803402) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021975)

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?! (2)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021915)

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.

about time (2)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021603)

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:2048 x 1536?! (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021659)

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?! (4, Informative)

poity (465672) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021727)

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?! (2)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021923)

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

tl;dr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021101)

tl;dr version
it looks exactly like the ipad 2

It's new and it's Apple (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021105)

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 (4, Funny)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021145)

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 (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021513)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021637)

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

Crystal Ball (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021123)

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? (1, Insightful)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021127)

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? (1)

thestudio_bob (894258) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021337)

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? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021657)

the black rim is painted under the glass

Re:Why would it be radically different? (4, Insightful)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021349)

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? (1, Interesting)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021623)

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

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? (1)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021863)

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? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021899)

it meets half of your design requirements

Fail, nothing like an iPad (4, Informative)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021895)

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.

why do we care about shape? (4, Insightful)

Sebastopol (189276) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021139)

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? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021277)

I'm an ubuntu user

Re:why do we care about shape? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021283)

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? (1)

Sebastopol (189276) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021767)

+1 /snort/ ;-)

Re:why do we care about shape? (1)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021467)

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? (3, Insightful)

Lord of the Fries (132154) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021635)

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."

Thus the proof that Apple is not about status (4, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021943)

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:why do we care about shape? (2)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021663)

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

Tech Media needs a JPG (2)

ZombieBraintrust (1685608) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021777)

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

Essentially looks the same? (4, Funny)

wjcofkc (964165) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021165)

Maybe they could sue themselves over it.

Re:Essentially looks the same? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021507)

Ba dum splash!

This anti-Apple troll doesn't even make sense. They invented the design, so of course they wouldn't sue themselves.

I guess now that all the stock anti-Apple trolls from the last 15 years are no longer valid, this is all the haters have left. Mocking a well-known design company for protecting its design work. Seriously? Why can't all those Asian companies come up with their own designs? Even friggin' Microsoft is doing that.

Expectations? Pah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021201)

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.

Get over it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021327)

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.

The biggest question.... (5, Interesting)

mwfischer (1919758) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021229)

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.

Why would they change the design? (1)

StoutFiles (2471680) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021245)

It works. People like it. Redesigns are expensive.

Re:Why would they change the design? (1, Informative)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021311)

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 [letsgodigital.org]

All these leaks... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021285)

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 (3, Interesting)

obi1one (524241) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021303)

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 (2)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021455)

Because 3 > 2. Get with the program!

Re:Ok, but why buy it (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021457)

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 (1)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021475)

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 (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021917)

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 (1)

Fallingcow (213461) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021481)

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 (1)

nitio (825314) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021687)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021609)

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.

Far more likely to be 1.5x not 2x (0)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021329)

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 (5, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021517)

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 (1)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021795)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021633)

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.

When? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021351)

When will it be available in stores?

Re:When? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021539)

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? (0, Troll)

dryriver (1010635) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021415)

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? (5, Insightful)

Dzimas (547818) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021561)

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.

Doesn't matter what it looks like (0)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021433)

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

These "exclusive" sites have a poor track record (4, Insightful)

david.emery (127135) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021551)

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.

It's the accessories market, stupid. (4, Insightful)

romanval (556418) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021627)

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. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39021771)

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.

I didn't read TFA, but... (3, Informative)

Intropy (2009018) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021629)

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

Can you say... (1)

geoffball (1195685) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021643)

iPad 2S.

what is the point of constant changing? (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021669)

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? (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021985)

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!!! (2)

mehrotra.akash (1539473) | more than 2 years ago | (#39021711)

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

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>