Back to Article

  • mygocarp - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    "The new iPad weighs in at 1.4 lbs, slightly heavier than the 601 grams of the iPad 2"

    Ouch, can we stick to keeping either only metric or only imperial in a given sentence?
  • quiksilvr - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    652 grams vs 601 grams
    1.44 lbs vs 1.32 lbs

    new iPad specs:

    iPad 2 specs:
  • bupkus - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    Is there any reason we aren't calling The New iPad, iPad3? Reply
  • MarkLuvsCS - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    It wouldn't be magical product if it wasn't NEW. :P Reply
  • Ronakbhai - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    Please do forgive Mr. Anand. His childhood spent memorizing massive multiplication tables has made him forget that many of us do not naturally do metric <-> imperial conversions. :) Reply
  • mutil0r - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    "Battery life remains unchanged at 10 hours and Apple is claiming 9 hours of battery life on LTE. I suspect Qualcomm's 28nm LTE baseband is to thank for that."

    Or the fact that this version of the iPad has a much larger battery at about 42 Whr compared to the 25 Whr in the previous model?
  • solipsism - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    But it's 10 hours with just the WiFi model. So being that close to the non-cellular model and being the same between WiFi and cellular models on the iPad 2 points to the MDM9615. Reply
  • mutil0r - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    It's sort of a no brainer that the new ipad has a qualcomm modem in it (given how Apple has used their modems in previous devices and no one else can actually supply the volumes that Apple needs)

    While it is impressive that the LTE battery life is so close to the non-LTE life (testing methodology not known), the article doesn't mention the almost 70% larger battery anywhere, while making it sound in the concluding line that the LTE chip alone might be responsible for the battery life.
    The 10 hours for the WiFi model is not really that impressive (even with the 2048 x 1536 display) when you consider the humongous 42.5 WHr battery.
  • Draiko - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    It looks like the A5x SOC is a 65nm power hog. 42.5 Whr battery for 9-10 hours of usage is kinda dismal when it comes to power efficiency. Reply
  • philbotimus - Wednesday, March 07, 2012 - link

    Ummm, the original A5 was 45nm, so the A5X is at least that small.


Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now