It's not like we weren't expecting it, but Apple's now made it official. The event is scheduled for March 7th at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in San Francisco at 10AM PST. 

Apparently, the event is about something they would really like us to see, and touch. If you pay close attention to the image, that is definitely not a 1024x768 pixel display, but instead a super-high resolution Retina display as most us have come to expect. Most estimates currently put the resolution at twice that of the original iPad/iPad 2; or at a ridiculous 2048x1536 pixels. That should put the iPad 3's display at 264ppi, which is still shy of the iPhone 4's 326ppi display, but impressive nonetheless. In comparison, the optional high resolution displays on the current-gen 15" MacBook Pros sport a modest 1680x1050 resolution.

Amongst other things, the new iPad should bring with it upgraded internals such as a faster processor; possibly an upgraded SoC with faster graphics and better front and rear-facing cameras. Since Apple never publicly releases the specifications of its SoCs, it would be unwise to comment on the exact nature of the silicon inside the iPad 3 until we can run benchmarks and draw some inferences about the architecture, process node, performance and power consumption of the new chip. It remains to be seen whether Apple offers Siri on the iPad 3 or if it would remain as an iPhone-exclusive feature. However, it would be fair game to expect iOS 5.1 to launch alongside the new iPad 3.

What is certain however, is that the added lure of the Retina display, amongst other things, should keep Apple comfortably ahead of the competition in terms of absolute revenue and unit sales. We can also expect pre-order systems to crash, and long lines outside Apple stores shortly.

If the date on the calendar is any hint, the wait isn't terribly long now. Keep your credit cards ready.

Source: The Verge

POST A COMMENT

52 Comments

View All Comments

  • zorxd - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    uh? really?
    Either practice your muscles or hold your tablet in landscape
    Reply
  • kmmatney - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    What? I'd have to say most web pages are not optimized for widescreens. You always get way too much whitespace on the sides on most websites. The 4:3 ratio of the iPad is great for most web pages. It's maybe not the best for movies, but it still works well. I would never want a 16:9 tablet, but 16:10 might be a good compromise. Reply
  • cptcolo - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    well a big advantage is that with 4:3 everything on the screen is close to the center. When working on something like Autodesk Sketchbook Ink., grabbing your tools on the side is much easier in a squarish shape as opposed to 16:9.

    The only thing 16:9 is good for is for not having black space above and below the screen. (On 16:9 PCs this space is just a fat black bezel!)
    Reply
  • Hi_res - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    you're right about the quad-core. But AFAIK not only is apple's resolution higher than Asus's, it 'll come to market before Tprime. So technically Apple would be the first to do it. Reply
  • tayb - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    Really? Where can I buy it? Reply
  • solipsism - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    Didn't Asus just sneak out quad-core for dual-core on those tablets? It's a better move but that doesn't make your comment seem worthwhile since you're only looking at the number of cores and not at the actual performance or utility of the device.

    As for the Asus with 1080p they are actually prepping the Asus Transformer Pad Infinity tablet with 1920x1200 resolution or 2,304,000 pixels which is 224 PPI. The iPad should be announced with 2048x1536 or 3,145,728 pixels which 265 PPI.

    That's a lot of extra pixels to push so people that are interested in technology will be wondering what Apple did to achieve this goal and if there are any caveats, like reduced usage times or using an AH-IPS panel that costs more.
    Reply
  • smartthanyou - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    Who gives a crap if they were first (which in this case is debatable)?

    I guess it might be important if Asus were able to turn that head start into a large marketshare or a large number of sales but since that isn't going to happen, why is being "first" at anything relevant?

    The produced the first netbook as well and we all know how netbooks changed the world. LOL
    Reply
  • KoolAidMan1 - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    The quad core SoC in the Asus is still barely competitive with the A5 from a year ago, and 1080p<2048x1536.

    Also, nobody cares about Android tablets.
    Reply
  • chrnochime - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    You != everybody.

    Then again with a name like that you must've drank a lot of kool-aid already LOL
    Reply
  • zorxd - Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - link

    Barely competitive? The CPU is more than twice as fast.
    It's true that the GPU is slower but non-gamers won't care.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now