As people have already mentioned - it's just the current iPad iteration with 128 GB of storage, it's nothing next gen
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
The picture is for the next gen though
[QUOTE=Lazor;39410487]about 15 different people are about to make long posts about how the surface pro is basically a laptop and you should get it because[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't compare the iPad and the Surface Pro (they're two different products for two different markets (I'm not certain that he Surface has a market, but whatever)), but if we talk hardware price alone, $1000 for the Surface Pro 128GB is a lot more reasonable. Still piss expensive, but there it is.
[QUOTE=Lazor;39410975]based on....?
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
y'all are reading way too much into this otherwise small release.[/QUOTE]
Stocks are plunging and they confirmed a leak. Never heard of Apple doing such a thing before.
[QUOTE=farmatyr;39413357]Stocks are plunging and they confirmed a leak. Never heard of Apple doing such a thing before.[/QUOTE]
were you born the other day or
A new one already?
Really?
I can't wait to buy a new product that's the exact same as it's 50 other predecessors, has half assed new features added in to make it seem new, and is just made to look a bit thinner.
Here's my money, Apple. Go crazy you hi-tech, innovative bastards.
[QUOTE=UntouchedShadow;39413890]I can't wait to buy a new product that's the exact same as it's 50 other predecessors, has half assed new features added in to make it seem new, and is just made to look a bit thinner.
Here's my money, Apple. Go crazy you hi-tech, innovative bastards.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy[/url]
This is just the fourth gen with 128GB of storage. The picture in the OP isn't related at all, and this iPad is just a higher storage model for people who want it. They haven't made any new generation or anything like that after it was updated in October. Why does everyone think this is some fifth generation model? I guess the stupid picture in the article that doesn't relate to the story didn't help.
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39411507]I wouldn't compare the iPad and the Surface Pro (they're two different products for two different markets (I'm not certain that he Surface has a market, but whatever)), but if we talk hardware price alone, $1000 for the Surface Pro 128GB is a lot more reasonable. Still piss expensive, but there it is.[/QUOTE]
I think when people see how poorly Windows will scale on a 10.6" 1080p display they won't even pay $500 for a device with mangled text and interface objects that are either puny or huge.
it costs $250 extra to get a 128gb ipad over a 16gb ipad.
a 128 gb SSD costs $140 (samsung 840)
lol apple
[QUOTE=Protocol7;39413901][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy[/url][/QUOTE]
What's your point?
[QUOTE=meppers;39414747]it costs $250 extra to get a 128gb ipad over a 16gb ipad.
a 128 gb SSD costs $140 (samsung 840)
lol apple[/QUOTE]
Not sure how a company would get profits if they sold you stuff for the price it costed them to make it.
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kljunas;39414795]What's your point?[/QUOTE]
It's not a trend exclusive to Apple, but it's used as a criticism exclusively against Apple. In fact hardware wise the jump from the 4S to the 5 is much larger than that of the S2 to the S3.
[QUOTE=Kljunas;39414795]What's your point?[/QUOTE]
Apple's hardware revisions have at least been substantial and they don't shit out 20 different kinds of crapware each year like Samsung does.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;39414830]Apple's hardware revisions have at least been substantial and they don't shit out 20 different kinds of crapware each year like Samsung does.[/QUOTE]
The 4 to the 4S wasn't exactly huge. The GPU performance jump was massive and there was the better camera and CPU bump. But the RAM and display and form stayed the same. I guess you could say it wasn't worth an upgrade from a 4, but with how Apple works with typical two year contract based major revision cycles it wasn't meant to be.
well at that point you didn't need to improve on anything other than the internals. a lot of phones Samsung still make are literally shit and blanketed under their flagship phone name. Apple doesn't do that.
There's a lot of people here under the mindset that you [I]have[/I] to have the newest gadget, because it makes all the other gadgets obsolete
I'm still on my iPhone 4 and I couldn't care less if they made 6 new iPhones within the week with minimal upgrades. Why do I not care? Because I wouldn't buy them. Someone else might. I won't. So I don't care. I'm content with my iPhone 4.
Question is, why are you caring?
How many god damn Ipads have they released?
Four generations, five if you include the mini as it's own.
and each one has been substantially different from the other, whether internally or in form factor.
[QUOTE=TheSporeGA;39410164]What's even the point of buying apple products anymore if it's just going to be outdated two minutes after it was released[/QUOTE]
What an incredibly silly thing to say. First-off, this is just a size upgrade. Secondly, that's the world of technology. What's the point of buying any piece of hardware when updated versions launch pretty frequently.
Apple is one of the few companies with a consistent release cycle, and this faster release cycle is a response to the increased competition.
[QUOTE=Kaabii;39414799]Not sure how a company would get profits if they sold you stuff for the price it costed them to make it.
[/QUOTE]
i'm sure putting 128gb in a tablet costs the same as putting 128gb into an SSD
[QUOTE=meppers;39418200]i'm sure putting 128gb in a tablet costs the same as putting 128gb into an SSD[/QUOTE]
That depends. Your statements are all without any basis because you don't know how much Apple pays for NAND. They aren't like Samsung where they can make it themselves. They have to order it from other companies that need to make profit on it too. Then Apple needs to make profit as well, and their margins are much higher than most competitors. That is to say...they actually make money unlike competing companies that aren't Samsung. I'm not saying Apple couldn't lower the price and still make money, but your analogy comparing it to a Samsung SSD isn't a good one.
[QUOTE=meppers;39418200]i'm sure putting 128gb in a tablet costs the same as putting 128gb into an SSD[/QUOTE]
No it doesn't lol.
Have you opened a SSD and an iPad?
The iPad has 1 maybe 2 NAND chips, while the SSD has a controller connecting a ton of NAND chips together.
Not only that, the iphone 5 BOM showed the NAND being between $1 and $4
[QUOTE='[EG] Pepper;39418580']No it doesn't lol.
Have you opened a SSD and an iPad?
The iPad has 1 maybe 2 NAND chips, while the SSD has a controller connecting a ton of NAND chips together.
Not only that, the iphone 5 BOM showed the NAND being between $1 and $4[/QUOTE]
Doesn't that depend on the SSD? Some mSATA ones only have like one or two NAND chips right?
Oh and the iPad only has space for one NAND chip IIRC.
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
Oh mSATA can hold four NAND packages max apparently.
[QUOTE=Kaabii;39418620]Doesn't that depend on the SSD? Some mSATA ones only have like one or two NAND chips right?
Oh and the iPad only has space for one NAND chip IIRC.
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
Oh mSATA can hold four NAND packages max apparently.[/QUOTE]
He was comparing the ipads NAND to a samsung 840.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;39413901][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy[/url][/QUOTE]
woh, samsung releasing phones that look substantially different and are NOT the same product line?
yeah, that's not the same thing
Yeah, it's not like Apple (or any other manufacturer) are putting the latest and greatest stuff in there. 500MB/s transfers wouldn't make any kind of sense on an mobile device, and I think the boot time you see with this kind of stuff shows that it isn't the fastest memory by any stretch.
[QUOTE=The First 11'er;39419141]woh, samsung releasing phones that look substantially different and are NOT the same product line?
yeah, that's not the same thing[/QUOTE]
from 2007 to 2013 apple has released six iterations of the iPhone
from 2009 to 2013 samsung has released 44 phones that carried the "Galaxy" label
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
so uh yea it's not the same thing at all. you're totally right.
apple has historically had a pretty coherent vision for their product. sorry, but "looking substantially different" is actually a bad reason to make a new phone.
incoming people posting pictures of the iphone 5
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;39419383]from 2007 to 2013 apple has released six iterations of the iPhone
from 2009 to 2013 samsung has released 44 phones that carried the "Galaxy" label
[editline]30th January 2013[/editline]
so uh yea it's not the same thing at all. you're totally right.
apple has historically had a pretty coherent vision for their product. sorry, but "looking substantially different" is actually a bad reason to make a new phone.
incoming people posting pictures of the iphone 5[/QUOTE]
[t]http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2012/1020-samsunggla/14008059-1-eng-US/1020-samsunggla_full_600.jpg[/t]
=/=
[t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/Samsung_Galaxy_Nexus_Render.png/220px-Samsung_Galaxy_Nexus_Render.png[/t]
or this
[t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Samsung_Galaxy_S_Advance_i9070.JPG/220px-Samsung_Galaxy_S_Advance_i9070.JPG[/t]
or even this
[t]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/Samsung_Galaxy_I5800_1.JPG/800px-Samsung_Galaxy_I5800_1.JPG[/t]
yeah really good point. the iphone's look a hell of a lot more similar (iphone 3gs <, iphone 4 was pretty different)
i don't think you know what substantially means, please compare the iphone 4 to the iphone 5, and you do realize that a lot of the galaxy phones were to pertain to carrier needs who needed phones that they can contract and give out for free? samsung is the company that makes most of those phones and some of them fall under the galaxy line
apple does not work the same way as samsung does
Well that's because they got SUED for all the designs before those, and they LOST. I own an i9000 and an i9100, and the latter from the front is pretty much just a larger version of the former. A bit more angular and the button is more squarish, but it's a spitting image and my i9000 has been confused for its successor many times. That's why they design the corner curves differently now, and have a home button best described as like a deformed toenail.
Retail stores like where I work hate you Apple. I thank god that every damn device for the past three years has been the same size, but now you make it thinner so everyone has to start over again.
God fuck.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
