1. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    Gizmodo's review of the new iPad is... interesting

    iPad 3 Review: Better Than Anything Else, but Kind of a Letdown

    Frankly, I could have written this review myself weeks ago; the new device is heavier, hotter, and has no better battery life. It also contains little in the way of new features, and does not present a compelling reason to upgrade for existing users.

    Not to say that the iPad is a bad device, but by maintaining current pricing with such an incremental upgrade the value proposition becomes a little wonky, if you ask me.
    03-25-12 01:37 PM
  2. avt123's Avatar
    This should be in the Apple section.
    howarmat and Chrisy like this.
    03-25-12 01:45 PM
  3. Economist101's Avatar
    Frankly, I could have written this review myself weeks ago; the new device is heavier, hotter, and has no better battery life. It also contains little in the way of new features, and does not present a compelling reason to upgrade for existing users.
    At the same time, if it were a huge upgrade, you'd complain that all those iPad 2 users were now using an obsolete product. Also, for what you consider to be an "immature market" (tablets), you're awfully hung up on how much of an "upgrade" this iPad is. Newsflash: most people buying tablets are buying their first one. Those people aren't pivoting based on the relative difference between the iPad 2 and the new iPad. They're just asking themselves whether they want this one. It's why you find this line in the review: "If you don't have a tablet and you want to buy a tablet, buy this tablet."

    On the other hand, if you're claiming the tablet market has matured, you have a valid point. Of course that would also mean the PlayBook is completely dead in the water, as Apple sold 3 x as many iPads in 3 days as RIM shipped PlayBooks in all of 2011.

    Apple sells 3 million new iPads in 3 days

    Not to say that the iPad is a bad device, but by maintaining current pricing with such an incremental upgrade the value proposition becomes a little wonky, if you ask me.
    See above.
    Last edited by Economist101; 03-25-12 at 01:59 PM.
    03-25-12 01:54 PM
  4. anthogag's Avatar
    I tried iPad3. Great screen

    But the playbook screen is also surprisingly good compared to the new iPad

    And the playbook swiping UI is much better IMO
    03-25-12 02:08 PM
  5. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    At the same time, if it were a huge upgrade, you'd complain that all those iPad 2 users were now using an obsolete product.
    Not at all. If Apple had lived up to its reputation as an innovator, I'd be the first to acknowledge it, albiet grudgingly.

    Also, for what you consider to be an "immature market" (tablets), you're awfully hung up on how much of an "upgrade" this iPad is. Newsflash: most people buying tablets are buying their first one. Those people aren't pivoting based on the relative difference between the iPad 2 and the new iPad. They're just asking themselves whether they want this one. It's why you find this line in the review: "If you don't have a tablet and you want to buy a tablet, buy this tablet."
    I'm sort-of/kind-of with you there, actually. Yes, I view the tablet market as immature, but Apple has depended on a certain "wow" factor, pretty much since Jobs returned to the company; its own fanbois are the company's best evangelists.

    This is two products in a row now where Apple has tried to present an incremental upgrade as "new" (and Mountain Lion has been criticized as a step backwards). I think Apple may be risking its reputation as an innovator.

    On the other hand, if you're claiming the tablet market has matured, you have a valid point. Of course that would also mean the PlayBook is completely dead in the water, as Apple sold 3 x as many iPads in 3 days as RIM shipped PlayBooks in all of 2011.

    Apple sells 3 million new iPads in 3 days
    And I'm going to say that if Apple doesn't find a way to restore its (well-deserved) reputation as an innovator, this is going to be as good as it gets.

    I'm not anti-Apple, by any stretch. No other company has done more to humanize technology. If they've decided to coast, though, it's going to cost them:

    "But here's the thing: This iPad is cruising. It's still living off its predecessors' reps and some seriously excellent inherited software. Its design isn't new, and, in fact, it violates one of Jobs' Laws by getting thicker instead of thinner..." (from the Gizmodo post)

    So, Apple has essentially decided they're selling-through enough units to new users that they don't have to worry about attracting upgraders. We'll see how that plays out for them.
    Last edited by Thunderbuck; 03-25-12 at 02:24 PM. Reason: Clarifying quoted text
    03-25-12 02:22 PM
  6. dbmalloy's Avatar
    WHat it comes to is innovation..... Apple seems of late seems not to be innovating.... They marketed Suri very well but how innovative is it... but if you look at it... is it that big of a deal.....Apple is already getting blow back about the service.... I think the benchmark for Apple will be Apple TV... If they can make it fly... they are in great shape.... however the retail market is much such like dominoes.... Keep them upright and add to them you do great.... have one drop much of what is set up is gone.... Apple TV is the latest domino for Apple..... This is in essence what happened to RIM.... The dominoes are stable if you inovate.... they start dropping he minute you do not.....
    Thunderbuck and CairnsRock like this.
    03-25-12 02:23 PM
  7. FSeverino's Avatar
    was just coming to post this.

    it is about time people are realizing what is happening.

    i am 100% sure that apple purposely holds back specs or upgrades so that they can release new versions every year with the specs that should already be in the previous generation of devices.
    03-25-12 11:57 PM
  8. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    was just coming to post this.

    it is about time people are realizing what is happening.

    i am 100% sure that apple purposely holds back specs or upgrades so that they can release new versions every year with the specs that should already be in the previous generation of devices.
    Manufacturers are entitled to do that, but I don't think it happens all that much; in a competitive market you run the risk of someone else beating you to the punch.

    Unless one thinks that perhaps Apple is so cynical that they believe they're entitled to this market and only need to make incremental changes.

    I think the door really IS open for RIM to take some advantage now; we know the 3G Playbook will have a better processor than the new iPad's, and it will include NFC, a technology that doesn't seem to interest Apple at all.

    Little holes like this present opportunities for RIM. Time will tell whether they can capitalize on them.
    03-26-12 01:22 AM
  9. hurds's Avatar
    It's amazing we are about a year in and the PB is still holding its own spec-wise. The OS has matured drastically and can only get better. If RIM upgrades the PB specwise and gives it NFC I could see purchasing one and giving my current one to a family member.
    03-26-12 05:00 AM
  10. Economist101's Avatar
    I think the door really IS open for RIM to take some advantage now; we know the 3G Playbook will have a better processor than the new iPad's, and it will include NFC, a technology that doesn't seem to interest Apple at all.

    Little holes like this present opportunities for RIM. Time will tell whether they can capitalize on them.
    The current PlayBook has a "better" processor than the iPad 2, but that hasn't mattered at all; until the current iPad event was announced the iPad 2 was selling more units per week than RIM shipped PlayBooks in all 2011. Then the new model hits and it sells more units in a day than RIM shipped PlayBooks in a ll 2011.

    Simply stated, if specs really mattered you wouldn't see such a ridiculous market disparity; the results prove specs are a minor factor, well behind questions such as whether Skype or Netflix are supported.
    03-26-12 08:00 AM
  11. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    If specs were all that mattered, we'd be crowning any of the numerous Android spec behemoths as tablet king.

    Mobile post via Tapatalk
    DPSydBerry likes this.
    03-26-12 08:45 AM
  12. Economist101's Avatar
    Not at all. If Apple had lived up to its reputation as an innovator, I'd be the first to acknowledge it, albiet grudgingly.

    And you’re basing this on customer satisfaction? No. Device sales? No. Reviews? No (even Gizmodo says “buy this tablet if you don’t own a tablet.” Also, I’d be mindful of Gizmodo. We know there’s going to a BB10 review, and you probably won’t be too satisfied with the site at that time.

    I'm sort-of/kind-of with you there, actually. Yes, I view the tablet market as immature, but Apple has depended on a certain "wow" factor, pretty much since Jobs returned to the company; its own fanbois are the company's best evangelists.

    This is two products in a row now where Apple has tried to present an incremental upgrade as "new" (and Mountain Lion has been criticized as a step backwards). I think Apple may be risking its reputation as an innovator.

    So which products actually built the reputation as an innovator that they are no longer meeting? Be specific.

    And why the “fanboi” spelling, instead of “fanboy”?

    And I'm going to say that if Apple doesn't find a way to restore its (well-deserved) reputation as an innovator, this is going to be as good as it gets.

    Good point. I mean, first you start to bleed market share, then your profit takes a hit, then you start writing down inventory and replacing co-CEOs, er, your CEO.

    "But here's the thing: This iPad is cruising. It's still living off its predecessors' reps and some seriously excellent inherited software. Its design isn't new, and, in fact, it violates one of Jobs' Laws by getting thicker instead of thinner..." (from the Gizmodo post)

    As for the iPad getting thicker, it was a Hobson’s choice. They could’ve made it thinner and lighter, and taken a battery life hit. Instead, they chose to make it slightly thicker, slightly heavier and retain the same battery life. They would be criticized in either case, so it’s not as though they made a bad call. As for the iPad not being “new” enough, I notice that whenever I read that criticism I never read any specifics, so I’ll ask you: what would you add to the iPad that it doesn’t currently have, and please don’t start with mobile Flash (which Adobe has abandoned), “Bridge” or “turn your iPhone into a mouse,” since if they’d done that you’d accuse them of copying RIM. Again, be specific.

    So, Apple has essentially decided they're selling-through enough units to new users that they don't have to worry about attracting upgraders. We'll see how that plays out for them.

    This is your conclusion; you don’t know what Apple has decided. Again, it’s a Hobson’s choice. If you offer a huge upgrade, people that just bought the prior model get upset, and blogs complain that Apple is “forcing” upgrades by making new devices that feature upgrades not available on previous devices. So, instead, they improve the device as a whole while maintaining battery life, and instead get people saying “well, it’s not a huge upgrade.” They continue to sell millions of them (which we both know is not easy to do), but you have to ignore that point otherwise it makes this whole thread sound silly.

    Ultimately though, attracting new users is incredibly important, and very difficult. Just ask RIM.
    03-26-12 09:41 AM
  13. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    Let me first say, while we clearly disagree on... pretty much everything, I'll give you credit for at putting some effort into your arguments.

    And you’re basing this on customer satisfaction? No. Device sales? No. Reviews? No (even Gizmodo says “buy this tablet if you don’t own a tablet.” Also, I’d be mindful of Gizmodo. We know there’s going to a BB10 review, and you probably won’t be too satisfied with the site at that time.
    Early reports have users complaining about heat, battery life, and WiFi range issues. I have no idea what impact this will have on sales but anything that puts a doubt in a user's mind has the potential to interfere with sales.

    So which products actually built the reputation as an innovator that they are no longer meeting? Be specific.
    Apple has produced some spectacular innovations over the years, dating back to the original Apple systems that Jobs and Woz built in the garage. The Mac, the LaserWriter, the PowerBook, the iMac, the iPod, various interesting variations on the iPod, the original iPad... I could go on all day.

    Overall, I also believe that Apple may have done more to democratize design excellence than any other company.

    It's also true that Apple has had the odd fiasco to swallow, like the Lisa and the Apple III (I don't count the Newton because Jobs wasn't there, but there are others), and they've been able to dust themselves off and move on. It's worth noting, though, that Apple's failures have generally been because they were innovating in a way the market wasn't ready for.

    And why the “fanboi” spelling, instead of “fanboy”?
    It's colloquial.

    Good point. I mean, first you start to bleed market share, then your profit takes a hit, then you start writing down inventory and replacing co-CEOs, er, your CEO.
    Tsk, tsk... you usually debate well enough that you shouldn't have to resort to cheap shots.

    But, since you bring up market share, there is at least some evidence that the Playbook and other lower-cost tablets have eaten into Apple's share of the tablet market. Now I'll be the first to agree that Apple's app selection is the best both in quantity and quality, and that will be a powerful drawing card for years to come, but the Apple App Store was pretty close to the only game in town for small developers even as recently as a year ago. They don't have quite the monopoly they used to.

    As for the iPad getting thicker, it was a Hobson’s choice. They could’ve made it thinner and lighter, and taken a battery life hit. Instead, they chose to make it slightly thicker, slightly heavier and retain the same battery life. They would be criticized in either case, so it’s not as though they made a bad call. As for the iPad not being “new” enough, I notice that whenever I read that criticism I never read any specifics, so I’ll ask you: what would you add to the iPad that it doesn’t currently have, and please don’t start with mobile Flash (which Adobe has abandoned), “Bridge” or “turn your iPhone into a mouse,” since if they’d done that you’d accuse them of copying RIM. Again, be specific.
    I bet Jobs wouldn't have been happy at all with the compromises baked into the new iPad, particularly when it comes to the battery. Did you see that recharge time in the Gizmodo piece? 9 hours! You don't think this interferes with the overall usability of the device?

    It's also a matter of expectations. Apple could have very easily have termed this iteration an "update", but, no, they presented it as a full-blown new model. I'm fairly sure some were disappointed by what is essentially a bigger battery, a better camera, and an admittedly gorgeous (but power-hungry) display.

    In terms of features? I've gotta tell you, most people who have actually USED both an iPad and a Playbook seem to think the PB's navigation model is more intuitive, so that was one thing Apple could have looked at. The rear camera got a nice bump (and finally equals the resolution of the PB's), but the front camera is still sub-par. I think NFC could be huge, but Apple apparently doesn't care.

    And, sure, I'll leave BB Remote aside, if you insist, but Send To... is actually pretty useful and cool.


    This is your conclusion; you don’t know what Apple has decided. Again, it’s a Hobson’s choice. If you offer a huge upgrade, people that just bought the prior model get upset, and blogs complain that Apple is “forcing” upgrades by making new devices that feature upgrades not available on previous devices. So, instead, they improve the device as a whole while maintaining battery life, and instead get people saying “well, it’s not a huge upgrade.” They continue to sell millions of them (which we both know is not easy to do), but you have to ignore that point otherwise it makes this whole thread sound silly.
    There are some who are looking at this new version and claiming it doesn't represent much of an "improvement" at all. And, yes, the incremental nature of this update suggests that Apple isn't particularly concerned about a lack of upgraders. It's their call, and they're entitled to it.

    Ultimately though, attracting new users is incredibly important, and very difficult. Just ask RIM.
    Again, there's evidence to suggest that RIM has done a great job of attracting new users. We'll have a better idea of how well they've actually done Thursday.
    03-26-12 03:01 PM
  14. xandermac's Avatar
    Gizmodo's review of the new iPad is... interesting

    iPad 3 Review: Better Than Anything Else, but Kind of a Letdown

    Frankly, I could have written this review myself weeks ago; the new device is heavier, hotter, and has no better battery life. It also contains little in the way of new features, and does not present a compelling reason to upgrade for existing users.

    Not to say that the iPad is a bad device, but by maintaining current pricing with such an incremental upgrade the value proposition becomes a little wonky, if you ask me.
    Not really upgrades they're going for so who cares if it's way better? They just want to make sure it remains the best device on the market, success.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    03-26-12 03:48 PM
  15. avt123's Avatar
    Thunderbuck, do you think SJ had nothing to do with this new iPad? How do you know this iPad was not almost fully created by the time Jobs died?

    He has only been dead for 5 months. I highly doubt this iPad was thought of in the time between his death and the launch. Steve definitely had a say in what went in it.

    Also, the iPad isn't meant to be upgraded every time a new one comes out, so these spec upgrades do not have to be dramatic enough to make a iPad 2 owner want it. The upgrades have to be dramatic enough to make someone with a tablet pick it over what else is on the market, and possibly have original iPad owners upgrade.

    Just because a new iPad and iPhone comes out every year doesn't mean you should drop your 1 year old version and upgrade to the next.
    03-26-12 03:49 PM
  16. xandermac's Avatar
    was just coming to post this.

    it is about time people are realizing what is happening.

    i am 100% sure that apple purposely holds back specs or upgrades so that they can release new versions every year with the specs that should already be in the previous generation of devices.
    They've been doing it for as long as I've used apple products. It shouldn't be a shock.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    03-26-12 03:50 PM
  17. Vindicators's Avatar
    I think some people just expected to much.
    Look at the landscape of current tablet market you can see that the iPad 3 update is even more significant than those 'not yet released' flagship android tablet.

    A tablet is nothing but a screen, they upgraded it. Plus a most powerful SoC in the market, top-notch battery life, faster network connect.
    What else they can do? Called it an "update", not a new model?
    BB Bold use basically the same CPU and screen for almost three years in a row and RIM still called it a new model, right?
    Last edited by Vindicators; 03-26-12 at 04:21 PM.
    03-26-12 04:14 PM
  18. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    Thunderbuck, do you think SJ had nothing to do with this new iPad? How do you know this iPad was not almost fully created by the time Jobs died?

    He has only been dead for 5 months. I highly doubt this iPad was thought of in the time between his death and the launch. Steve definitely had a say in what went in it.

    Also, the iPad isn't meant to be upgraded every time a new one comes out, so these spec upgrades do not have to be dramatic enough to make a iPad 2 owner want it. The upgrades have to be dramatic enough to make someone with a tablet pick it over what else is on the market, and possibly have original iPad owners upgrade.

    Just because a new iPad and iPhone comes out every year doesn't mean you should drop your 1 year old version and upgrade to the next.
    Actually, no, I don't think SJ had much to do with this product, if only because I find it hard to believe he'd approve it in the form it was introduced.

    The device is heavier and thicker, and prone to heat up. The bigger battery needed to run that beautiful display serves to make the device less usable than its predecessor. And if Apple is so gung about pursuing the Enterprise market (which they've been doing with only middling success since the Apple III), why change the device in ways that make it LESS attractive to most Enterprise customers?

    Bottom line, it's an incremental upgrade that offers little new functionality, and as such should have been presented as an enhanced iPad 2. Worse, the biggest "improvement" could make the device less attractive to customers.

    The paranoiac in me wonders if Apple deliberately built expectations to draw attention away from the PlayBook 2.0 launch...
    03-26-12 04:44 PM
  19. MartyMcfly's Avatar
    was just coming to post this.

    it is about time people are realizing what is happening.

    i am 100% sure that apple purposely holds back specs or upgrades so that they can release new versions every year with the specs that should already be in the previous generation of devices.
    Sounds like RIMM. (c) storm, storm 2, tour, bold.......etc


    Sent from my IPhone 4s using Tapatalk
    pilsbury likes this.
    03-26-12 06:26 PM
  20. avt123's Avatar
    Actually, no, I don't think SJ had much to do with this product, if only because I find it hard to believe he'd approve it in the form it was introduced.

    The device is heavier and thicker, and prone to heat up. The bigger battery needed to run that beautiful display serves to make the device less usable than its predecessor. And if Apple is so gung about pursuing the Enterprise market (which they've been doing with only middling success since the Apple III), why change the device in ways that make it LESS attractive to most Enterprise customers?

    Bottom line, it's an incremental upgrade that offers little new functionality, and as such should have been presented as an enhanced iPad 2. Worse, the biggest "improvement" could make the device less attractive to customers.

    The paranoiac in me wonders if Apple deliberately built expectations to draw attention away from the PlayBook 2.0 launch...
    In your opinion it might be less attractive for enterprise users, but I bet the majority of enterprise users will still buy it over other tablets like they have been in the past.

    You may think Steve had no hand in this, but he laid down the future for Apple. I am sure he had something to do with most of the most recent product releases since he death was not that long ago.

    You are extremely paranoid if you believe Apple did that. That is a completely ridiculous thing to think. The PlayBook and the OS 2 launch mean nothing to Apple. The iPad is in a different league/category than other tablets. The iPad 2 was outselling the PB and the new iPad is already doing so as well. The PlayBook is not a treat at this point in time.
    03-26-12 07:34 PM
  21. xandermac's Avatar
    Actually, no, I don't think SJ had much to do with this product, if only because I find it hard to believe he'd approve it in the form it was introduced.

    The device is heavier and thicker, and prone to heat up. The bigger battery needed to run that beautiful display serves to make the device less usable than its predecessor. And if Apple is so gung about pursuing the Enterprise market (which they've been doing with only middling success since the Apple III), why change the device in ways that make it LESS attractive to most Enterprise customers?

    Bottom line, it's an incremental upgrade that offers little new functionality, and as such should have been presented as an enhanced iPad 2. Worse, the biggest "improvement" could make the device less attractive to customers.

    The paranoiac in me wonders if Apple deliberately built expectations to draw attention away from the PlayBook 2.0 launch...
    Lol. Glad you're not in the mobile industry. The biggest launch of all 3 iPads and you still deny the inevitable. Perhaps you are in the mobile industry after all, working for RIM.


    Sent from my iPhone4s using Tapatalk
    03-26-12 07:40 PM
  22. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    I could be wrong (plenty here would swear that I am), but I honestly believe that one of the LAST things Apple thinks about is RIM and what RIM is doing.

    Of course, that goes against the school of thought that implies Apple is behind the worldwide conspiracy against RIM... the one that includes the US government.
    03-26-12 08:12 PM
  23. brucep1's Avatar
    I could be wrong (plenty here would swear that I am), but I honestly believe that one of the LAST things Apple thinks about is RIM and what RIM is doing.

    Of course, that goes against the school of thought that implies Apple is behind the worldwide conspiracy against RIM... the one that includes the US government.
    It's had Android in it's cross hairs for the last 2 years with other OS's as more of an afterthought.
    03-27-12 06:47 AM
  24. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    It's had Android in it's cross hairs for the last 2 years with other OS's as more of an afterthought.
    I agree.

    Mobile post via Tapatalk
    03-27-12 06:48 AM
  25. Mystic205's Avatar
    ios had got to the point of "h0-hum" for me..seriously... no widgets?.. and so with an iPad1 i still see no reason to upgrade, as the new iPad offers me nothing.

    A hot 7" android tab was the sweet spot for me, but after seeing the galaxy Note i have found my uber portable tablet... I use it wifi only and its the very best companion to the 9930
    03-27-12 11:04 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD