| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Apple unveils iPad mini |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-10-23 19:12:55 |
| It's one of those days again: Apple held a product announcement today, announcing several new products. The most important of which was rumoured about for a long time now: a smaller iPad. It's called the iPad mini, and has the potential to become the best-selling iPad - and thus, the best selling tablet. |
|
| RE[2]: New iMac ? |
| By jared_wilkes on 2012-10-23 23:02:37 |
| There are tablets with bigger humps. |
 - Score: 3 |
| RE[2]: MacPro |
| By Tony Swash on 2012-10-23 23:11:02 |
|
> I'm in the same boat. A Mac Pro refresh needs to happen. It's obvious they're gong to drop optical drives and go to sandybridge xeons.. just get it over with already. . I too want a Mac Pro update but when you saw the list presented at the event today of all hardware/products that has been upgraded and redesigned this year one can see how busy their design team (which is not large) has been. I get the impression that the Mac Pro may also be redesigned and not just upgraded and I am hoping for something radical. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: Fail |
| By darknexus on 2012-10-23 23:16:35 |
|
> $130.00 USD more than the Google Nexus 7, yet the hardware is less capable and less screen resolution? Fail. You're comparing the 8 gigabyte Nexus 7 to the 16 gigabyte iPad Mini? Whatever makes your comparisons skew toward your chosen platform I guess, but try being a little more accurate. $249 vs $329. That's $80 more, not $130. Either way, your platform comes out looking better, so no need to futz the comparison and look foolish. |
| - Score: 4 |
| ...and the world yawns... |
| By cmost on 2012-10-23 23:18:49 |
| Who cares! Really! Anyone who was actually surprised by this move by Apple is someone I have to wonder about. The problem Apple is going to face is the onslaught of cheaper, (and arguably better) tablets sporting Android 4.x that are hitting the streets as we speak. With cheaper Android tablets that are often times more powerful (spec wise) how will Apple be able to justify the iPod touch and the iPad mini which are nearly double the cost? |
| - Score: 5 |
| A bit disappointed |
| By darknexus on 2012-10-23 23:21:22 |
| I was hoping they'd at least put an A5X chip in there rather than just the A5. Spec wise, this thing seems rather similar to the iPod Touch with a larger screen (although a lower resolution). I'm not sure how it'll do against the Nexus 7. It doesn't fair well in price, but most iOS apps seem to be better quality than their Android counterparts, so it might win there. As a geek I'm perhaps biased to say it doesn't have high enough specs, but then again, that doesn't matter to 99% of the people who will buy it. It's that revised iPad 3 that actually interests me more than the new Mini. With that upgraded processor, that thing is going to fly. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: iPad 2 owners rejoice |
| By henderson101 on 2012-10-23 23:25:29 |
| True, but the fact the iPad 2 is still in the line up guarantees another year. The fact that iOS 6 is also snappy as ever on the iPad 2 also bodes well. Not so for the iPhone 4, which now has pretty dismal performance in some situations. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: resolution variability |
| By barakedry on 2012-10-23 23:29:20 |
|
UIKit does actually come with a proper layout manager, it had it from day one, As many other things in cocoa touch it was inherited from mac UI frameworks (years back I believe from NEXT), If a developer use standard UIKit widgets (and many does) he can define layout attributes very easily from the interface builder, no need to write single line of code. using standard view controllers doesn't even requires to define anything. for standard UI apps all a developer has to do to support the iphone5 resolution for example may very well be just updating the splash screen image. The reason it doesn't happen automatically is because apple wants to force developers to test the apps on the new resolutions. The reason apple got to this unfortunate state in the first place comes from the fact that unlike android, all the iOS devices that were running iOS at the time apple opened it for third party development had the same screen and same resolution, Lots of developers were lazy and just statically positioned elements, it worked perfectly on every iOS device back then. The situation is very different from android where from the very beginning it was obvious that android devices will come at different shapes, sizes and resolutions. On the other hand though, the fact that developers has to test and create updated build to support new resolutions is also one of the main reasons that encourage app developers to create a proper suitable layout for the iPad form factor. As you say, Android apps handle different resolutions fairly well, so it's good enough reason for lots of developers to leave it as it is. |
| - Score: 4 |
| RE: A bit disappointed |
| By galvanash on 2012-10-24 00:08:29 |
|
> I was hoping they'd at least put an A5X chip in there rather than just the A5. Apple is not going to put the A5X in anything new - it doesn't make sense for them to do that. The A5X is still a 45nm chip, while the currently manufactured version of the A5 is 32nm - the A5X is over twice as big and uses ALOT more power. Its all about maximizing profitability on varied products - the A5 is used in ALOT of devices (iPad2, iPod Touch, AppleTV, and now iPad mini). Its tiny, so you can make a whole lot of them cheap - and it is packaged with RAM on the chip, so it needs much less PCB area. Apple is going to put it into anything they deem "value oriented". The A5X is is a layover from the previous generation. It is probably cheaper for Apple to make an A6X now, as it is much smaller and uses the same process node as the A5. I expect you will either never see another new product with an A5X in it, or it will get shrunk to 32nm first (like the A5 was) if there is ever an "Old New iPad" type SKU. Besides, your really don't need 4 GPUs to push a 1024x768 screen. Other than the GPUs, there isn't all that much difference between the two chips. |
| - Score: 6 |
| RE[3]: resolution variability |
| By some1 on 2012-10-24 00:28:39 |
| I don't have any iOS development experience myself, so I just relay what this guy said: http://nfarina.com/post/82396340... |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: MacPro |
| By whartung on 2012-10-24 00:31:56 |
| A refresh would be nice if for nothing else to drive down the prices yet more of the older Mac Pros. I'm in the 1,1 boat as well, and considering just buying a more modern used one that can run Mountain Lion. But I too want to wait for Thunderbolt support so perhaps I can find out any requirements for adding a TB card to an existing Mac Pro. |
| - Score: 2 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |