Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Apple

IPad 2 33% Thinner, 2x Faster, iOS 4.3 1118

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the that's-a-paddling dept.
Steve Jobs was on hand today deliver a speech at Apple's iPad 2 event. The new iPad will feature dual-core processors, 2x faster CPU, and 9X faster graphics, front and rear cameras. And it's 33% thinner. Prices range from $499 to $829 depending on if you want 3G and 64 gigs, and it ships March 11. iOS 4.3 will ship at the same time.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IPad 2 33% Thinner, 2x Faster, iOS 4.3

Comments Filter:
  • by recoiledsnake (879048) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:15PM (#35360078)

    Looks like mostly a hardware bump and some minor functionality improvements. But will lot of apps emerge that will take advantage of the big increase in speed(at the cost of alienating the 15 million existing iPad 1 owners)?

    • Re:Not bad (Score:4, Funny)

      by pushing-robot (1037830) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:25PM (#35360222)

      To be fair, the fact that they bought first-generation products proves that they secretly enjoy suffering and inevitable alienation.

    • by cgenman (325138)

      The same has been true of iPhones. Programmers and designers generally over-estimate what you can get out of a piece of hardware, and it runs slower than it should. New rev of the hardware comes out, and the slow-feeling apps now feel crisp. Everyone starts developing for the new platform, and repeat.

      Sure, it will "run" on an iPad 1. But given a few years, and the iPad 1 owners will be a small minority, and everyone will expect apps that push the hardware.

  • ...seriously, who cares how thin it is? Most people I know would just prefer a nice long lasting battery that is user-replaceable.

    I mean, unless you need to use it to shimmy a door handle because you don't want to ruin your credit card...

    • by dazedNconfuzed (154242) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:37PM (#35360410)

      The device is under 9mm thick. Making the battery replacable means you have to add two more layers of thickness around the battery module itself, another layer inside the battery bay, a little space for fit tolerance, all adding up to non-trivial increase in overall thickness just so a small percentage of users can actually replace the battery (most who say "I want a removable battery" won't actually do it). Never mind the extra space/weight needed for the connector, interface circuitry, and other stuff. In addition, the replacement battery would have to be almost as wide as the iPad, only ~3mm thick, and somehow strong enough to not bend & break. Solving all that just isn't worth the problem being solved.

      The 10+ hour run time is real. Are you REALLY not going to have a chance to recharge, using a 2 cu in charger, during that time?

      In a year of heavy use, I've drained my iPad battery at most a half-dozen times, maybe twice when having a charger nearby wasn't a viable solution.

      • by Charliemopps (1157495) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:55PM (#35360658)
        He's talking about when the batter DIES not when it runs out of juice. Rechargeable batteries degrade significantly with age. After a year or 2 your Ipad2 is going to have a battery life of an hour or two and you're not going to be able to replace the battery. Throw-away society I guess.
        • by sribe (304414) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @04:03PM (#35360786)

          He's talking about when the batter DIES not when it runs out of juice. Rechargeable batteries degrade significantly with age. After a year or 2 your Ipad2 is going to have a battery life of an hour or two and you're not going to be able to replace the battery.

          Yes, except no ;-)

          You just described lithium-ion batteries. Apple is using lithium-polymer, which degrade much more slowly, and are quite likely to outlast the device itself. There is really no need for a replaceable battery in the iPad.

          • by Boycott BMG (1147385) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @06:06PM (#35362440) Journal
            I dunno where you get your information, but Li Ion degrades slower than LiPo. The reason LiPo is used is not because of capacity or extended life, but because the polymer can be made into small thin shapes for use in handheld consumer electronics. Basically anything smaller than a laptop is probably using LiPo.
            • by sribe (304414)

              I dunno where you get your information, but Li Ion degrades slower than LiPo.

              Older LiPo degraded faster than Li-Ion. The newer ones have much longer lifespans.

        • by vlm (69642) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @04:07PM (#35360836)

          After a year or 2 your Ipad2 is going to have a battery life of an hour or two and you're not going to be able to replace the battery. Throw-away society I guess.

          21 steps to battery replacement. Actually not bad. My 1st gen Mac Mini hard drive upgrade was something like 43 steps. And unlike the ipods, the ipad doesn't require soldering.

          http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Repair/Installing-iPad-Wi-Fi-Battery-Replacement/2198/1 [ifixit.com]

          If you refuse to do it, thats OK, give me your "throw away" device with a dead battery, I'll replace the battery and either use it myself or sell it / give it away.

          Apple hardware is generally superior to other consumer devices. The batteries do tend to last quite awhile. A year or two, only if you drain and charge the battery daily.

    • by SuperKendall (25149) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:40PM (#35360446)

      In all of the iOS devices I have ever had, I have not once had to replace a battery. And even if you need to Apple can do that for you, which is something like once every three years at worst, probably longer (since as I said I have not had to replace a battery in a device yet).

      In any device if I wanted longer use time (for instance on an international flight) I always found an external power pack preferable, as they can be smaller than a second battery for a real device - I mean think of how an iPad extra battery would have to be shaped, all by itself it would be pretty bulky and large, where an external battery can opt to be much thicker but also far less higher and wider to provide more battery life in a more compact package.

      Apple has made the right choice by making the devices as small as possible, and moving the occasional need to longer use into an external form that can be customized into many shapes and sizes and capacities instead of just one monolithic replacement battery.

    • by beelsebob (529313)

      I don't know a single person who would rather the user replacable battery, so I guess your anecdote is countered by my equally invalid one. The hard stats will say whether people prefer this over the iPad 1.

  • No Verizon 4.3? (Score:2, Interesting)

    At the bottom of the page of the iOS webpage, http://www.apple.com/ios/ [apple.com] It shows that it's available for the iPhone 4 GSM Model, but no mention of the CDMA versions.

  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:19PM (#35360144)

    Will the $829 model be 65% hipper than the $499 model? I *really* want to impress the other guys in the drum circle.

  • tick - TOCK (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xMrFishx (1956084) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:26PM (#35360248)

    I'm not entirely convinced this is aimed at upgraders, apart from bleeding edge users but seems to be more for drawing in the second round of buyers. Those that wanted the camera feature, those that have seen what competitors have produced and are now making their purchase decision. There seems to be a minor price reduction on the existing IP1 too, £329 for the 16Gig is showing at time of writing on the UK store, though the IP2 is not listed there yet. No doubt there's so much stock of the IP1 that a price drop will cause more fence sitters to buy in at the older model if they decide they don't want the newest.

    It's a nice tactic and these guys really are the pro marketeers. They could sell water to fish.

    This follows (loosely) Intel's tick - tock model and doesn't overwhelm the consumer too much allowing production methods to be refined to lower cost for the next tick product whilst still staying in a good market position with the tock item.

  • by mblase (200735) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:28PM (#35360266)

    Things normal people wanted and didn't get: USB port, wireless syncing, lower price, 7-inch version

    Things normal people wanted and did get: faster, more powerful, same battery life, white body, two cameras, FaceTime

    Things geeks wanted and didn't get: oh, hell, I'll be here all day. The geeks can go buy a Xoom to hack instead.

    • by coinreturn (617535) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:43PM (#35360492)
      Yeah, if the haters ordered a shit sandwich, they'd complain it had too much mustard on it.
    • Things normal people wanted and did get: ... two cameras,

      In all seriousness, why was that a "normal" request? I understand (and use it) in cellphones, since they are commonly used as a mini-cam or a party self-cam. But why on a tablet? It feels more like ticking a feature box than anything anyone has seriously been clamouring for. A user-facing webcam for video-chat, okay, but what's the other for?

      • by ultramk (470198)

        the first thing that comes to mind is augmented reality, with a chip that's fast enough to actually be useful.

        I'm using AR apps on my iPhone 4 fairly often, and have more than once wished my iPad could do the same.

  • by BeProf (597697) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:28PM (#35360270)

    No flash. Less features than a XOOM. Lame.

  • by utahjazz (177190) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:30PM (#35360294)

    I really dig my iPad, and have no reason to get this new one.

    Except..Apple is going to make me download the new OS, making my iPad 1 slow to a crawl. Just like they did to my iPhone 3G.

    Yes I know I could never update. But, that doesn't seem like a reasonable thing to ask your customers to do.

    • by fredmosby (545378)
      I had a 3G with the same performance issues when I upgraded the OS. I looked online for solutions and they suggested turning off the phone search feature. After doing that it was as fast as it had been before the upgrade.
  • by blind biker (1066130) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:41PM (#35360466) Journal

    As a person casually interested in tablet computers, I never looked with too much interest at CPU speed. Screen size, application availability, OS and user interface usability and connection ports (USB is a must) are my most relevant factors in the choice. And price. I imagine, however, that even if I were an Apple enthusiast, CPU speed for a tablet would be less important than screen size and user interface. The iPad 2 is definitely an improved model, but no Apple enthusiast will be swept off his/her feet, though some will feel the urge to upgrade, no doubt. The rest of us won't really care about the iPad 2. In fact, at this point a much cheaper Android-based tablet computer may start to look more interesting than before ("Hey, even Apple didn't add much to their own iPad, why not get this $SEMI_ANONYMOUS_BRAND tablet instead?").

  • by penguin_dance (536599) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:41PM (#35360472)

    Unless I missed something, it still only comes with an embedded hard drive, forcing you to shell out $$ for a larger hard drive. Even my NookColor has an SD slot (and is also rootable on Android [dkszone.net]). I feel pretty much about this as I did the first one--looks cool, but considering it costs approx. the same as a laptop (except without Flash), it's an expensive toy.

  • by WiiVault (1039946) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:43PM (#35360500)
    The new audio output which supports 5.1 dolby and 1080p is huge. The HD output is especially nice for teachers since it supports any app, not just specific Apple sanctioned ones like the first iPad (at 480p).
  • 33% thinner (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:53PM (#35360626)
    Looks like Jobs is 33% thinner, too. Poor guy.
  • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @03:59PM (#35360730) Homepage

    All the "used" ipads on ebay and craigs list are still within 20% of MSRP...

    Your Used ipad 1 should go for at LEAST $200.00 less than what you bought it for.

    APPLE even discounted new ipad 1's by $100.00 as well.. I can buy a NEW Ipad 1 for $399.00 so your used one is worth $299...

  • by Jeremi (14640) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @04:45PM (#35361378) Homepage

    246 posts and nobody has discussed the magnetic covering? That seems to be the biggest design change. I'm can't decide if it's really cool, or really silly....

  • by am_fek (2007416) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @04:48PM (#35361448)

    Love the Slashdot reaction, especially the comments about what 'normal people' think. The iPad has a fucking awesome, objectively great battery life. How does Slashdot react? "It's not user replaceable!". Whatever. I've had mine for nearly a year now and it still gets over 10 hours. Maybe in another 2-3 years it'll degrade but, honestly, like I give a care.

    The iPad is incredibly cheap. This thing was widely expected to start at $1000+ last year and it started at half that. The iPad 2 is coming in at the same price points and is way cheaper than the competition. The Xoom 32GB goes for £499 in the UK. The iPad 2 32GB? £399. A fucking c-note of difference, and a sterling c-note at that. So what's the Slashdot reaction? "Too expensive!" and "lower the price!".

    iOS devices have a track record of holding up well against new cycles of iOS for at least a couple of years. As someone said above, the original 2007 iPhone 4 held up well until iOS 4 in 2010, and is still faster on its pared-back iOS 4 than some other non-Apple smartphones I've seen. Compare that with Android phones released months ago that already have no prospect of ever even seeing any OS updates, let alone being able to handle them with grace. What's the Slashdot reaction, though? "So I suppose they're going to brick my iPad now to force me to upgrade!". Bull. Shit. It's amazing how, on Slashdot, completely make-believe, possibly-maybe-in-the-future downsides for iOS seem to outrank actual, major-fuck-up downsides happening right now for Android.

    The iPad has a solid, very nice capacitive resistant IPS display. Let's not forget that some tablets are still coming out with horrible, piece-of-shit resistive screens that can only actually be viewed from one angle beneath a layer of plastic. No, the iPad 2 does not have a retina display (whatever that would mean in the iPad world), but then again the only people who ever speculated that it would have absolutely no fucking clue what is going on inside Apple, just like the rest of us. So, what's the Slashdot reaction? Do they satisfy themselves with what is already a display that is better than most and as good as any out there, but which fails to live up to a standard that only existed in the realm of fantasy? Fuck no they don't! "No retina display! Rip-off!"

    "No 4G!". Okay, seriously, get out more. Yes, in a few years, greater cellular data speeds will obviously be needed for services we can't even fully imagine right now. But right now, 6-7mpbs on an iPad 3G should be enough for everyone (ho ho). What is anyone doing today on their iPad in mobile situations anyway? Browsing Flickr? Streaming Netflix? Can't these things be done perfectly well at 3.5G speeds? What about data caps? Besides, are there tablets out there that actually have 4G? Whatever '4G' even means. Do you mean LTE or WiMax? American LTE or Chinese LTE? The one available in some places in the US or in some places in Europe, and none of which is available in any true scale? Man, I can't imagine why Apple hasn't leaped head-first into this technology, which is so obviously ready for primetime!

    "No 7-inch screen!". Fuck off. This from the same crowd that roared that the iPad was just a big iPhone. 7-inch screens are a cop-out by bullshit manufacturers who cannot price-match the iPad at 10 inches.

    "No Flash!". Yeah okay. You get that one. I'm really missing those wicked banner ads spamming my eyes from all corners. What about iAd, you might cleverly retort? I have 200 apps and maybe 15 that I use daily or very often, and I have never - as in not once, ever - seen an iAd. Anyway it's true that, once in a blue moon, I come across a video that isn't playable via HTML5 video. Somehow I get by. If you're genuinely bothered by the lack of Flash, then I respect that. IMO this is as close to a genuine trade-off as the iPad comes. I have a sneaky feeling, though, that a lot of the uproar surrounding Flash and iOS is actually coming from people who are scrambling for something (anything!) that they can fire at Apple

    • Spoken like a middle income spoiled brat. Your whole post boils down to "I'll by another when this one is obsolete"
      iPad is not Cheap. Just because something could have been more expensive doesn't mean 'cheap'.

      And stop referring to /. as if it's some kind of group think, it's not. Different fanbois and hater comes out for different things. Trolls always just come out.

      and this is 4g:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4g [wikipedia.org]

      "LTE or WiMax?"
      Neither are 4G.
      Don't get pissey at people because you have no clue about 4g.

      "On the other hand, when it comes to poxy Motorola or Samsung shitboxes that actually ARE left out of OS upgrades and ARE more expensive and DO have crappy battery life... well, we seem to have endless patience for those."
      No, completely different haters come out for those.

      And to be fair, the iPAd was compared to the Touch; which it is. A big touch. Which is neither good nor bad.

      Me? I would gt an iPAd 2, it has what I wanted in the iPAd 1, Camera for video calls. Unfortunately the times in bad right now, financially.

    • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Wednesday March 02, 2011 @09:17PM (#35364358) Journal

      The iPad 2 is coming in at the same price points and is way cheaper than the competition. The Xoom 32GB goes for £499 in the UK.

      I dunno how it is in UK, but in US, no-contract Xoom is $799, while iPad with comparable specs (3G 32Gb) is $729. So the actual difference is $70, and Xoom is exactly 10% more expensive than iPad. "Way cheaper"? Not really.

      But Xoom has a slightly larger screen (10.1" vs 9.7") and higher resolution (1280x800 160ppi vs 1024x768 130ppi), and smaller physical dimensions. Then there's the SD slot. Compared to iPad 2 specifically, a much better camera. For geeks, there's also openness, even if you don't unlock/root - you have proper filesystem shared between apps, full support for background processes (I run an FTP server on mine so that I don't have to muck around with cables to sync it with PC), and much more. Is that all worth the extra $70? It certainly did for me, but it is, of course, subjective.

      Oh, and it doesn't need iTunes to sync. That alone is priceless.

3500 Calories = 1 Food Pound

Working...