BGR has obtained a number of images said to be taken of output from iBoot, Apple's iDevice bootloader, running in debug mode on an iPad 3 — and in debug mode, you're able to see some detail on the hardware running underneath. Notably, the processor is identified as model number S5L8945X, which is new — it's apparently a quad-core Apple A6, which is exactly what everyone is expecting: we saw the single-core A4 in 2010 and the dual-core A5 last year, and a variety of tablet and smartphone makers will be launching quad-core devices on hardware from TI, Qualcomm, Nvidia, and others in 2012.
Perhaps more interesting is that the model references "iPad3,1" and "iPad3,2" are apparently Wi-Fi and LTE versions of the same model. Apple uses a similar scheme to differentiate between the Wi-Fi, GSM, and CDMA versions of the iPad 2 — but just as with the iPhone 4S, the iPad 3's cellular will be collapsed into a single model that supports GSM, CDMA, and LTE alike. This would be Apple's first device to support LTE, excellent news for customers on Verizon and AT&T who've been enjoying true 4G speeds in a number of markets for months now.
Our own sources are telling us that BGR's information is spot on — and we've heard the LTE bit before — so we think there's a high likelihood that this is exactly the two-device combo we'll be seeing at Apple's next event. That event could come at any time now; the iPad 2 debuted in early March of last year.

There are 193 Comments. Add yours.
BUT DOE SIT HAVE A RETINA DISPLAY? The quad-core chip (and presumably upgraded GPU) might suggest so.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:06 PM EST reply Recommend (14) Flag actions
I’m more interested in a 7.5" model sporting the current iPad 2’s resolution, to be honest.
As far as I’m concerned, the iPad 2 is no more of a mobile device than the MacBook Air. You simply cannot comfortably carry/operate the iPad with one hand. Every time I’ve used it (or seen other people use it) on a subway train, for instance, it’s a horribly awkward experience. Using the Kindle with just one hand, however, is a joy.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:11 PM EST reply Recommend (7) Flag actions
Buy a phone – or a Kindle. Neither is a tablet
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:21 PM EST reply Recommend (24) Flag actions
Too true. If I’m looking at purchasing an Android tablet or iPad, a Kindle isn’t even part of the discussion.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:26 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Kindle Fire?
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:55 PM EST reply Recommend (8) Flag actions
Android-based OS an android tablet does not make.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 7:04 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Too true.
Hehe Kindle Fire. That’s cute.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:57 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Heres a thought….dual boot iPad 3 with full Mac OS Lion and iOS5…….
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 2:17 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
The thought alone gives me nightmares.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 3:39 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Might as well throw in Mac OS9 for legacy support
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:57 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
You can’t get a Fire in England as I’m sure that you’ll know.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:45 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I do. I still think that the Kindle Fire is a viable option for those of us who can get it.
Posted on Feb 04, 2012 | 7:13 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I more interested in an iPad with a 3.5" screen, to be honest. You could operate it comfortably with one hand.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:18 PM EST reply Recommend (36) Flag actions
I believe that is called an iPhone (or iPod).
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:26 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
That’s the joke.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:28 PM EST reply Recommend (41) Flag actions
He is pretty irrelevant.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 10:38 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I see what you did there.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 11:48 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
jesus christ…
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 11:33 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
nothing gets by you does it?
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 9:55 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
eh, I think you’d get the best of both worlds, on a 7" iPad with the current display’s resolution.
But yeah, I definitely prefer my iPhone to my iPad, in EVERY mobile use case.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:50 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
My main problem with this idea is that it’s the same resolution as the current iPad. The only reason to do that is so that it can run current iPad apps, and shrinking the interface like that is going to create all sorts of usability problems. If you’re going to create a new form factor between the iPhone and the iPad, then you need a whole new set of apps designed for the new ways that people will use it.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:27 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
And that is exactly why it’s not gonna happen anytime soon.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:30 PM EST reply Recommend (20) Flag actions
Uh? No. This is why iOS devies have resolution independence.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 7:52 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
They do?
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:27 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Yeah. Otherwise the change from 3GS to iPhone 4, would of left the UI twice as small. Everything gets bigger. If a normal icon was 25×25, it’d double.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 9:38 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s not really resolution independent like you’re talking about, you can’t incrementally scale the UI. Xcode switched form pixels to points, but as a developer you still need to include both the hi-res and lo-res asset. A 7" screen would require a third set of assets and in many instances outside of non-native UIs (e.g. games) a third layout scheme. Xcode makes it easier to support multiple screen sizes, but it’s not trivial.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:31 AM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Yep. Similar for Android too.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:45 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Well put!
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:51 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
A 7"-ish device (tho I am not convinced they would do less than 7.5"…it is AAPL after all, gotta be a lil different) would actually use UIUserInterfaceIdiomPad and use @2x assets of retina displays, methinks…problem has already been solved :)
Posted on Feb 14, 2012 | 7:48 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
No, just smaller fingers and more powerful reading glasses…;0)
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:02 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
How does apple deal with apps that run on both the retina desplay iphone 4 and older models? wouldn’t this work with a retina display iPad?
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 5:33 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
The iPhone 4/4s have exactly four times the res of the iPhone, 3G, and 3gs so if they did that then that would mean the iPad3 would have a res of 4096 × 3144 which although great would be highly unlikely. I think this is the only reason the iPad2 hasnt been done that way so they probably have something in for us as they cant keep the 1024 × 786 res on a 10.1 screen forever. I have my money on a higher res, but not a 4096 × 3144 screen thats for sure (although it would be great!)
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 9:02 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
False. iPhone 4/4S has four times as many pixels, resolution is doubled. iPad should have the resolution of 2048 x 1572.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:41 AM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
You mean 2048 × 1536. (1024 × 2 = 2048 & 768 × 2 = 1536) But yeah your right.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:32 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
ahh, so in order have the apps scale properly the ipad 3 would have to have a screen with a resolution very difficult to manufacture. a retina display ipad would look gorgeous if they could pull it off!!
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 7:32 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
MacBook Air owner here.
Horsediddly.
An iPad requires two hands to operate. A MacBook Air requires three.
An iPad goes for ten hours at peak operation. A MacBook Air gets 7 hours near-idle.
The smallest MacBook Air is twice the thickness and double the weight of the iPad 2.
iOS need not worry the user with rogue background processes. OSX does.
A MacBook Air still contains moving parts (Fan, Hinge). The iPad does not.
No matter how thin and light you make a laptop, it’s still a laptop. Even if the Air is among the few that are portable.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:31 PM EST reply Recommend (16) Flag actions
And also rooted Nook Color owner here.
A nook color fits in your pants pocket — when your pants are too baggy.
A nook color is not reasonably operable with one hand no matter how big your hand is — even pro basketball players stop at the dell streak.
A nook color is okay with novels but no good for textbooks and websites — you must always be horizontal and scroll excessively in those cases, whereas on an iPad your screen is your page, period.
When the iPad came out, I clamored a pad with the dimensions of Death of a Salesman. When I got it, I clamored for an iPad. A pad smaller than an iPad is called a phone.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:39 PM EST reply Recommend (10) Flag actions
CM 7 Nook Color rooted user also here.
NC definitely fits in your pants (I carry it to work this way). One handed NC operation is possible, but not fun and unless you have the stand (worthwhile purchase by the way), it’s not worth the hassle. You want something thats a tablet that fits in one hand, shoot for the Galaxy Note.
Textbooks and websites is where we differ. Dolphin, Boat and Opera do a great job resizing & reflowing text (I don’t like the stock Gingerbread browser). You just have to get used to it.
Posted on Feb 03, 2012 | 10:07 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Bq. An iPad goes for ten hours at peak operation. A MacBook Air gets 7 hours near-idle.
Your MBA is broken. I have the second gen (2.13Ghz Core2Duo, GeForce 9400M) MBA and at nearly 3 years old it gets 4+ hours full use on a single charge.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 1:22 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I imagine he’s talking about the 11" Air, while I’m guessing you’re talking about a 13" model.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:30 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I have the 2011 13" Air — i5, Intel 3000. Under my load which usually consists of 13-18 apps at four bars above 50% brightness and heavy use of Misson Control/Spaces/Fullscreen and some youtubin, I get 4 to 5 hours. I’d imagine if my usage were more the norm (a lot of people just rock the browser with a couple tabs, word processor and text editor at 50% brightness), I’d hit 6 or so.
If we were to go by Apple’s estimates, the iPad is 10 hours and the 13" Air is 7 hours.
If we were to go by life experience, the iPad is 11 hours and the 13" Air is 4:45.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:31 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I have a similar experience with the 11" air core i7. I get about 3-4 hours in normal use which means that it needs to go on the charger at mid-day. This is good enough for me but would be really annoying on a long plane trip if there are no outlets available.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:16 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’d like to see you operate a 7" tablet with only one hand.
You must have sexy spider finger hands
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:34 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
i have rather large hands. I also have 5 modern tablets. (i have older newtons and toshiba’s but don’t consider them)
my 7" model is a a100 by acer. While you can hold it with one hand easier than an iPad, you can’t use it with one hand.
i would assume it’s the same with any 7" tablet, save some special software.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:58 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
The point is you can’t use any tablet with one hand. You are holding it with one hand and using the touchscreen with the other. The idea that you’re doing both in one hand with any tablet is preposterous.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:23 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
You can for reading with iBooks. Holding/cradling my iPad 2 in my right-hand I can use my thumb to swipe left/right. But this is a fairly limited use of a tablet.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 1:31 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
but UIs can/should evolve so that more apps can be operated with just one thumb (obviously not typing of course).
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:55 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I hold my iPad with one hand and use my rather impressive erect Johnson to navigate the screen. (oh someone had to be childish and make this joke)
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:00 AM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I call those piano hands.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:32 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
But the apps would have to be redone in a way that is much more difficult than just updating non vector assets. Jobs’ quip about filing down finger tips was in response to that notion, not necessarily in response to the seven inch form factor. I don’t think that there is anything wrong with the 7" tablet, but to just shrink the tablet down like unreleased TouchPad Go does not lend itself to the best user experience, especially if app devs were already pushing the limits of smaller button sizes.
Also, I highly doubt that Apple wants or needs to push devs to re-imagine their apps for another screen size, especially with a supply-constrained device like the iPad. I can see an iPad mini next year, or the year after, but not this year. If anything, I’d want to see them go bigger, not smaller—a 14" retina display iPad that can run two regular apps side by side would be awesome. But maybe that’s just me.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:49 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I think it’s time to stop hoping for Apple to make a 7 or so inch tablet.
Not gonna happen. The idea itself, to me, is stupid. Like some folks have pointed out that’s almost a phone size.
If you want to read a readers digest-sized book, buy a Kindle Fire or Nook Tablet.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:04 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Its just under double the size of the average phone. Totally phone sized.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:19 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
what are you talking about I took a 5 hr flight with my iPad 2 and watching movies, playing games and web browsing was enjoyable. I take my iPad everywhere I go and using it is never a pain or awkward.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 2:07 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Dude, just… it’s never going to happen. Everyone who is asking for this, shut up and get an Android tablet. Please shut up. You are clogging the tubes with your noise.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 6:55 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
lolz. I think you’re high and drunk if you think Apple will only ever make 3.5-4" and 10" slates, with nothing in the middle (and nothing greater than 10" also).
There are a ton of different use cases and appliacations that make a compelling argument for a 5-9" screen. And they would sell like hotcakes.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:58 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
What’s the point of a small tablet, why not just get a big phone?
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:44 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Yes, it has a “retina” display! You can see it with your eyes!
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 10:00 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Retina resolution on an iPad would require a massive amount of GPU power, at least for gaming. It’s much higher res than 1080p.
There is a quad core variant of the current iPad 2 GPU, and it’s in the Vita. Launch Vita games have struggled to run at even the Vita’s native screen resolution. (960×544) Apple would need a GPU a class or two beyond that, which I’m not sure is available for mass market use yet.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:13 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I would be willing to argue that the Vita games are more graphically intensive than any iOS game…
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:27 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
While I agree a retina iPad would require a lot of GPU power. I don’t think you can really compare it to the Vita. As is right now the GPU in the iPad 2 can play games without issue in its native resolution of 1024 × 768 (which is higher than the Vita’s resolution you listed at 960×544). It can also play games without issue at 1080p through hdmi. I realize 1920×1080 is not 2048 × 1536, but i would imagine if the iPad had a quad core version of the sgx543 instead of dual core it could more than make up for the difference.
Or they could use the new 6 series rogue platform Imagination Tech. has coming out although I’m not sure it’s ready to ship yet. Either way I think a bigger issue for a retina iPad with a quad core a6, LTE and all those pixels is the battery.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:58 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
i dont get peoples obsession with PPI….on a 9.7" you wouldn’t need the same PPI a 3.5" iPhone needs to not be able to differentiate pixels
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 1:25 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
But when can we have the thing? That’s what we all want to know Apple!
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:07 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
End of March/Early April.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:09 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Quad Core? Great.
LTE? Utterly irrelevant to me as I live in the UK. Good for the rest of you though.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:08 PM EST reply Recommend (18) Flag actions
Ditto that.. Retina display yes please… Quad core? Take or leave really… LTE useless here in sunny England!
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:11 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I’ll be skipping this gen anyway I think.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:13 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I have an iPad 1 so I think I owe myself an upgrade?
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:17 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
iOS devices are every 2 years for me.
iPhone 5/6 in 2012, iPad 4 in 2013
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:19 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
You have remarkable self control.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:36 PM EST reply Recommend (17) Flag actions
I have the self control of a three year old… so I am quite proud of myself for not buying an iPad 2! Bravo me….
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:38 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Internet high five from another iPad 2 non-owner
I did bought one for my grandma though, to facetime with me.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:42 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
did buy oh why would I even bother… Damn you no edit Verge
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:44 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
“to facetime with me”
Oh god I cant believe that is a thing now.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:21 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I survived w/o an iPad 2… Bt I have two iPad 1’s as my wife kept stealing mine back in 2010.
iPhone is another story… Since I have two phones on my family plan with a year off of upgradeability, one of the always qualify for an upgrade… So I always get the new models. Selling the old ones pretty much pay for it! Those devices REALLY sell well on eBay!
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:07 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
*edit
*edit
*edit
Thanks @Verge
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:07 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
hell yea, iPad 1 is kind of crappy. relatively speaking that is.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:45 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I can’t skip this generation if iPad 3 really does include a Retina screen + my original iPad is sloow.
LTE is not a selling point for me either – only some coverage in major Danish cities (which isn’t many, mind you.)
Oh and I refuse to believe England is sunny.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:46 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
It has been sunny….
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:56 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It has been a surprisingly rain and snow free winter.
touches wood
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:52 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
It’ll snow by the weekend. Sorry.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 6:43 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m forecast sun/cloudy with sun.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:15 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Still freakin’ freezin’ though.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 9:07 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Shit yeah, too cold.
We are talking about the weather… all we need to do is pop the kettle on and start queuing for something and we are as British as it comes.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:07 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
So rain and snow free equals sunny in England?
:-)
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:32 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Yep.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:13 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Well… not necessarily but winter has been a lot les grim and disrupted by snow than the last 2.,
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:15 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
The same here in The Netherlands.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:32 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You’re going to want a quadcore proc running a retina display at that size…….
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:19 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
Why when the iPad-2 already has a GPU that is enormously faster than any competitor?
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:28 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Not fast enough to run 4 iPads screens at once without dropping frames.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:31 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Why? Games almost certainly won’t render at that res.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:35 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
………..then why have the screen? that’s the purpose….of course they would.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 6:03 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
For everything else other than games. Text should look astonishingly great.
Games could still render at somewhere between the resolutions too and look great. I’m sure it will depend on the title.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:25 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Of course, yeah. But the top-notch games will make use of this on launch. INFINITY BLADE III.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 11:13 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You can’t have 3D games on 2048×1536, it’s just too much pixels that even high-end PCs would struggle. I doubt the GPU Apple uses will support that kind of native rendering, it might be possible on some less intensive games, and almost certainly on light-weight games. For example on my iPhone 4, GTA III runs at 480×320, exactly half.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 7:06 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Crikey, its running at 800×480 on my Nexus S.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:22 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Asus came out with a quad core, have to stay competitive. resting on your laurels turns you into Microsoft. If you didn’t HAVE to use windows they wouldn’t even be as large as they still are. And yes if you work in a corporate environment you HAVE to use windows.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:48 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Blame Ofcom for not forcing TV providers off the 800 MHz frequencies sooner.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:30 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
Man that ‘digital switchover’ has taken far too long just because some old biddies can’t deal with buying a £15 digibox.
They should have ripped the plaster off quick and sharp. 6 month switchover period MAX.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:53 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Wait so LTE is going to be over 800MHz spectrum?
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 7:11 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I believe it is intended to be on the spectrum freed up by turning of analogue TV yeah.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:09 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Same, all the talk of LTE devices is just nothing to me. We won’t have decent LTE for ages.
I’m surprised so many Americans care about it tbh when it is only available on certain cities and not in any suburbs or smaller towns/outskirts. Surely not everyone lives in the bloody city?
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:55 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
VZW’s 4GLTE is certainly available in the 30-40 miles that I travel in, so, YES, I care. And I don’t live in the city either.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:00 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
What!? Everyone is America lives in a great big city dude! In fact… 99.9% of the population lives in:
New York
LA
Miami
That’s it.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:10 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
82% of the US lives in cities or suburbs. So you’re not far off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 9:31 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Suburbs aren’t cities.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:08 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Verizon LTE already covers 2/3 of the country. You have to basically live in the middle of nowhere to not have access to LTE now. Remember that a lot of the US is very rural.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:20 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You got any coverage maps? I was under the impression that is covered 2/3rd of the big cities but not the areas not in the cities, suburbs etc…
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:16 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Verizon’s 4G LTE covers over 200million people in 194 markets, or more than 2/3 of the population…not 2/3 of land area.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 1:26 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I live on the outside of a small town, and guess what? Verizon LTE is in my airwaves baby! I guess we’re just awesome like that over here in the states.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 4:27 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
They shouldn’t care about LTE, especially on an iPad. If you stream an HD movie you’ll be over your limit before the movie is even over.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:50 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This’ll be the iPad which comes of age I think. Schools should start using it (dunno what model though – probably the cheapest).
The iPhone really ‘came of age’ when the iPhone 4 was released – will it be the same for the iPad 3?
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:09 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I disagree. I’d say the iPhone came of age once it was offered on multiple carriers. It just happens that this occurred when the iPhone 4 was the current model.
I’d argue that price is what is keeping the iPad from true ubiquity. If they lower the price of the iPad 2 to $249 or even $299, then we’ll start seeing many more schools buy/lease them by the hundreds.
You really think that the lack of a quad core processor or LTE radio is what is keeping this device from selling better? lolz. Apple’s target audience (read: about 95% of the people on the planet) don’t have a clue what either of those things are.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:16 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
The people making the purchasing decisions for schools do know what a quad core processor and LTE radio are. As such, they play a huge part in competing with similar Android devices. Price has nothing to do with it, as schools use government money for these purchases. They’ll also get a large discount from Apple, Samsung, or whomever.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:21 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Price had better have something to do with it. “Government money” used to be my money and if doesn’t matter, it sounds like your school board needs a new treasurer
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:28 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
It should, but it doesn’t. If it was coming out of the school’s money or out of their annual budget, price would be the only deciding factor.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:00 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Do you REALLY think the “people making the decisions” at schools know that much about technology?
Please…
Although I agree on price being of consideration, the truth is that no one can offer the same form factor/size of the iPad while providing access to the ecosystem.
THAT is the most important part – the ecosystem and ability to sell content to schools/teachers/students. In that regard, Apple already has a leg up.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:14 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Of course they do. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just talking.
Again, price is no consideration. If that were the case, no school would be using Macs.
In the same vein, the iOS ecosystem has nothing to do with choosing the iPad over Android. Both are locked down before they hit the kid’s hands so App Store’s are irrelevant. Ecosystem is irrelevant.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:04 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
“Anyone who thinks otherwise is just talking”…
Then you go on to say money and ecosystem have NOTHING to do with the decisions…
I think you are just trolling now, or really, really misguided.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 2:09 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I personally believe that the GSM iPhone 4 was where they wanted to go in the first place. Sure the design changed, but a high res screen with a fast processor and good battery life were exactly what they would’ve liked the first iPhone* to be. And I agree with redbullcat that this next iPad, if it has a retina display and all the relavant cellular technologies, will be the iPad coming of age—that is, what they wanted the original iPad to be.
*The earlier iPhones were on multiple carriers pretty much everywhere but here in the US. While it certainly has something to do with the “coming of age”, I don’t think that was the only thing. Also, the exclusivity was offered as a way to get into the markets, otherwise, I don’t believe Apple would have had the clout to get on carriers and get into people’s hands.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:09 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I agree. I think the multiple carriers thing was huge for the iPhone, but the iPhone 4 really blew all of the other ones out of the water. It was a fantastic device.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:50 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
They dont know what LTE is, but I’ve had execs stop me and ask “why is my iPad so slow loading websites” ? They dont know the name of the technology but they know what fast and slow is.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:21 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
agreed. I think we’ll look back at the “low res” iPad 1 & 2 one day and smile. I can see the 2500x 1500 display being around for many generations to come.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:18 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
Question: Quad-core Cortex A9 or quad-core Cortex A15?
A9 sounds more likely, that’s on-par with Tegra 3. But if it is quad-core A15, that the performance will blow everyone’s mind.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:09 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
It’ll be the A9. From what we’ve seen, there won’t be any A15 products until the second half of this year.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:17 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
I’ve been wondering the same thing and I’ve come to the same thinking as chadnielsen. It is the A7 based iPad 4 that will blow people’s minds.
Apple has done this now where every other model gets significant features followed by a significant speed boost (the “s” model). So new features with the iPad 3 (retina display a la iPhone 4) followed by much faster iPad 4 (a al iPhone 4s).
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:31 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s annoying that the A4/5 use the such similar naming convention to the cortex A9/15 etc…
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:57 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I also wish that ARM didn’t go straight from A9 to A15.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 7:23 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Also very strange.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:10 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m much more curious about the GPU. The iPad 3’s gonna need a fairly beefy one to keep performance comparable to the iPad 2 but with 4x the pixels.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 7:24 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This isn’t as groundbreaking of a discovery as is seems..
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:09 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
there will be 78 articles about it posted to twitter in the next ten minutes.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:18 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Only because people like you and me click on them, read them, and then comment. Apple is the biggest story in tech because of their secrecy and success, and their disruptive and divisive strategies and devices make every little thing they do seem like it might be a big deal. Apple is to tech what Rowling’s Harry Potter series is to literature—a huge deal derided because they are toys/stories for children.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:18 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I have a feeling that when the latest iPad comes out, the iPad 2 will be sold discounted heavily to educational institutions.
Makes sense… (With Apple’s latest push on education and all…)
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:11 PM EST reply Recommend (7) Flag actions
Those students will need large amounts of storage space for all those textbooks, wont they? Will 16GB be enough?
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:13 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Doubt more than 16GB is necessary. If textbooks are going to be 1GB then you could easily hold more than 10. I don’t know about you, but I never had more than 5 a year.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:24 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
And it would prevent students from overflowing the iPads with unnecessary crap.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 6:25 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I hope so. Would really move the platform forward.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:24 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Here we go..
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:13 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
There’s no guarantee it’s the quad-core A6, or even that it’s the iPad 3 and not an iPad 2S or something.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:19 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Phonearena? Really? It’s not going to be a 2S.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:26 PM EST reply Recommend (6) Flag actions
It is going to be a true iPad 3. I predict that it will be quad core A9 based, and then next year we will see the quad core A15 based model, which will be the iPad 3S.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:33 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
the only feature I care about for the ipad 3 is siri. lol.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:28 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I need somebody to go look at those pictures and figure out a way to COUNT pixels! Report back on PPI. Go. Now!
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:39 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
If BGR’s info is correct: I believe the upgraded cpu/gpu point to a higher resolution screen and if Apple can keep the price point – very good deal. One step closer to Final Cut on an iPad.
If Apple continues to make/sell the iPad 2 but at a lower price point – $299-399 – they are good to go until Xmas 2012.
Please, no one say anything about Amazon’s Kindle Fire – Amazon’s most recent quarterly earnings are my rebuttal.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:51 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Do you really want to edit on a touch screen? When I’m editing my hands are nearly constantly on the keyboard shortcuts, a touchscreen just isn’t enough.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 6:00 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Ziegler, really? “excellent news for customers on Verizon and AT&T who’ve been enjoying true 4G speeds in a number of markets for months now.” The Current version of LTE doesnt even classify as 4G so saying “true 4G” is misleading..
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:54 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
The marketers have co-opted “4G” It’s time to let it go…
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 6:47 PM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Dude where have you been, the ITU changed the definition at the end of 2010 to classify LTE as 4G. Google harder.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:24 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Imagine Apple dropping the price of iPad 2 to 299$, then PS Vita will have hard time.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 4:55 PM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
any other tablet would have a hard time and by “hard time” I mean non existant market share.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:08 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Amazon would still do fine… but I see your point.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:35 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I always read “PS Vista” as “PC Vista” the first time.
Probably won’t help in marketing…
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:11 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
sorry but @ $299 apples margins would be slashed and they would cut into ipad 3 sales .
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:17 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
- Margins would probably be fine if the 2 was cut to 299.. but I could be wrong.. so this is a valid point
- Apple currently sells 3 phones: the 3S, 4, and 4S. Clearly they are subsidized by carriers, but Apple is making money either way.
Also, if they did continue producing the iPad 2 at a discounted price, that would definitely cut into the 3’s sales. Due to manufacturing problems in recent history.. maybe that is what Apple wants.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:40 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
299 aint gonna happen. 399, probably. MAYBE 349 or 379. But no way 299,
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:39 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>variety of tablet and smartphone makers will be launching quad-core devices on hardware from TI, Qualcomm, Nvidia, and others in 2012<<<<<<<<<<<
wtf, do these guys have to pretend that quad is new to the scence, there are quad core devices for sale right this second, can we not pretend apple is leading here, they are catching up.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:15 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Are you 12? Quad core ARM cpus are new. As in mobile quad core CPUs. Please stop posting.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:25 PM EST reply Recommend (5) Flag actions
Well, to be fair, the Tegra 3 will have been shipping in the Transformer Prime for close to 6 months if the iPad 3 launches around its rumored date. That’s forever in the tech world.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:41 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It is amazing how the computer market took approximately 30 years to start using quad core chips. And the tablet market (more like the iPad market) has taken 2 years to go from 1 core—>4 cores.
What next? 8 core iPads? And are all of these cores really necessary? I don’t know the answer.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:29 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
The initial R&D required for multi-core CPUs as well as the software development paradigms for concurrent execution (the hard part!) took many years. It started off in the high-end first and was eventually scaled down as costs went down, so multi-core execution has transitioned from supercomputers > servers > desktops > laptops > phones/tablets.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 5:43 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
For tablets with such high res displays, perhaps. But quad core phones is ridiculous. WP7 uses dual core and is smoother than Android.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 6:01 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Can anyone tell me if this is true? Just because the iPad 3 has double the pixels, does this mean that it requires more processing power? I know it SOUNDS logical, but can someone with actual hardware experience tell me if this is a myth. Like, if you swapped out the iPad 2’s screen with the new retina display, would it not run because it is only a dual core processor? Isn’t this more of a graphics processor thing? Seems like a lot of ambiguity, and a lot of people speculating that more pixels requires more CPU cores, I don’t know if this is true.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 7:33 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
True, it is more of a GPU thing than a CPU thing. But with the higher res display will come more complex apps and processes for the CPU to deal with. Specifically more complex games and 1080p+ video.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:09 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
But compared to the iPad 1, the iPad 2 gpu is already fast enough to handle a double resolution screen. So no – the iPad 3 don’t really need a quad cpu.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 2:17 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
WP7 actually only has been on single core phones unless I’ve missed the dual core ones.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 12:44 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
My bad, I mean single core.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:08 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
WP7 refused to jump on the dual core bandwagon until now, Joe Belfiore stated that in his recent interview with the Verge
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 2:41 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I meant single core..I’m an idiot.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:08 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
EDIT: I meant single core.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:08 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
…and Srint come mid-summer!
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 7:31 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Anybody know how a quad-core A9 compares to a dual-core A15?? The iPhone will be based of the A6 and i’m thinking Samsung is delaying the Galaxy S3 so they can put their Exynos 5250(dual-core A15) in it. Wondering how they might compare to each other.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 7:58 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m pretty sure that the dual core Cortex-A15 beats it. Samsung’s next gen Galaxy Tab has a chance to beat the iPad 3 in display and SOC, and if they throw the same SOC into the GSIII, they’ll be over half a year ahead of everybody.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 8:58 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
From what I’ve read, the A15 is going to be roughly 50% faster than the A9. Who knows if real-world usage will see that big of a jump.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:12 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
WHEN IS IT COMING OUT!?
I skipped on the previous two, think maybe this is the worthy buy after all that waiting.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:33 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’ll probably just keep my iPad 2 it’s the best and most useful thing I have ever bought. I’ll wait another year to upgrade.
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 9:48 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Can’t wait for the new iPad 3 to hit! I already own the first iPad to have ever come out and I bet the this one will be faster and even more stable with the new quad core! I even blog on my iPad!! Can’t wait for it to come out! I wonder about the price though. I hope I’ll be able to afford it!
Posted on Feb 01, 2012 | 10:59 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Am I the only person in the world who feels that no one has still made the perfect tablet..? Until the tablet can replace my laptop – it’s not perfect.
Very curious to see exactly what Google’s Nexus tablet will bring to the tablet..
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 5:43 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I think that’s an odd requirement. For example, my laptop can not replace my tablet. I guess it depends on exactly what you want it to be able to do though. What would make a tablet “perfect” for you?
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 9:07 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I had an iPad2 for a week and it DID completely replace my MBP for that week. The only thing that prevented an outright replacement was that a 27 inch monitor is plugged into my MBP.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 9:31 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Care to be more specific?
What is the iPad missing for you?
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 2:28 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
software (adobe / logic / amongst others) oh and flash! lol.. usb and other connectors inc sd and other card slots etc.
Posted on Feb 07, 2012 | 11:30 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
But.. it’s BGR…
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 7:54 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Sounds awesome :D
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:19 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It sounds fantastic. I use by 1st gen iPad several hours a day to watch HBOGo, Youtube, read news, surf, etc. How would the iPad 3 make any of what I do better though. The 1st gen iPad seems fast enough for most apps and video looks great.
Hopefully they’re not playing the Android game where all they do is bump up specs and think that makes it better.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:39 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Will the A7 be 8-core? There is NO WAY they can keep up this level of progress. Do I need an 8-core iPad? This is getting rediculous.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:41 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Ask ARM what they got in store for them to play with and label “Apple A?”.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:52 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I wonder when Apple runs into a battery life issue. Or rather, how far will they reverse the “thinner&lighter” mantra to fit more batt into the pad.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:51 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
.and this is the reason I’ll buying an iPad this year, to hell with Android tablets this thing will be a beast.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 8:56 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
how about they hold off on an ipad3…. wonder if the fans will bite
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:30 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m not seeing how they’re getting a quad core processor out of that model name… it seems to hint towards a higher clocked dual core chip in the iPad 3/
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 10:46 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I admit I am a glorified Android fanboi, I enjoy my SGSII and CM7 Nook Color a lot but I’ve had it with the lack of tablet apps. I’m selling my NC and saving up for this ipad3 thing. I’ll need to invest double in apps but until Android devs get motivated to produce awesome tablet apps I’ll have to live in both worlds.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 11:17 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
People who think Apple are going to produce a 7" or about iPad are retarded. Ain’t gonna happen! It will fragment the iPad, which is something Apple does not like……and 7" is also simply too small. You would aim for a very small group.
Posted on Feb 02, 2012 | 1:49 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.