The Apple iPad Review (2012)
by Vivek Gowri & Anand Lal Shimpi on March 28, 2012 3:14 PM ESTThe Most Tangible Feature: LTE Support
As the iPad straddles the divide between the smartphone and the notebook, wireless connectivity is a must to maximize its usefulness. In cities where WiFi is plentiful, opting for cellular connectivity isn't absolutely necessary, but in most of my travels I find that having some form of data plan associated with your tablet makes it a far more useful device.
If you already have a wireless hotspot or can create one through your smartphone, the appeal of a cellular modem in your iPad is diminished. There's still the convenience aspect of simply unlocking your tablet and having internet access regardless of where you are, and without having to turn on another device or configure a software based personal hotspot.
If you don't have either of these things however, and you plan on using your iPad regularly outside of your home/office, buying one of the cellular enabled versions is a costly but sensible decision.
In the past the iPad was limited to 3G operation, however arguably one of the most tangible improvements with the new iPad is its support for LTE. Through Qualcomm's MDM9600, a 45nm LTE modem with support for EVDO and HSPA+ (but no voice), Apple brings the most complete set of cellular connectivity options we've seen on the iPad.
Qualcomm's MDM9600 in the LTE iPad, courtesy iFixit
Before we get to the discussion of service plans, performance and the personal hotspot, I must stress just how big of an improvement LTE is on the iPad compared to last year's 3G models. Although LTE on a smartphone is pretty amazing, it's even more shocking on a tablet. Assuming your usage model on an iPad is a closer approximation of a notebook usage model, the inclusion of LTE is akin to always being on an extremely fast cable internet connection. Web pages load up just as quickly over LTE as they do over WiFi at my home (since the iPad's WiFi is limited to around 30Mbps in most cases, which ends up being peak downstream for me on AT&T's LTE network here in Raleigh). At my parents' house, where the fastest internet available is 6Mbps DSL, it's actually even faster for me to browse the web on the LTE iPad than it is using their WiFi. Obviously their home internet offers unlimited data transfers, while the LTE iPad does not, but for non-primary use the performance is absolutely worth the entry fee.
I mentioned the LTE connectivity on the new iPad is the most tangible feature of the tablet because the improvement in web page loading times alone makes the tablet feel much faster than its predecessor. While you can argue about how significant the Retina Display is, there's no debating about how much faster LTE is over the 3G iPad 2 models when out of range of WiFi. It's just awesome.
The LTE Breakdown, Carrier/Frequency Support
In the US, Apple makes three versions of the new iPad available: a WiFi-only device that lacks the MDM9600 and its associated components, a Verizon LTE version and an AT&T LTE version. The pricing between the three options is outlined below:
| The new iPad Lineup | |||||
| 16GB | 32GB | 64GB | |||
| WiFi | $499 | $599 | $699 | ||
| AT&T WiFi + 4G | $629 | $729 | $829 | ||
| Verizon WiFi + 4G | $629 | $729 | $829 | ||
As has always been the case, these's a $130 adder to enable cellular connectivity on the iPad. Apple is making up for slimmer than usual margins on the 16GB WiFi iPads by charging quite a bit for NAND and cellular upgrades. Unfortunately there's no way around the cost (outside of relying on an external hotspot via smartphone/MiFi) and the added functionality is definitely worth it.
Just as before, AT&T and Verizon offer no-contract data plans for use with the new iPad. These plans don't require any activation fee and can be managed on the iPad itself. You can cancel and re-activate at any time:
| iPad Data Plans | ||||||
| $14.99 | $20 | $30 | $50 | |||
| AT&T | 250MB | - | 3GB | 5GB | ||
| Verizon | - | 1GB | 2GB | 5GB | ||
AT&T offers the better "deal" at $30 per month although both carriers offer the same 5GB limit for $50 per month. Currently only Verizon enables iOS' personal hotspot option on all of its plans for no additional charge. AT&T claims it is working on enabling personal hotspot, however it is currently not available.
Both the AT&T and Verizon versions support the same GSM/UMTS/HSPA/HSPA+ frequencies and ship carrier unlocked so you can swap in any microSIM and use your iPad on a supported network. The table of bands supported by both models is below:
| Cellular Network Support | ||||
| AT&T WiFi + 4G | Verizon WiFi + 4G | |||
| 4G LTE | 700 MHz, AWS | 700MHz | ||
| EV-DO Rev. A | - | 800, 1900 MHz | ||
| UMTS/HSPA/HSPA+/DC-HSDPA | 850, 900, 1900, 2100 MHz | |||
| GSM/EDGE | 850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz | |||
The premise behind shipping the iPad unlocked is to allow users to purchase and use SIM cards from around the world when traveling. As long as the network you're on is supported by the iPad, your microSIM will work.
LTE support is unfortunately confined to North America only. International support is limited to 3G. And although DC-HSPA+ is supported by the new iPad, T-Mobile customers in the US are mostly out of luck. A T-Mobile microSIM will work but unless you're in a market where T-Mobile has enabled W-CDMA on 1900MHz, you'll be limited to EDGE speeds. In theory, if T-Mobile had two available W-CDMA carriers on 1900MHz in your area you could get DC-HSPA+ but that seems highly unlikely given the limited 1900MHz spectrum T-Mobile has available.
Although both AT&T and Verizon have LTE-FDD deployed on 10MHz wide carriers in the US, many AT&T markets use 5MHz carriers. In a 5MHz AT&T LTE-FDD market, assuming all else is equal in terms of deployment and loading, Verizon's network should be significantly faster. The reality of the matter is far more complex. Verizon's LTE network is (presumably) far more utilized as its been in operation for longer than AT&T's. Verizon's carrier bandwidth advantages can easily be eaten up by an increase in active LTE subscribers. On the flip side, there's also the question of deployment strategies. Take Las Vegas for example. As we found at CES, AT&T had great coverage in key areas (e.g. the Las Vegas Convention Center), however at other hotels around the Las Vegas Strip we typically had better luck on Verizon. It's been my personal experience that AT&T's network is either be great or horrible, with very little in between. Verizon on the other hand tends to deploy much more evenly from what I've seen.
Raleigh, NC, my home town, happens to be a 5MHz market for AT&T. With both AT&T and Verizon LTE deployed here, I ran through a combination of nearly 200 speedtests across two LTE iPads around the North Raleigh area:
_AT&T4GLTE_Downstream.png)
_Verizon4GLTE_Downstream.png)
| AT&T LTE vs. Verizon LTE in Raleigh, NC—Downstream | |||||
| Average | Max | Min | |||
| AT&T | 11.46 Mbps | 25.85 Mbps | 1.12 Mbps | ||
| Verizon | 13.33 Mbps | 29.52 Mbps | 0.33 Mbps | ||
_AT&T4GLTE_Upstream.png)
_Verizon4GLTE_Upstream.png)
| AT&T LTE vs. Verizon LTE in Raleigh, NC—Upstream | |||||
| Average | Max | Min | |||
| AT&T | 4.44 Mbps | 12.35 Mbps | 0.07 Mbps | ||
| Verizon | 4.52 Mbps | 19.67 Mbps | 0.01 Mbps | ||
_AT&T4GLTE_Latency.png)
_Verizon4GLTE_Latency.png)
| AT&T LTE vs. Verizon LTE in Raleigh, NC—Latency | |||||
| Average | Max | Min | |||
| AT&T | 72.9 ms | 120.0 ms | 58.0 ms | ||
| Verizon | 84.1 ms | 217.0 ms | 60.0 ms | ||
On average, Verizon was faster than AT&T. I measured a 15% advantage in average downstream speed and a similar improvement in latency. The two were roughly equivalent in average upload speeds, with AT&T managing a small 1.8% advantage. The numbers were closer than expected, given that Raleigh is a 5MHz market for AT&T, but I suspect some of the mitigating factors I mentioned above are at work here.
Subjectively, Verizon did seem to be faster more often although I didn't really have any complaints about the performance of the AT&T LTE iPad. Both iPads indicated they remained on LTE although, as you can see from the data above, performance can get very low before officially falling back to 3G.
In the case of the AT&T iPad, if you don't have LTE coverage you first fall back to HSPA+ which can still deliver respectable performance. Verizon iPad owners will unfortunately fall back to EVDO, which can be significantly slower. If Verizon LTE coverage is good in the places you plan on using your iPad then this difference isn't really a big deal. As with any smartphone carrier decision, you need to factor in where you plan on using the device into your decision.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
234 Comments
View All Comments
Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
Max brightness.Take care,
Anand
h4stur - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
I use it every day. But it don't see enough improvement in the new version, to warrant an upgrade. I view the high ress as an actual downgrade. As the machine will have to upscale the majority of the content.mavere - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
text text text text.If that means nothing to you, then the upgrade won't do anything for you. For the rest of us, this screen is a godsend.
darkcrayon - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
I'm guessing the machine will have to upscale very little content other than images on the web in a month or two. Every major app will be updated for the higher resolution, no new app will be caught dead not supporting the new resolution, and text based apps get a "free" upgrade to the higher resolution. If your primary concern is whether images on the web will be updated, then that's an area for disappointment. Otherwise...adityarjun - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
I love this site and most of the reviews. Since the ipad has been released I have been coming here 6-7 times a day just for this review. Glad to see it finally put up. I just registered here specifically to ask a few questions.While I was more than impressed with the review, I was hoping to read something about the use of Ipad as an educational tool. This section was sadly missing.
I am a engg grad student and I am currently looking for a good pdf reader. The only viable options for me are the new Ipad or the Kindle DX (the kindle 6" is too small). While the Kindle does sound good , the problem is that some of my pdf books are over 100mb and full of mechanical drawings. Will the Kindle be able to handle that, especially if i want to frequently jump pages or refer to multiple books side by side? I have never seen a Kindle in person so anyone who has used it, please comment.
Reading ebooks on my laptop is a pain. I often read through the night and that is not possible for me to do on a laptop. The vertical height is too small and I often end up turning the laptop 90 degree to read. Not to mention, carrying around a laptop in your hand is impossible for long durations. Plus the zoom options on Adobe reader are just weird. In short, I am really uncomfortable reading on a laptop. I have tried both a 14" 1366*768 screen as well as 17" 1920*1080 screen
On the other hand, ipad gives me the advantage of iOS. I will also be able to see OCW videos on the ipad as well as watch my college slides (ppt). Ipad owners please comment-- can i play .avi or real media player file on it directly or through an app? I can also use the educational apps like Khan academy plus it can serve as a note taking device. The disadvantage of the ipad is that reading on it through the night will probably leave me blind in a year or so. I have myopia and my power is -8D. That is one BIG disadvantage, or so I have read. I have never used an ipad so perhaps someone who uses it can share their experience of reading on it for hours at a stretch.
I am really confused about this so I hope the collective intelligence of this site will help me make an informed decision. And I would really like to see a page in the reviews of tablets that talk about the reading and note talking abilities and the educational purposes they can serve.
Monobazus - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
I understand your desilusion with the ommission here of any specific discussion of the advantages or desadvantages of using the iPad as a book reader. After all, that may probably be one of the main usages of the iPad, apart from browsing the web or checking the email or Facebook posts. But anandtech.com is mainly a tech site for geeks and technically oriented people, and we must understand that putting a special emphasis on specs and speeds is more interesting for the majority of its readers. For an analysis of your question, you could perhaps go into one of the various sites that deal with ebook readers. Unfortunately most of them, as far as I can tell, have not the level of expertise or care that anantech.com has in its analysis (see http://www.the-ebook-reader.com/ipad-3.html as an example).Now to your questions. I have no direct experience with the new iPad or the kindle DX. I have an iPad 1 and a kindle 3 (the one with the 6" screen and no touch controls). I haven't seen yet the new retina display of the iPad, but from what I've been reading it's much better on text than the previous editions. I doubt however that it is as good for the eyes as the eInk screens are - these are reflective and, as such, closer to paper than LCD screens. From my experience - I'm an intensive reader and use glasses, due to my advanced age - eInk screens don't put as much stress on the eyes as the emissive screens do. If you are planning to read through the night with a LCD screen use an indirect ambient light and plan for frequent periods of rest.
On the other hand, handling pdfs on the Kindle is an awful experience. A DX is certainly better than a 6" one, no doubt, because the bigger screen allows for larger type. On a 6" screen you can forget pdfs. You can't read them. If your typical pdfs can be accommodated in a 9,7" screen without zooming, then a DX can be the eReader for you. But be careful with the illustrations: I think the DX has the same controls that the 6" non-touch kindle. If that's the case be prepared for a bad experience with the illustrations, specially if they are detailed and need zooming (or if they have colour). The DX is a non-touch machine. The iPad touch controls are much better.
You can't see two documents side by side on any of these readers: not on the iPad and not on the Kindle. For that you need a laptop. On the iPad you can use a trick: open one document in one app (say, on the eBook app) and the other in other app (say, on the kindle reader). By switching rapidly between them, you can see the two documents in rapid succession. You can't do that on the Kindle. But this is a trick, a compromise, and not the same thing as looking to two documents side by side.
As to seeing ppt's and videos, the iPad is the way to go. There are apps for that. The kindle has not that capability.
In the end, my advice is this: try to get access to an iPad before buying, and see if it meets your expectations for reading clarity and comfort. Getting access to a DX before buying may be more difficult, because there are few people around with them. I have yet to see one and they are around for several years.
I'm sorry if these considerations haven't been useful for you.
Monobazus - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
See this YouTube analysis of the Kindle DX with pdf's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVPBCD0GgBw&fea...adityarjun - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
Thanks you very much for your reply.It does seem as if neither of the two fit my needs perfectly. So I will have to make a compromise.
A 6" kindle or 7" tablet is out the question. It is just too small to read comfortably on.
The Kindle DX's screen and size seemed good to me but if you say that it can't handle pdfs comfortably then it is of no use to me. I will not be viewing any newspapers or magazines nor will I be surfing the net with it.
The only other option that remains is to use the ipad. The pros is that it should be able to handle large pdf *as per videos on youtube* as well as all my videos.
The con is the eye strain.
Is it really as bad as some sites make it out to be? Especially when compared to an e ink reader?
I will try to get my hands on an ipad and use it for a day or two but come to think of it, the screen cant be that much more stressful than a normal laptop, can it? And I have been reading reviews of the SoCs on Anandtech since morning...
Damn, I am really gonna go blind at this rate. *summons immense willpower and tries to close anandtech* * fails :-) *
mr_ripley - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
I keep and read all my technical pdf files on the ipad (textbooks, reports, memos, drawings, etc). I use an app called GoodReader which is absolutely amazing with all kinds of pdfs.Regarding eye strain, I usually keep my brightness setting at around 50% and zoom in to make the font large, which strains my eyes a little less and definitely less than a desktop screen. The sharp font on the new retina screen helps as well. That said I will admit it is not as easy on the eyes as an e-ink display.
tbutler - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link
Honestly? I think the iPad's screen (even the first iPad, let alone the new one) gives me significantly *less* eyestrain than eInk, and I've owned a couple of Sony eInk readers.For me, the key eyestrain issue between the two is contrast. eInk displays are a light grey background with dark grey text, and in bright lighting the contrast is fine. But in less than bright lighting - for example, an indoor room without either a ceiling light fixture or multiple floor lamps - I start having trouble with distinguishing the text. Even a 40-year-old yellowing paperback is easier for me to read under those conditions. While you can use a clip-on reading light, I find that both clunky and less effective than it would be on paper.
The iPad (and really, any backlit LCD screen) has the 'stare into backlight' issue; but honestly, this is rarely a problem for me, and in particular it's much less of a problem than eInk contrast issues. Backlit color LCDs also wash out in bright sunlight, but not in even the most brightly-lit interior room, in my experience - however, for me this isn't a significant issue, since I spend much more time reading indoors than outdoors.
So just in terms of legibility, I'd pick the iPad (or the nook Color/Tablet) over any of the eInk readers I've used. And that's leaving out issues of software and PDF handling.