Analysis of the new Apple iPad
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 9, 2012 1:37 AM ESTFinal Words
In many ways the new iPad was a known quantity. We knew to expect a faster SoC, a significantly higher resolution display and LTE support - Apple delivered on all fronts. The new iPad, much like another iPhone, is simply a tangibly improved version of its predecessor.
The iPad 2's display quickly became unacceptable from a resolution standpoint. The 3rd generation iPad's Retina Display completely addresses the issue and creates a new benchmark for other players in the tablet and ultraportable notebook space to live up to. It really is great to see Apple pushing display technology so aggressively and at reasonable price points. I do hope it's only a matter of time before we see a similar trend on the Mac side.
The finer details of yesterday's announcement were interesting - a much larger battery and 4x-nm LTE baseband. Arguably the most important information however is what Apple didn't talk about.
Today we have a first-world-problem with tablets, including the iPad - they are spectacular for certain usage models, but frustrating for others. Tablets aren't notebook replacements yet, but they can be more useful than a notebook depending on what you're doing. At the same time, tablets can be considerably worse than a notebook - again, depending on what you're doing. The solution to having the best of both worlds is to switch between or travel with two devices: a tablet and a Mac/PC. Ideally we'd like to see consolidation where you'd only need one.
Windows 8 proposes a solution to this problem: a single OS that, when paired with a convertible tablet (or dockable tablet like the Transformer Pad), can give you a tablet experience or a full blown desktop OS on a single device. Apple hasn't tipped its hand as to what the iOS UI strategy is going forward. I suspect we'll get some update at WWDC this year, but Apple is playing it very quiet at this point. Microsoft's strategy does bode very well for Windows users who also want a tablet, however it does alienate Windows users who want a more robust desktop experience. It's clear to me that Apple is trying to move the iPad closer to the MacBook Air in its product line, but it's unclear to me whether (or when) we'll see convergence there.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
161 Comments
View All Comments
WaltFrench - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
Methinks much of the extra battery drain is (1) LTE and even more, (2) the hi-res screen, which appears less efficient. Assuming it's important enough to spend a few engineer-months on it, turning off unused GPU capacity would seem to moot the question of extra units.tipoo - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
Possibly a stupid question, but are we sure they are the same? They specifically said saturation at the keynote, and they've used the term gamut before. Some Android phones displays have lots of saturation, but less gamut.gorash - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
It would suck if all they did was increase the saturation via software. That's kinda what I assumed.jabber - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
...seems far less press hyperbole this time around.Maybe folks are just bored with tablets now.
Torrijos - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
First off I've been trying to find the anandtech article on mobile multi-threading analysis mentioned in the article to no avail so if anybody can point me in the right direction I would appreciate it.On the subject of multi-threading, it feels to me that besides benchmarks, there isn't a lot of usage model that benefit from 4 vs. 2 cores on mobiles platform right now.
While Apple has a tight control on multitasking, leading to a lower charge on the CPU, they also have been trying to facilitate the real life use of multiple core with Grand Central Dispatch, that they were pushing even a year before the release of their first multi-core mobile device.
My question would be are the benefits of multi-core architecture real in mobile devices right now?
Even on mainstream desktop computers we now barely see multi-threaded mainstream software (not talking about pro or engineering), so how many software are optimized for multi-cores on each mobile platform (iOS, Android, W7)?
Also to benefit from better multi-thread performances what version of the OS have to be used in Android?
Even the web benchmarks used to test multi-threaded performances have to be taken with a grain of salt since network performances would probably end up annihilating the benefits of a faster CPU in real life usage.
While it's always nice to speak of hardware specs, I feel we still lack a good usability measure on mobile platforms, besides ideal webpages loading that would be hampered by real life networks.
WaltFrench - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
Mostof the time, most apps are twiddling their thumbs waiting for user events. Other functions maybe look for network events. But if few iOS apps make use of multi-threading, it must be because the extra work and risk of introducing bugs doesn't result in an app that is perceptibly better to the user.tipoo - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
70% is a massive increase in battery capacity. I wonder if that was mainly for the LTE, or if the Retina display sucks lots more power too? For less intensive work where the CPU and GPU can idle a lot like web browsing, would it likely last longer than the 2?tipoo - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
Also I've been wondering, they didn't say anything about the CPU part in the keynote but would it require that new heat spreader just for moving from the MP2 to the MP4 graphics? The PS Vita does not have one yet has twice the CPU cores and the same MP4 graphics, maybe the CPU cores are clocked higher?solipsism - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
it's for the Retina Display and associated components as the system still gets 10 hours for web surfing, watching video, or listening to music with the WiFi-only model, just like with the previous iPads. They do omit the standby time this time around. WIth a 70% larger battery isn't in safe to assume it should have increased by around 70%?tipoo - Friday, March 9, 2012 - link
I feel like if it went up by 70% they would have said so. But on the other hand in the one without the wireless radios, I don't see why it wouldn't have.