1. Ken_FSU's Avatar
    PURE conjecture, obviously, but what do you guys think?

    Would Steve have been willing to trade off a retina display with a better camera for a thicker, heavier, hotter iPad that takes longer to charge?

    Seriously not trying to troll in the least bit, but after spending a full day with the new iPad, I don't know, display aside, it seems like a step back in a few departments, which is something we haven't been used to seeing in the last few years.
    03-16-2012 09:23 PM
  2. BlackBerry Guy's Avatar
    I'm sure SJ was still around when the latest iPad was in development.
    03-16-2012 09:35 PM
  3. Octo Pop's Avatar
    Agree with you, the research and development process are about 2.5 years ahead of what's available in stores so he would have been around at that time.
    03-16-2012 09:40 PM
  4. Ken_FSU's Avatar
    Of course he would have been around, but that wasn't my question.

    R&D obviously takes a long time, but Apple is famous for prototyping both conservative and more technologically advanced models for their new releases, and deciding pretty late in the development cycle which skew to go with.

    Based on what we know about Apple, I think it's fair it's fair to say that the final decision on the newest iPad was more likely than not made after the tragic passing of Jobs.
    03-16-2012 09:49 PM
  5. ModeratorOMD's Avatar
    Oh, it's not trolling at all, don't worry about that. I would also like to have my impression of the iPad heard, because I wanted it more than anyone. As an Apple fan, I can say that this new iPad is a dissappointment.

    And when I say i was dissappointed, I mean, I was really dissappointed. We soent most of our time, me + the the sales associate + observers trying to see this RETINA display everyone was talking about. There we were just sitting there trying to see something that wasn't there. "Uh, download a retina ready app." "Watch some videos." "Look at the pictures." We were looking and looking trying to find the RETINA, but it's just a regular screen. Yes, iBooks was clearer, but it was not outstanding. Its just a regular old screen. Apple just gives stuff a name. They call it retina and all of the sudden it's supposed to be magic? It isn't. Like they call the camera iSight now. Doesnt change anything. And now 3G is renamed to 4G on the 4S? Um, still no real change. So no, I was not blown away by any means.

    MR banned me for saying it, lol, but it doesn't matter.

    Not trying to rain on parades or anything because I had a nice time in the gathering for it and waiting in line.

    But all I do is observe, and the #1 question that everyone was asking is this: How is it different from the iPad 2? This question was asked constantly.

    The only real difference there is is that it's heavier. That's the only thing you will notice.

    The screen is just a regular screen. LTE is the equivalent of Wi-Fi. The retina display is not anything outstanding. It's not more high definition than anything. The graphics chip does not support anything substantial.

    If I had to choose, I'd get the iPad 2, JUST because it's thinner and lighter.

    And it really makes me sad because I keep getting excited for lackluster. Apple crossed the line when they made it thicker. That's unacceptable.
    Last edited by motoleo; 03-16-2012 at 11:07 PM.
    03-16-2012 10:42 PM
  6. canadu's Avatar
    I don't see the relevancy in posthumously questioning Steve Jobs impressions on the
    latest iPad. Apple is a techno marvel of a company not a school of magic. The new iPad would have been DOA without retina and LTE but still considered marvel given boasting all said features with a marginal size increase. I notice the difference in size but smile as I gaze into the beautiful display and battery that keeps on going and going...
    03-16-2012 10:52 PM
  7. Matsudaira's Avatar
    This "mediocre" iPad capped the stocks at $600 today. So yeah... Jobs probably would have been just fine releasing it.
    03-16-2012 11:23 PM
  8. 0pusX's Avatar
    In my opinion, this iPad was mainly used as a trial run for LTE capabilities to see how certain aspects perform when on LTE. If Apple could help it, they wouldn't release an LTE phone until battery life is on par with what it is now.
    03-17-2012 01:04 AM
  9. Chop's Avatar
    I think Steve would've done a much better job of presenting it at the Keynote, that's for sure. A Cook-led Keynote is like watching fossils form in real-time. This is shaping up to be a very important year for Apple - while I wouldn't necessarily say it's "make or break" time, it IS getting to the point where this is completely Cook's show now. What Apple does with the upcoming iPhone and Mac/MacBook lines in 2012 will say much for the future direction of Apple.

    I agree that this iPad release was just as much about the LTE rollout as it was about any screen. I also think (hope) that the iPad has reached its annual refreash maturity - a 2 year cycle would work, and give them time to implement significant changes. Apple's tablets are never "geared" toward the spec-chasers, and the user exprience can easily withstand a 2 year run. Can you imagine if the original iPad were the only version up until yesterday, with a new (iPad 2/3) form factor, slimness, weight, cameras, chip, and Retina Screen being released as the second generation? THAT may have guaranteed those lofty 15+ million sales per quarter. The new iPad will be a definite success, but I doubt those predicted numbers will be met. Just my opinion... I know they'll still sell millions of these things around the world.
    03-17-2012 04:03 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD