bit-tech.net

iPad 2 Dual-Core CPU Rumoured

iPad 2 Dual-Core CPU Rumoured

Apple's iPad 2 is rumoured to feature a 2,048 x 1,536 display and a dual-core Cortex-A9 CPU.

Rumours concerning Apple's next generation iPad 2 tablet are spreading ahead of this year's launch, with the latest gossip claiming it will have a massively increased screen resolution, and a boost in processing power.

Apple watcher MacRumors points to support in the latest version of the iBooks app for a display resolution of 2,048 x 1,536. This, says the site, could be evidence that the iPad 2 will pack a display with four times the pixel density of its predecessor, which will also be a much higher resolution than most other tablets currently on the market.

Of course, such a boost to the resolution of the device would require a suitably beefy processor to keep up, and Apple Insider claims that's exactly what Apple is planning.

The rumoured A5 chip, the successor to the ARM Cortex-A8-based A4 CPU that powers the current iPad, will reportedly feature two Cortex-A9 processing cores, along with a pair of PowerVR SGX543 GPU cores. Each of the latter would offer twice the graphics performance of the current model's PowerGV SGX535, along with the addition of OpenCL support.

If the rumours are true, the iPad 2 could be a seriously powerful platform for mobile gaming and HD video playback. However, with Nvidia continuing to push its rival Tegra 2 system-on-chip design, the iPad 2 is going to have some competition that was lacking when its predecessor launched to great success.

Could a powerful, high-resolution tablet convince you that the form factor holds promise, or will it take more than that before you shell out on a scaled-up smartphone? Share your thoughts over in the forums.

83 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
xaser04 17th January 2011, 12:19 Quote
Assuming the physical size stays the same (I can't imagine it would get much bigger) wouldn't anything on that resolution screen be hard to read without constant zooming?

Surely 720p or even 1080p would make more sense especially as everything is now geared for these resolutions (thanks to mainstream adoption of "HD").
liratheal 17th January 2011, 12:25 Quote
I will laugh heartily if it launches with a res that high on a similar form factor.

I would suspect that support would be used for external screens, such as plugging it into a monitor, or TV.

I very much doubt that res would appear on a ~10" device.
Picarro 17th January 2011, 12:27 Quote
Dual core processor, great! Extreme screen resolution, great! Resulting battery life that can be measured in milliseconds? Not so freaking great.
DbD 17th January 2011, 12:27 Quote
Impressive but a display like that, with good viewing angles, and brightness for use in direct sunlight is going to cost a lot. That's going to bump up the already pretty high price.
jrs77 17th January 2011, 12:32 Quote
There's no doubt that the new iPad will have a bigger screen and a more powerful SoC. It has to compete with the nVidia Tegra2 this year around after all.

As the manufacturer of the iPad-screens is known, it's just counting 1+1 actually.
Technobod 17th January 2011, 12:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picarro
Dual core processor, great! Extreme screen resolution, great! Resulting battery life that can be measured in milliseconds? Not so freaking great.

Exactly what I was thinking, but also the fact that until apps become HD then a lot of that ability may be wasted.
GuilleAcoustic 17th January 2011, 13:17 Quote
High res 4/3 screen .... I'd love computer screens with that resolution and that aspect ratio. I hate 10/9 and 16/10 screen to work .... only good for movies.
wuyanxu 17th January 2011, 13:19 Quote
PowerVR SGX543 is pretty much the same as SGX540, used in Samsung Galaxy S. so i highly doubt it's going to have such a display. (won't call it high resolution, as my 27inch has more pixels :P )

dual core is also wasted in current iOS system. sure it can be faster and smoother due to having 2 CPUs. but iOS just suspends any third party application, making dual-core a marketing phrase than a practical step forward.

i'd love an iPad, but i won't rush out to buy it until Apple implements WebOS kind of multi-tasking on it (applications are still running in the background, aka backgrounder on jailbroken iOS). although HP's announcement of WebOS tablets is very interesting.
kempez 17th January 2011, 13:24 Quote
If Apple can .launch with those specs at a decent price point with the same/better battery life then it will be a very impressive device indeed. Those two factors could be pretty killer though, especially price.

For those of you doubting a screen with that res, it would be superb. The iPhone 4's screen has a higher PPI than that (my maths aren't great, but I think so - 264ish for the rumoured new iPad compared to 326 on the iPhone 4) and looks stunning.

Rumours are rumours, but those specs sound good to me ;)
Bauul 17th January 2011, 13:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by xaser04
Assuming the physical size stays the same (I can't imagine it would get much bigger) wouldn't anything on that resolution screen be hard to read without constant zooming?

Surely the iPhone 4 has a higher pixel per inch density?

*does some maths*

iPhone 4: 326 PPI (960×640, 3½â€³ diagonal)
iPad 2: 264 PPI (2,048x1,536, 9.7" diagonal)

Yup, the iPhone 4 has a much higher pixel density. In fact that PPI is nearly indentical to a typical mainstream smartphone with a 3.7" screen and a resolution of 480x800.

Seems to me like that's the kind of resolution all tablets should be pushing for.
jrs77 17th January 2011, 13:59 Quote
The new iPad might even have a 12"-screen with that resolution. Do the math...

2048x1536 in 12" = 216ppi = 240 x 180 mm screensize.

This would still fit into DinA4 (297x210mm) or Letter (279x216mm) perfectly fine and it would be even better imho without a too dense pixelpitch.

EDIT: Looking at the numbers and assuming the border around the screen to be evenly thick (3/4"), then the Letter-format makes actually total sense.
mclean007 17th January 2011, 14:15 Quote
It's a doubling of pixel count in each dimension and it's the obvious way for Apple to go. They did it with the Retina display on iPhone 4 (which as Bauul points out has a tighter pitch than the suggested res for the iPad 2 would produce, much as iPhone 3GS has a tighter pitch than the existing iPad does). I'd be more surprised if Apple didn't push "Retina display" as one of the new features on iPad 2 than if they did. I think a faster processor (possibly dual core) must be absolutely nailed on, and I'd also be shocked if we didn't get a Facetime camera.

For app and accessory compatibility the aspect ratio and physical dimensions of the device will remain the same. Doubling screen res means old apps can be guaranteed to run with simple pixel doubling, which avoids any unsightly scaling issues on text (try running an LCD below its maximum resolution to see what I mean - text can look horribly smeared).
mclean007 17th January 2011, 14:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The new iPad might even have a 12"-screen with that resolution. Do the math...

2048x1536 in 12" = 216ppi = 240 x 180 mm screensize.

This would still fit into DinA4 (297x210mm) or Letter (279x216mm) perfectly fine and it would be even better imho without a too dense pixelpitch.

EDIT: Looking at the numbers and assuming the border around the screen to be evenly thick (3/4"), then the Letter-format makes actually total sense.
Unlikely. Apple is far more likely in my view to produce an "iPad mini" with a 6-7" screen than a supersized one. What's the point of a 12" tablet? May as well carry a laptop. Even the existing 9" iPad is close in size to the 11" MacBook Air. They don't want any more crossover.

My money is on iPad 2 with Retina display (doubled resolution), Facetime camera and dual core, and POSSIBLY an iPad mini with same res as existing iPad (but inherently tighter dot pitch), Facetime camera and single core, so basically the same specs as the existing iPad but in a smaller form factor and probably with added Facetime.

I doubt we'll get a 128GBer this time round. Probably stick with 16/32/64 (maybe drop 16) for iPad 2, and if iPad mini comes along that will be 16/32GB.

Place your bets!!
leveller 17th January 2011, 14:56 Quote
This sounds great to me and worthy of the upgrade. Retina-like quality display on iPad2? Oh yes!

Kinda worried that Jobs' cancer might have come back though ...

:(
jrs77 17th January 2011, 15:01 Quote
The current iPad (9.7") is 240x190mm and it's no wonder it's close to the size of the 11" MacBook Air. With my assumption of a 12"-screen the size would be 280x220mm and this is hardly making the device too big for the usual user. Every printed magazine is DinA4 or Letter-sized.

And an iPad-mini? Erm... the iPhone is basically an iPad-mini, so I don't see the point there.

Facetime-camera and aditional 5MP-camera in the back are allready confirmed for the iPad2, so there's no speculation about that.
javaman 17th January 2011, 15:13 Quote
Im not convinced tegra is fully competing with this generation chips never mind next. With an even stronger push in gaming from the likes of sony with the psp phone and Nvidia with tegra hopefully we will start seeing some really good games coming out. With netbooks with android and ipad supporting keyboards whats to stop a mobile gaming session thats cheaper and more portable than a high end gaming laptop? With tailor made games its certainly possible
karx11erx 17th January 2011, 15:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by kempez
Apple .. at a decent price point
Haha! Good one! :P
jrs77 17th January 2011, 15:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by karx11erx
Haha! Good one! :P

All other offerings for tablets with the specs of the iPad are exactly the same price. Just sayin'

Butt call me, if you find a comparable tablet for atleast $100 less
REMF 17th January 2011, 16:14 Quote
"The new core also supports OpenCL"

Fantastic news about the OpenCL support in the 543MP2 core, just a shame it will take so much longer to reach smart-phones.

As to the resolution; it is much more likely to be 1920x1280, as this would be an integer increase over the iphone screen.
mclean007 17th January 2011, 16:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The current iPad (9.7") is 240x190mm and it's no wonder it's close to the size of the 11" MacBook Air. With my assumption of a 12"-screen the size would be 280x220mm and this is hardly making the device too big for the usual user. Every printed magazine is DinA4 or Letter-sized.

And an iPad-mini? Erm... the iPhone is basically an iPad-mini, so I don't see the point there.

Facetime-camera and aditional 5MP-camera in the back are allready confirmed for the iPad2, so there's no speculation about that.
What would be the point in a 12" iPad? It does everything it's supposed to do perfectly well in its current format, and the additional screen size would not in my opinion add any benefit, whereas it would make the thing more unwieldy. I'd be very surprised.

Didn't know Facetime was nailed on, but glad to hear it. 5MP on back sounds a bit wasted - can't see many people using an iPad as a camera (I think it would be pretty awkward to use as one), but I guess it means you can use the switch function of Facetime to show what you're looking at rather than showing your own face. Still seems an odd inclusion.

iPad mini could happen - I bet Apple is considering it, depending on success of devices such as the Samsung Galaxy Tab. at between 6 and 7 inches it would be usefully bigger than the iPhone but not far off portable sized. As an eBook reader it would make a lot of sense (I just got a Kindle, which is probably similar in size to what a 6-7" iPad would be, and in my opinion it is perfectly sized as an eBook reader). As a portable video device it would be a nice compromise between smartphone size (just a fraction too small for my liking) and full sized iPad. I think it's a possibility. By no means certain but I'd say more likely by an order of magnitude than a 12" iPad.
Tyinsar 17th January 2011, 16:25 Quote
I've been looking at tablets long before the iPad and the issues have always been: (1) Too expensive, (2) underpowered &, (3) poor battery life. I'd buy one if Apple can solve all three (power is still an issue for me). Unfortunately they've added (4) too restricted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picarro
... Resulting battery life that can be measured in milliseconds? Not so freaking great.
That concerns me as well but I don't think they'd release one without keeping the battery life at least close to the last generation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuilleAcoustic
High res 4/3 screen .... I'd love computer screens with that resolution and that aspect ratio. I hate 10/9 and 16/10 screen to work .... only good for movies.
My name is Tyinsar and I (whole-heartedly) support this proposition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
All other offerings for tablets with the specs of the iPad are exactly the same price. Just sayin'

Butt call me, if you find a comparable tablet for atleast $100 less
True but I get annoyed by "butt calls". It's just not my thing ok?
kempez 17th January 2011, 17:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by karx11erx
Haha! Good one! :P

As has been stated above, I've not seen a tablet out there that has the features and build quality at a price point near an iPad. Apple price high, but their products are quality. There is no tablet out there for a good amount less than an iPad that compares well to an iPad, at the moment. If there was, I would be looking very hard at buying it.

So laugh away and next time back your one line post (plus an edited quote), up with some fact
greigaitken 17th January 2011, 17:14 Quote
why are people not saying "wow nice res!, now gimme that on a real laptop and you can have all my dollars!" "+ my wife"
Picarro 17th January 2011, 17:19 Quote
I think that the iPad is one of the best price/performance tablets out there and for an Apple device it's not that expensive compared to what it is capable of.
sub routine 17th January 2011, 17:33 Quote
would make a nice 2nd ( or even 3rd ) portable touchscreen monitor if you could sync it in ok.
Mighty Yoshimi 17th January 2011, 17:40 Quote
Really don't get what all the fuss is about. I'm not an Apple fan at all. I remember when everyone was like buy a MAC they crash less than windows no viruses. Well obv cos they have a tiny market share compared to windows so much less likely to have a virus written for it. As for crashing i'm sure windows could write a stable system if they limited it to certian hardware setups. Apple is so stable because they try to force you to use predefined hardware set ups. Windows you can run on just about anything.

Just find they are often inferior to other products that are cheaper and more fit for purpose. Don't get me started on the retina display! Resolution is NOT higher than the eye can make out.
Star*Dagger 17th January 2011, 17:52 Quote
Pure Win, I'm buying two.
Jehla 17th January 2011, 18:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mighty Yoshimi
Really don't get what all the fuss is about. I'm not an Apple fan at all. I remember when everyone was like buy a MAC they crash less than windows no viruses. Well obv cos they have a tiny market share compared to windows so much less likely to have a virus written for it. As for crashing i'm sure windows could write a stable system if they limited it to certian hardware setups. Apple is so stable because they try to force you to use predefined hardware set ups. Windows you can run on just about anything.

Just find they are often inferior to other products that are cheaper and more fit for purpose. Don't get me started on the retina display! Resolution is NOT higher than the eye can make out.

While I'm windows all the way for proper PCs (.pages not able to be opened in open office or word? I mean really?!) Apple products are not really that much more than if you are to buy a system when you look at the components. A mate of mine just bought a 27" imac, the ISP panel accounts for about half the price of it (looking at the dell ISP monitor).

Mobile though apple really do offer competitive rates and their products just feel well built. the iphone 4 works out at about £100 or £5 a month more than the samsung gal S (back when it was lunched). I've only briefly looked at the samsung, but I'd say I made the right choice with the iphone.

I've been looking at getting a tablet, the basic ipad and the Samsung tablet come in at the same price. the ipad with a better and larger screen or the samsung with 3G.

Also as far as battery power goes, I'm sure it will be fine. The iphone 4 has double the resolution of the 3GS, a more powerful cpu and manages 40% more battery power.
Yslen 17th January 2011, 20:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehla

While I'm windows all the way for proper PCs (.pages not able to be opened in open office or word? I mean really?!) Apple products are not really that much more than if you are to buy a system when you look at the components. A mate of mine just bought a 27" imac, the ISP panel accounts for about half the price of it (looking at the dell ISP monitor).

Two things;

1.) The Dell IPS monitor is far better than the current 27'' iMac screen. It's not glossy, it's not using off-white LED backlights. For people actually using the screen for creative purposes (rather than messing about in iPhoto) these things are VERY important.

2.) 5 years down the line when the Mac and PC you're comparing are ready to be replaced, the PC user just buys a new CPU, motherboard and RAM, usually a sub-£500 upgrade even if you're going for real performance kit. The Mac user has to buy a whole new iMac, inluding a new IPS monitor because they're bolted together. THAT is why buying an iMac is a damned stupid idea.


Back on the iPad thing... I don't understand why they'd go for this resolution, why not stick to 1920 horizontal pixels in a 4:3 format? Nobody needs more than that, especially on a tablet. It doesn't seem sensible to make a tablet that will have to upscale HD content to display it properly on the screen, especially when the iPad already feels sluggish.
Picarro 17th January 2011, 20:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yslen
*snip* especially when the iPad already feels sluggish.

I'm sorry, WHAT? The iPad is the least sluggy tablet I have ever tried. All the Android tablets with their fancy "I canz do flazzh" lags like no end whenever I browse the web. I'd much rather have an iPad for webbrowsing and day to day use than an Android tablet. My only gripe with the iPad is that it defaults to Apples very "locked" stance on basically anything.
Yslen 17th January 2011, 20:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picarro
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yslen
*snip* especially when the iPad already feels sluggish.

I'm sorry, WHAT? The iPad is the least sluggy tablet I have ever tried. All the Android tablets with their fancy "I canz do flazzh" lags like no end whenever I browse the web. I'd much rather have an iPad for webbrowsing and day to day use than an Android tablet. My only gripe with the iPad is that it defaults to Apples very "locked" stance on basically anything.

Oh, I don't have any other tablets to compare it to. It feels slower to use compared to my desktop or even my 5-year-old (ubuntu) laptop though. There's a notable difference in the time it takes to open a browser and load a web page for example.
Picarro 17th January 2011, 21:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yslen
Oh, I don't have any other tablets to compare it to. It feels slower to use compared to my desktop or even my 5-year-old (ubuntu) laptop though. There's a notable difference in the time it takes to open a browser and load a web page for example.

-.-' That's like saying, "HEY, this bicycle is crap because my Ferrari is faster". Afterall the CPU speed of the iPad is much lower than either your laptop or your desktop.
M7ck 17th January 2011, 21:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yslen
. There's a notable difference in the time it takes to open a browser and load a web page for example.

Mine is almost instantaneous, perhaps its your internet connection thats the problem.
Yslen 17th January 2011, 21:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picarro
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yslen
Oh, I don't have any other tablets to compare it to. It feels slower to use compared to my desktop or even my 5-year-old (ubuntu) laptop though. There's a notable difference in the time it takes to open a browser and load a web page for example.

-.-' That's like saying, "HEY, this bicycle is crap because my Ferrari is faster". Afterall the CPU speed of the iPad is much lower than either your laptop or your desktop.

Yeah, but that would be a perfectly valid argument to make if the bicycle cost more than a Ferrari. My laptop was cheaper when new than an iPad is now, so it's a very valid comparison. For reference my laptop CPU is 1.6GHz, so there's not that much in it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by M7ck
Mine is almost instantaneous, perhaps its your internet connection thats the problem.

It could be an incompatibility between the internet here and the iPad, yes. I have noticed that it is much more demanding of bandwidth too. For example, if someone is using the majority of our connection streaming video (we have a slow connection, BBC iPlayer uses most of it) then the iPad simply fails to load any web page. Other people in the house using Windows/Linux have no such issue - there is a delay of perhaps 10 seconds due to the lack of bandwidth but they do actually load the page. If I actually used the iPad myself I'd look into it, but as I don't I can't be bothered.
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 17th January 2011, 21:26 Quote
Well maybe a dual core CPU will allow for REAL multitasking on the iPad 2. I haven't touched an iPad in a while so is it still limited to non-multitasking?
M7ck 17th January 2011, 21:30 Quote
Yeah 4.2 added multitasking
eddtox 17th January 2011, 22:41 Quote
My prediction is:
*same(ish) size screen
*higher resolution
*same battery life
*faster processor
*thinner
*lighter
*same(ish) price
*front-facing camera
*possibly thinner bezel around the screen

Either way I'm going to pre-order it. I don't see android tablets being able to match it within the year - they're still lagging behind the existing one. (Plus I hear the Tesco app for iOS is excellent - brownie points with the missus :D)
leveller 17th January 2011, 23:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sub routine
would make a nice 2nd ( or even 3rd ) portable touchscreen monitor if you could sync it in ok.

I can't recommend it because I've never used it, but I read about this app 10 minutes before I read your post:

http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/idisplay/id363500805?mt=8

And I can see a use for this too. Certainly for stocks-tickers.
thehippoz 17th January 2011, 23:58 Quote
lemme check the mayan calendar again
Jehla 18th January 2011, 00:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yslen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jehla

While I'm windows all the way for proper PCs (.pages not able to be opened in open office or word? I mean really?!) Apple products are not really that much more than if you are to buy a system when you look at the components. A mate of mine just bought a 27" imac, the ISP panel accounts for about half the price of it (looking at the dell ISP monitor).

Two things;

1.) The Dell IPS monitor is far better than the current 27'' iMac screen. It's not glossy, it's not using off-white LED backlights. For people actually using the screen for creative purposes (rather than messing about in iPhoto) these things are VERY important.

2.) 5 years down the line when the Mac and PC you're comparing are ready to be replaced, the PC user just buys a new CPU, motherboard and RAM, usually a sub-£500 upgrade even if you're going for real performance kit. The Mac user has to buy a whole new iMac, inluding a new IPS monitor because they're bolted together. THAT is why buying an iMac is a damned stupid idea.

Oh, I did not know there was a difference in the panels <hugs 23" ultra sharp>. Aye I appreciate the monitor being bolted to the pc, and like to mention that when possible. They can also get pretty toasty. Still look vey pretty :p
Guinevere 18th January 2011, 00:45 Quote
I love that the anti-fanboys are now backlashing against apple fanboys so much these days on the internet, they are more annoying than the die hard fanboys (But it's a tough call)

A retina style display on a tablet by apple? Surely that's great news for everyone, as where apple lead in this space others will follow - Android, Window etc.

More screen res is win win win in my book as long as it doesn't kill battery life by more than a few %.
DiegoAAC 18th January 2011, 03:17 Quote
My prediction: $ 259.00 nano display link adapter (yeah, you need another adapter to use the adapter)
Cthippo 18th January 2011, 07:24 Quote
I saw an article on Macworld that purported rumors that iPad 2 cases had been seen in the wild that were the same size, only thinner and had holes for 2 cameras. YMMV
leveller 18th January 2011, 07:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
I love that the anti-fanboys are now backlashing against apple fanboys so much these days on the internet, they are more annoying than the die hard fanboys (But it's a tough call)

A retina style display on a tablet by apple? Surely that's great news for everyone, as where apple lead in this space others will follow - Android, Window etc.

More screen res is win win win in my book as long as it doesn't kill battery life by more than a few %.

+rep for common sense!

If Apple are going to develop tech for us from 2010 to 2020 then it makes sense to support any achievements they make - people don't need to buy the products - but the designs and achievements will filter down to other, cheaper, manufacturers and then everyone can get a slice and be happy.

added: cash stockpile now rumoured over $50billion ... that pays for a lot of R&D!
Nexxo 18th January 2011, 07:58 Quote
The new iPad will:
- be slightly thinner (looks more so because corners will be more rounded)
- have higher resolution display
- have two cameras
- have a slightly larger speaker
- have an SD slot (yes, really) but no USB port
- have a new CPU (dual core? I don't know)
- will be slightly cheaper
- have same battery life

On a related note, the iPhone 5 will have a different mobile band chipset, abandoning the Infineon one for a Qualcom. I suspect this is because the Infineon chipset is what caused the "grip of death" issue, not the antenna design (the Verison iPhone 4 handsets had a slight redesign in that area though, and the problem, such as it was, appears to have resolved itself. But I wouldn't be surprised if the redesign was cosmetic because the gap arrangement is now symmetrical, and there is a Qualcom mobile chipset inside as Verison operates on a different band). I think this is so because the Samsung Galaxy had the same "grip if death" issue and the same Infineon chipset.
stonedsurd 18th January 2011, 09:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
The new iPad will:
- be slightly thinner (looks more so because corners will be more rounded)
- have higher resolution display
- have two cameras
- have a slightly larger speaker
- have an SD slot (yes, really) but no USB port
- have a new CPU (dual core? I don't know)
- will be slightly cheaper
- have same battery life

How do you know this?

Also, interesting observation on the Qualcomm vs Infineon chipsets.

I am looking forward to the iPad 2. SD card and cameras will be nice. I would honestly not mind if they left everything else as it is now and just added more RAM.
pingu666 18th January 2011, 09:29 Quote
that res is kinda insane, would be great to have that for a small eyefinity setup, if your in a cramped area like me :x
Bauul 18th January 2011, 12:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo

On a related note, the iPhone 5 will have a different mobile band chipset, abandoning the Infineon one for a Qualcom. I suspect this is because the Infineon chipset is what caused the "grip of death" issue, not the antenna design (the Verison iPhone 4 handsets had a slight redesign in that area though, and the problem, such as it was, appears to have resolved itself. But I wouldn't be surprised if the redesign was cosmetic because the gap arrangement is now symmetrical, and there is a Qualcom mobile chipset inside as Verison operates on a different band). I think this is so because the Samsung Galaxy had the same "grip if death" issue and the same Infineon chipset.

I'm not so sure it's anything other than the antenna design. My HTC Desire has a WiFi blackspot at the top right (just where your index finger goes when holding it in landscape), and as far as I know almost all smartphones have this issue somewhere or another.

The Apple backlash was due to the way they handled the problem, not really the problem itself. All Apple need to do is tweak the design slightly and the issue will go away (or at least move to a new location). It seems a bit extreme to get a whole new chipset, unless there are other reasons too.
sausages 18th January 2011, 12:42 Quote
I find it hard to give a **** when all you can play is stuff like Angry Birds. I like a lot of the little iGames but I wouldn't play them for more than half an hour a go. If they gave it flash support and iDos it would be a completely different story story though. I would want one bad.


p.s. No usb? Wtfsadface.
[USRF]Obiwan 18th January 2011, 12:52 Quote
Apple + rumours = always fail
jrs77 18th January 2011, 12:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
The new iPad will:
- be slightly thinner (looks more so because corners will be more rounded)
- have higher resolution display
- have two cameras
- have a slightly larger speaker
- have an SD slot (yes, really) but no USB port
- have a new CPU (dual core? I don't know)
- will be slightly cheaper
- have same battery life

On a related note, the iPhone 5 will have a different mobile band chipset, abandoning the Infineon one for a Qualcom. I suspect this is because the Infineon chipset is what caused the "grip of death" issue, not the antenna design (the Verison iPhone 4 handsets had a slight redesign in that area though, and the problem, such as it was, appears to have resolved itself. But I wouldn't be surprised if the redesign was cosmetic because the gap arrangement is now symmetrical, and there is a Qualcom mobile chipset inside as Verison operates on a different band). I think this is so because the Samsung Galaxy had the same "grip if death" issue and the same Infineon chipset.

The new iPad2 will have a micro-USB-port actually. Just like any other mobile device that wants to enter on the european market 2011 ongoing.
The EU pushed micro-USB to be the new power-connector for all devices past 2010 to allow for a universal power-adapter, getting rid of all the proprietary ones. And Apple has allready annonced, that they'll follow this directive.

Reuters reported 2 years ago allready
wuyanxu 18th January 2011, 13:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The new iPad2 will have a micro-USB-port actually. Just like any other mobile device that wants to enter on the european market 2011 ongoing.
The EU pushed micro-USB to be the new power-connector for all devices past 2010 to allow for a universal power-adapter, getting rid of all the proprietary ones. And Apple has allready annonced, that they'll follow this directive.

Reuters reported 2 years ago allready
so is that what the top little connector for? rumour sites are saying there is a little connector on the top of iPad 2, some say it's mini-DisplayPort, but i doubt it as Apple are currently pushing its airplay.
Tokukachi 18th January 2011, 18:32 Quote
I'd rather it had a better display that you can actually use outdoors/ on the train when its sunny/ anywhere with harsh lighting. I'm considering not bothering with my iPad anymore and just getting a kindle for books, and will be on the lookout for a fusion netbook/small laptop.

The idea of a 5mp camera is silly, the iPad is not a sensible shape for taking photo's. As someone mentioned above, the iPad is a bit sluggish when browsing, but so's the iPhone and I believe it's an issue with the browser rendering speed.

After 2 iPhones and a iPad, I'm about ready to give up on apple, both my iPhones (3gs and iphone4) have has hardware and software issues and the iPad is next to useless for what i bought it for, which was an ebook reader with the odd web browsing ability, due to the screen.
eddtox 18th January 2011, 19:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neat69
I'd rather it had a better display that you can actually use outdoors/ on the train when its sunny/ anywhere with harsh lighting. I'm considering not bothering with my iPad anymore and just getting a kindle for books, and will be on the lookout for a fusion netbook/small laptop.

The idea of a 5mp camera is silly, the iPad is not a sensible shape for taking photo's. As someone mentioned above, the iPad is a bit sluggish when browsing, but so's the iPhone and I believe it's an issue with the browser rendering speed.

After 2 iPhones and a iPad, I'm about ready to give up on apple, both my iPhones (3gs and iphone4) have has hardware and software issues and the iPad is next to useless for what i bought it for, which was an ebook reader with the odd web browsing ability, due to the screen.

I'd love to see a pixelqi display on an ipad, but I doubt it seeing as apple tends to be a bit cautious on the uptake of new tech, so get yourself a kindle if you want a serious reading device. They're not that expensive these days.
Nexxo 18th January 2011, 20:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The new iPad2 will have a micro-USB-port actually. Just like any other mobile device that wants to enter on the european market 2011 ongoing.
The EU pushed micro-USB to be the new power-connector for all devices past 2010 to allow for a universal power-adapter, getting rid of all the proprietary ones. And Apple has allready annonced, that they'll follow this directive.

Reuters reported 2 years ago allready

Not sure about that. This is because the iPad's connector functions as more than just a charger and USB port. It also handles audio, video and Firewire. There's 30 pins for a reason...
Guinevere 18th January 2011, 20:57 Quote
If there's one thing that Steve doesn't like, but would make the iOS products better is.... more buttons!

Not for day to day use mind, I'm happy my iphone only has three external controls (okay + the headphones).

For gaming! The platform so needs another input method other than touch. Touch is good 'n' all, but come on. A fire button - Is that too friggin difficult to understand the desire for. And nobody in their right mind games on a track pad, so come on Steve (Okay not Steve, he's off doing his best to keep himself alive)... so come on Jonathan, pull a fancy trick out of your sleeve and give us something new (and not just faster, lighter, higher res)
Guinevere 18th January 2011, 21:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The new iPad2 will have a micro-USB-port actually. Just like any other mobile device that wants to enter on the european market 2011 ongoing.

I doubt it very much: http://www.onechargerforall.eu/en/faq.html#c_coverage

{quote from the official eu website}
On the basis of the Micro-USB interface, the companies have agreed to develop a common specification in order to allow for full compatibility of chargers and mobile phones. These specifications have been translated in European standards.
N.B. The agreement allows for the use of an adaptor.
{/quote from the official eu website}

So what will apple do? In the EU they'll provide a dock to micro-usb adaptor and a micro-isb charger or combination there of.

Job done!

Would be nice if they also added micro-usb, but I don't see the need myself.
maverik-sg1 18th January 2011, 21:09 Quote
I don't get what all the fuss is about with Tablets (ipads, Tegra etc..).

They are oversized smartphones right? Or are they trimmed to the bone slow latpops? Or overbloated ipod touch wannabe's?

I hardly use any of the features on my phone, apart from using it to call people and the alarm is quite good when I work away :0) On the plane or waiting around I play on my PSP.

Ergonomics prevents me from spending more than an hour on these products - I guess the ideal one for me would be one that has a sliding (and possibly hinged) keyboard behind the screen, some sort of 'kinect' style technlogy built in (so I could use an invisible mouse) - it would need to run all my office software and be compatable with games I like to play.

But right now there is nothing it can do as well as or better than a laptop in terms of computational stuff, or a phone..... and in some of the areas I have worked in, if you had one these and just happened to be sat outside using it, enjoying the screen in direct sunlight or in near darkness, It would be seconds before someone mugged you and stole it.


... I just don't get it... and therefore... I am out!!
Jampotp 18th January 2011, 21:27 Quote
This has probably been said somewhere already... but if you can get by fine with 1680x1050 on a 20 inch, and 1980x1080 would be as good as you could see on a 20inch pretty much, what's the point of having such a massive resolution on a much smaller screen?
Unless people are going to go round with iPads strapped round their heads like ski goggles so they can appreciate the high pixel density.
Now, if i could borrow that screen, make it a few times bigger, and stick it on a stand on my desk (and burn out any "appple" logos, i would be more than satisfied
eddtox 18th January 2011, 21:32 Quote
I, too, doubt the iPad 2 will have a usb port, mainly because apple makes a shedload of money off the back of the dock connector and I doubt they will want to give people a way to circumvent it.
What they will do is offer a dock connector to micro usb lead, just like the usb one they currently provide, and that will plug into a eu standard charger.

@maverik-sg1: The iPad is probably not for you.
Yslen 18th January 2011, 23:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
I love that the anti-fanboys are now backlashing against apple fanboys so much these days on the internet, they are more annoying than the die hard fanboys (But it's a tough call)

I assume that's directed at me. I just get annoyed being told how amazing Apple are all the damn time, so its nice to have bit-tech to rant to... chances are most people here are anti-Apple or indifferent anyway.
maverik-sg1 19th January 2011, 10:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddtox
@maverik-sg1: The iPad is probably not for you.

Why is that?

I want to discover the reason why anyone would buy these things, maybe it is for me (I kinda want one), I find the tech interesting but the usefullness of them (where they fit in to be used) obscure..

I can't see myself holding a 10" tablet to my ear and using it as a phone, or holding the same 10" pad infront of me to make a video or handsfree call, I can't use the touchpad keyboard for productive work (I have never tried playing games on one) nor hold the unit and read a book.

I can't understand (but want to) why I would shell out £500 for a product that has niche uses (presentations, light games, music videos, maybe a film on the move).

What do people use it for?
What does it replace?
Why is it better?
What does it not do so well?

Could it be that I just see the cost of £400-500 (I think the products with the specs I want cost this much) and that in itself is a turn off for a niche (inbetween) product? Maybe if said technology and desireable spec was half (or less than) the current cost - I could justify the purchase of it?

Or maybe people can enlighten me as to what they do with there tablets, maybe there's a use or three that I am yet to discover or understand?
eddtox 19th January 2011, 11:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1
Why is that?

I want to discover the reason why anyone would buy these things, maybe it is for me (I kinda want one), I find the tech interesting but the usefullness of them (where they fit in to be used) obscure..

I can't see myself holding a 10" tablet to my ear and using it as a phone, or holding the same 10" pad infront of me to make a video or handsfree call, I can't use the touchpad keyboard for productive work (I have never tried playing games on one) nor hold the unit and read a book.

I can't understand (but want to) why I would shell out £500 for a product that has niche uses (presentations, light games, music videos, maybe a film on the move).

What do people use it for?
What does it replace?
Why is it better?
What does it not do so well?

Could it be that I just see the cost of £400-500 (I think the products with the specs I want cost this much) and that in itself is a turn off for a niche (inbetween) product? Maybe if said technology and desireable spec was half (or less than) the current cost - I could justify the purchase of it?

Or maybe people can enlighten me as to what they do with there tablets, maybe there's a use or three that I am yet to discover or understand?

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm planning to pre-order the iPad2 as soon as it's announced.

I have a 1yr old daughter who will probably not be able to use a desktop/laptop computer for a few years, but there is every indication that the iPad is intuitive enough to allow her to use it by the time she hits 18 months (maybe earlier). I believe that this will help give her a bit of a head-start in understanding, using and being comfortable with technology.

Now I realise that £500 is a bit much to spend on a "toy" for a 1yr old, but I am also hoping to get into app development for the iOS platform, so having one on-hand would be useful.

Videocalling is quite interesting, as we use it quite a bit to keep in touch with the grandparents, and I hear there's a brilliant tesco app for iOS which will likely please the missus as their website is rubbish :P.

I realise that doesn't seem like much, but I suspect we will find further use for it once we actually have it.

As for the cost, it may come down in the future, but for now the absence of cheaper competitive products suggest that the price is about right.
wuyanxu 19th January 2011, 12:02 Quote
Tesco app is designed for iPhone to quickly scan barcode.

for facetime calling, you need another Apple device on the other end.

with iPad 2's rumoured PowerVR 543, i can't help but feel it's underpowered for games due to 4x the resolution of original iPad. i won't be buying until i see a game ported to the new resolution without any detail loss, to show that the 543 can keep up with this resolution.
Snips 19th January 2011, 13:11 Quote
What will the Apple faithful do now that you won't have Jobs to use his "Reality Inversion Field" against them? Will they keep buying with the Master sidelined?
jrs77 19th January 2011, 13:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1
Why is that?

I want to discover the reason why anyone would buy these things, maybe it is for me (I kinda want one), I find the tech interesting but the usefullness of them (where they fit in to be used) obscure..

I can't see myself holding a 10" tablet to my ear and using it as a phone, or holding the same 10" pad infront of me to make a video or handsfree call, I can't use the touchpad keyboard for productive work (I have never tried playing games on one) nor hold the unit and read a book.

I can't understand (but want to) why I would shell out £500 for a product that has niche uses (presentations, light games, music videos, maybe a film on the move).

What do people use it for?
What does it replace?
Why is it better?
What does it not do so well?

Could it be that I just see the cost of £400-500 (I think the products with the specs I want cost this much) and that in itself is a turn off for a niche (inbetween) product? Maybe if said technology and desireable spec was half (or less than) the current cost - I could justify the purchase of it?

Or maybe people can enlighten me as to what they do with there tablets, maybe there's a use or three that I am yet to discover or understand?

Surfing the web, watching movies, writing/reading eMails in the train/bus on your way to/from work in a much more comfortably way then on your smartphone.
The same as above while on the beach, in the park, etc, or just on the sofa at home.

Games might be fun to play, but that's not the main-aspect of this device, whereas creativity-software is a totally new and good experience. Making music (tons of good apps like synthesizers, mixers, etc), painting with Brushes or SketchBook Pro or ArtStudio, and many other funny little apps to play around with.

The iPad is definately not targeted at the person, who's driving to work with his car or at the person, who does nothing else then browsing the web or watching a movie.
The iPad is a mobile device targeted at creative and unconventional people. People who don't wait for others to come by and tell them what to do with the iPad, but people who think of new ways to use it themselves and integrate it into their life in a fun way.
maverik-sg1 19th January 2011, 14:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
The tablet device is definately not targeted at the person, who's driving to work with his car or at the person, who does nothing else then browsing the web or watching a movie.
The tablet device is a mobile device targeted at creative and unconventional people. People who don't wait for others to come by and tell them what to do with the teblet device, but people who think of new ways to use it themselves and integrate it into their life in a fun way.


Any generic tablet product would suffice - yes I guess I am not one of those who would spend £500 on an item and then decide how to use it...... I might not even use a product the way other people do, but I like to have list of what I 'could' do with a tablet device which can therefore justify it's cost to me.

In the same way as guy above says he'd let his 1yr old play with his tablet device - V-Tech do some great devices for 13% of the cost of the tablet device and I would be so much less upset if my 1yr old puked/shat/smashed/fed to the dog :0)

I simply don't have £500 to blow on a device that I don't even know if I would like enough to use regularly, especially in the grim days of financial hardships we find ourselves in.
M7ck 19th January 2011, 14:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1

I simply don't have £500 to blow on a device that I don't even know if I would like enough to use regularly, especially in the grim days of financial hardships we find ourselves in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddtox

@maverik-sg1: The iPad is probably not for you.
maverik-sg1 19th January 2011, 15:27 Quote
M7ck you miss the point - I want to believe that I would get good use from a tablet and that I would be satsfied with my purchase.

I am asking if anyone can to present a reasonable justification as to why they own one, what they use it for and then see if the overall uses of tablet devices fits in with my lifestyle.
Da_Rude_Baboon 19th January 2011, 15:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1

I can't understand (but want to) why I would shell out £500 for a product that has niche uses (presentations, light games, music videos, maybe a film on the move).

What do people use it for?
What does it replace?
Why is it better?
What does it not do so well?

Personally I would use it as a laptop replacement. I have my desktop PC if i need to do any intensive computing tasks or office tasks that require a lot of typing. I have a laptop that mostly gets used for web surfing from the couch, reading office documents and emails and looking at pictures, videos etc. The iPad is the perfect replacement for that, even more so if it supported flash. Its form factor is more suited for casual use, i'm a keen cook and quite often have the laptop in the kitchen while i follow recipes. The iPad again is a better form factor for that and I can also get food magazine apps with the recipes and video demonstrations on the iPad. I could also use it as a touch screen controller for my HTPC. Hell it even has games my cat can play!

For me the price holds it back. If the iPad cost £150-£200 I would buy it tomorrow or if my laptop was in need of replacement I could justify the purchase but at the moment I cant.
jrs77 19th January 2011, 15:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1
Any generic tablet product would suffice - yes I guess I am not one of those who would spend £500 on an item and then decide how to use it...... I might not even use a product the way other people do, but I like to have list of what I 'could' do with a tablet device which can therefore justify it's cost to me.

In the same way as guy above says he'd let his 1yr old play with his tablet device - V-Tech do some great devices for 13% of the cost of the tablet device and I would be so much less upset if my 1yr old puked/shat/smashed/fed to the dog :0)

I simply don't have £500 to blow on a device that I don't even know if I would like enough to use regularly, especially in the grim days of financial hardships we find ourselves in.

There's tons of information available of what you could do with a device like the iPad. Just do some research about all the software available etc.
It's not the manufacturer who's to blame for, if the consumer buys the product without knowing what he's buying it for.

It's like buying a Kart becuase it sounds cool and then realizing that you've got no place to go and drive it.

Smartphones are a totally different thing, as you can allways use them as a phone, totally forgetting about the rest of possibilities. I'm not using my phones for anything else then calling people or writing a SMS. I've simply disabled all WAP and 3G-services and use my laptop with a USB-Stick instead for surfing etc while not at home.
I'm not even using my smartphone for music, but carry a dedicated MP3-player around.

So again, if you don't know yourself, what to use a tabletPC for, then these devices are simply not for you. And there's nothing wrong with this... people are just different. However, others can maybe tell you what they use their iPad for, but that might not be, what you would do with it. You've to know yourself, if you can make any use of the software available for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Da_Rude_Baboon
Personally I would use it as a laptop replacement. I have my desktop PC if i need to do any intensive computing tasks or office tasks that require a lot of typing. I have a laptop that mostly gets used for web surfing from the couch, reading office documents and emails and looking at pictures, videos etc. The iPad is the perfect replacement for that, even more so if it supported flash. Its form factor is more suited for casual use, i'm a keen cook and quite often have the laptop in the kitchen while i follow recipes. The iPad again is a better form factor for that and I can also get food magazine apps with the recipes and video demonstrations on the iPad. I could also use it as a touch screen controller for my HTPC. Hell it even has games my cat can play!

For me the price holds it back. If the iPad cost £150-£200 I would buy it tomorrow or if my laptop was in need of replacement I could justify the purchase but at the moment I cant.

Lol @ the £150-200. The Touchscreen of the current iPad alone costs $100 and the screen for the iPad2 is announced to cost $214. With OEM-prices this may be up to 50% less, but this would still make it totally impossible to get to the price you want it to be.
eddtox 19th January 2011, 21:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1

In the same way as guy above says he'd let his 1yr old play with his tablet device - V-Tech do some great devices for 13% of the cost of the tablet device and I would be so much less upset if my 1yr old puked/shat/smashed/fed to the dog :0)

I simply don't have £500 to blow on a device that I don't even know if I would like enough to use regularly, especially in the grim days of financial hardships we find ourselves in.

You can hardly compare the iPad with the things vTech produces - and they are not likely to be of any use to anyone other than my daugther.

As for the £500 spent - if you don't like it you can always sell it on. I doubt you would lose any more than £100.
stonedsurd 20th January 2011, 01:13 Quote
As a college student, the iPad I bought replaced a laptop that I needed but couldn't afford.

I take notes in class with it, while recording the lectures at the same time. I use it to browse the web, watch movies and listen to music while I'm on campus and away from my apartment. I use it to catch up on TED videos and read books (currently on Goodbye, Mickey Mouse by Len Deighton). I use it to play games when I'm bored. I use it as a GPS on road trips. When I'm not at my dying old laptop, I use it for almost everything that I use the laptop for, with 5 times the battery life and less than one quarter the weight. To me, that's worth the $700 I paid for it. A Macbook would have cost me $1300.

When I bought the iPhone 4 a couple of weeks ago, I expected that I would be selling my iPad but I find that the iPad still has a place in my life, so I haven't. Books and movies, for instance, are way better, and I like the huge screen when I'm driving, as opposed to squinting at a phone. I love convergence, I love the fact that the iPhone 4 does so much so well, but the iPad is a brilliant product.

Seriously, jrs77 was right - if you have use for it, the price (and its existence) are justified. If you don't, they are not. Why that becomes a reason for bitching and moaning about a company, a dying man, one's sexual orientation etc are beyond me.
leveller 20th January 2011, 09:12 Quote
Poster above says it eloquently enough. There are a multitude of practical uses, but only to those who have those needs to be met. And then there are some where it might only meet a few uses and not be worthwhile. We still have a whole year of innovation and advancement to come from the other manufacturers and so we may get that iPad2 beater and we may see a new must-have tablet take the lead. But until then it is quite clear that the only tablet on the market worth getting is still the iPad(2).

As for books, I thought I would use it more for books but it turns out I actually can't make that transformation. Music, videos and websites/magazines - yes, books, no.

Side note: has anyone noticed how more mature the Apple/iPhone/iPad conversations are getting? I'm certainly not complaining! It's nice to see people discussing the subject rather than raging about it.
maverik-sg1 20th January 2011, 09:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddtox
You can hardly compare the iPad with the things vTech produces - and they are not likely to be of any use to anyone other than my daugther.

I think thats the point - for the cost of the insurance of your tablet device, your daughter could use indestructable V-tech learning aids without the risk of all your data/music/video/games getting lost if/when the tablet device takes a nose dive off the high chair onto the tiled floor and then buried by the bull mastiff in the back garden :)
stonedsurd 20th January 2011, 09:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by leveller
Side note: has anyone noticed how more mature the Apple/iPhone/iPad conversations are getting? I'm certainly not complaining! It's nice to see people discussing the subject rather than raging about it.

Only on BT. Almost everywhere else on the web, volcanos erupt when anything Apple-related is posted. Also IRL, my flatmates give me so much grief for owning both an iPad and an iPhone.
Da_Rude_Baboon 20th January 2011, 09:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77

Lol @ the £150-200. The Touchscreen of the current iPad alone costs $100 and the screen for the iPad2 is announced to cost $214. With OEM-prices this may be up to 50% less, but this would still make it totally impossible to get to the price you want it to be.

You miss my point though. For all of us a product has to hit a certain price point before it becomes a valid purchase. As I have a laptop the price of an iPad is too expensive for me to to justify. If it was at a lower price I could justify the purchase. Weather it will ever reach that price point is irrelevant.
eddtox 20th January 2011, 09:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1
I think thats the point - for the cost of the insurance of your tablet device, your daughter could use indestructable V-tech learning aids without the risk of all your data/music/video/games getting lost if/when the tablet device takes a nose dive off the high chair onto the tiled floor and then buried by the bull mastiff in the back garden :)

Yes and for a small percentage of the price of your car insurance you could get a bicycle, with a much lower risk of losing life and limb if you crash. That doesn't mean that a bicycle is superior to a car.

I intend to get a ruggedised case for the iPad, and the little one will only use it under our supervision. If that is not enough, the insurance should cover physical damage to the device, and most of the data will either live on our home NAS or be backed up there.

I am fully aware that there are risks involved, and that I may live to regret my decision, but hopefully things will work out.

P.S: Here are links to the vTech product ranges for 6-18months and 18-36months. Which of the products listed would you propose as a suitable alternative to the ipad (bearing in mind that my daughter is currently 1)?
http://www.vtechuk.com/age/6-18months/Default.aspx
http://www.vtechuk.com/age/18-36months/Default.aspx
maverik-sg1 20th January 2011, 10:54 Quote
I don't see a 1yr old using either a bike or a car.

Well actually the type of things you would use instead of a tablet pc are only suited above age5 - whats the age range for tablets again?
maverik-sg1 20th January 2011, 10:58 Quote
PS: I wans't criticising ure life choices, just expressing my concerns and speaking of experience that with 3 kids under my belt - giving a 1yr old an ipad to 'play' with (which they can't even hold).

I really can't see the benfits you speak of, only the risks - I doubt we'll be seeing ipads in nurseries any time soon for similar areas of concern.

Anyhow, I wish you luck and your child a safe learning experience.
eddtox 20th January 2011, 11:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1
I don't see a 1yr old using either a bike or a car.
The analogy was supposed to illustrate the fact that comparing a vtech toy to an ipad is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverik-sg1
Well actually the type of things you would use instead of a tablet pc are only suited above age5 - whats the age range for tablets again?

I've seen numerous videos of children around 18 months using the ipad effectively and without help. The fact that vTech - a company specialising in technological toys for children - has not been able to produce a similar type of device which is intuitive enough for an 18-month old to use, illustrates perfectly the magnitude of apple's achievement and the reason why I will get my daughter one.

By the time she is old enough to use vTech's alternative products she will have been using an ipad for 3 and a half years, and I believe that will give her a huge head-start in understanding technology.
maverik-sg1 20th January 2011, 11:31 Quote
Well good luck with that - I guess the world needs visionaries like you to continue to progress at the rate it currently is... however inpractical it may seem at the time.

On a side note - I continue to watch the progress of tablet devices with great interest and have a sincere hope that no one company has a monopoly on the technology or it's systems.
leveller 20th January 2011, 16:28 Quote
Recent trip I went on, long-ish flight. A guy, mid-40's playing a golf game (no idea which one). And then at the resort, large italian family, 3 kids all with an iPad each, aged between 7 and 14. Kept them pretty quiet for a couple of hours during dinner ... thankfully!

I'm not sure I would give mine to a toddler, although I have seen videos on the web of toddlers using them, mentally handicapped children/adults and the elderly. ... erm ... and me ... damn! Talk about digging a hole ... :| ... ... :) ... ;)
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums