Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bowlen

The latest roundup of new Apple products!

Recommended Posts

Heh, one of those reviewers referred to "The iPad 4".

I was working for an apple authorized store at the time, calling it that was a HUGE no no; the official product name is "The New iPad".

We did all have a laugh about the next one; being "the Newer Ipad" "The newest ipad" and "the future ipad".

 

I'll admit, it looks neat. very neat. If only they'd 'borrowed' the surfaces built in stand idea, I'd honestly consider one of those.

I guess I'm just still struggling to see the usability improvements (except size) from the last one.... I guess its the old philosophy, build it and they will come.

Be interesting to see what this one can do the old ones can't!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, one of those reviewers referred to "The iPad 4".

I was working for an apple authorized store at the time, calling it that was a HUGE no no; the official product name is "The New iPad".

We did all have a laugh about the next one; being "the Newer Ipad" "The newest ipad" and "the future ipad".

 

I'll admit, it looks neat. very neat. If only they'd 'borrowed' the surfaces built in stand idea, I'd honestly consider one of those.

I guess I'm just still struggling to see the usability improvements (except size) from the last one.... I guess its the old philosophy, build it and they will come.

Be interesting to see what this one can do the old ones can't!

What was this authorised store? How long did you work there?

 

I am guessing Apple wasn't their bread and butter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, was an independent. And no, apple was only probably 20% of their sales.

 

It was funny, because the boss\owner kept calling it the 'iPad 4' and the apple rep (who decides if you're allowed to stock their product or not, and how much) kept staring daggers at him, considering he'd just given us the "no iPad 4" speech, lol.

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah - I just keep trying to figure out why on one hand you would keep mentioning your work experience as if it was giving you some sort of cred and then on the other, stating that you really know nothing about Apple products.

 

Thread derailed again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Onto ipads;

Was it a little short sighted? or was it just a massive hit elsewhere? I went by the local apple store on launch day, and... yeah it was busy... but it wasn't insane, I doubt the store would have sold out; the Pokemon launch was bigger tbh.

Launch date is tomorrow.

 

Sorry - need to correct myself. Launch date is Friday.

Edited by The Tick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah - I just keep trying to figure out why on one hand you would keep mentioning your work experience as if it was giving you some sort of cred and then on the other, stating that you really know nothing about Apple products.

 

Thread derailed again!

Oh, I can quote the sales pitch and training videos untill the cows come home. Doesnt mean I know how to admin them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll continue my apple noob trend, and ask: why is Retina (on the ipad) so amazing?

From my understanding, most people use ipads to enjoy web content, which is usually at a fixed resolution (or at least, no where near 'retina' levels).

 

On a PC I can kind-of see the appeal if you work in graphics or something. But as my friend found out, Retina is just a pain when you try to bootcamp any other OS.

While that's not apples concern, isn't the same issue going to arise on almost all applications (apple native too) that aren't 'retina aware' where things are tiny?

 

Just curious :)

Having more pixels in the same physical area means things can be rendered in finer detail, while remaining the same visible size. It's not about fitting more crap on screen at once.

 

Think text readability. It's not about the X pixels by Y pixels, it's about the pixels per inch.

 

That's why mobile apps (even on Android) aren't designed in pixels, they'll use points, pels, %, or some other DPI-aware unit of measurement.

Edited by SquallStrife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Squall; so the desktop application of Retina is actually the less sensible one. That being because mobile apps use a % for scaling, where most desktop programs, and webpage layouts are a pixel size?

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Squall; so the desktop application of Retina is actually the less sensible one. That being because mobile apps use a % for scaling, where most desktop programs, and webpage layouts are a pixel size?

Why would it be less sensible? Do you not read text on a laptop, work with photos and/ or edit video? On the smaller displays, like the 13" it actually is quite sensible. As someone who owns one, uses it for daily work and works on a variety of other computers as part of their job function, I can honestly say I prefer the Retina as it is easier on the eyes.

 

--------------

 

Interesting review of the iPad air

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7460/apple-ipad-air-review

 

Considering I was holding out for the mini Retina due to weight and size, I am really unsure which way to go now. I do like the screen size of the iPad. Maybe I don't have to compromise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Squall; so the desktop application of Retina is actually the less sensible one. That being because mobile apps use a % for scaling, where most desktop programs, and webpage layouts are a pixel size?

Why would it be less sensible? Do you not read text on a laptop, work with photos and/ or edit video? On the smaller displays, like the 13" it actually is quite sensible. As someone who owns one, uses it for daily work and works on a variety of other computers as part of their job function, I can honestly say I prefer the Retina as it is easier on the eyes.

 

I'd have thought because a LOT of webpages are still hard coded to pixel size, and I was shown how small firefox' controls are on retina last week, because they also use pixel sized icons.

 

I didn't ask if it was useless, just less sensible.

Since, as you pointed out, if you're editing video or photos; that's another hard pixel limited medium. Working on a DVD quality video would be tiny I'd imagine (being only 576p); or am I wrong?

 

It was a question, not a statement; relax.

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In situations like that, it would be practical to work on a 2x or 3x magnified image.

 

And since the pixels are so dense, it'll still look alright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have thought because a LOT of webpages are still hard coded to pixel size, and I was shown how small firefox' controls are on retina last week, because they also use pixel sized icons.

 

I didn't ask if it was useless, just less sensible.

Since, as you pointed out, if you're editing video or photos; that's another hard pixel limited medium. Working on a DVD quality video would be tiny I'd imagine (being only 576p); or am I wrong?

Some sites graphics don't look as sharp although not all of them are like that. A browser which supports retina shows text sharp and clear unless there is some sort of weird coding going on I guess (although I haven't noticed that from sites I have visited). The graphics (like the logo etc) on a site like Atomic looks slightly blurry (although that's hardly a deal breaker - nor a real problem) but the text is nice and sharp. I don't see it as a trade off when you are getting the advantage of a high definition display where it matters. So long as the browser supports retina you shouldn't have a problem with anything else - chrome and safari do, I don't know about Firefox.

 

There is a marked improvement working with photos. It does depend on the resolution of the photo. If you capture everything in 640x480 then yes, you will see no benefit but I am talking about working with high quality images or RAW. Video is much the same - depends on what you are working with. Not everyone is working on DVD quality video.

 

To call it less sensible would be to imply that websites would never be optimised for higher density pixel displays. If you look at what is occurring both on the tablet front as well as new models of notebooks coming out from a variety of companies, I would say that going for a higher resolution display would actually be quite a sensible thing to consider. Like most purchases though, it's down to the individual's needs and budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To call it less sensible would be to imply that websites would never be optimised for higher density pixel displays. If you look at what is occurring both on the tablet front as well as new models of notebooks coming out from a variety of companies, I would say that going for a higher resolution display would actually be quite a sensible thing to consider.

True, over ambitious maybe?

No argument its heading that way, just to take so many products to that level so soon, on the consumer focused market feels a little 'quick' is all.

 

 

and yeah Squall, magnification is OK I guess, and I didnt think the pixel density would help keeping it smooth, but you're right.... fair cop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To call it less sensible would be to imply that websites would never be optimised for higher density pixel displays. If you look at what is occurring both on the tablet front as well as new models of notebooks coming out from a variety of companies, I would say that going for a higher resolution display would actually be quite a sensible thing to consider.

True, over ambitious maybe?

No argument its heading that way, just to take so many products to that level so soon, on the consumer focused market feels a little 'quick' is all.

 

 

I don't believe it is if you understand the section of the market Apple is targeting. Ask a normal, regular Mac owner how often they turn over their PC. For the people I service, I can't think of one that does it prior to it getting very long in the tooth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking at getting a Macbook in the near future, but am weighing up whether to get the slightly more portable 13" or the apparently more powerful 15". The price difference between the higher spec 13" and the entry level 15" is quite small, but the hardware does appear to get a significant bump. Is there much of a real world, visible difference between the dual core i7 in the 13" and the quad core in the 15"? Also is there a difference between Iris and Iris Pro, other than three letters? I don't find built in graphics processing particularly appealing, but I don't plan on using this as a gaming machine. I'd be using it for batch processing and image editing of large-ish images, as well as general usage away from home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the most intense things I run on my 13" Retina would be Final Cut Pro X, Vmware fusion with max of 2 VMs at one, some video conversion usually through Handbrake and Photo stuff through either Aperture or Photoshop.

 

I opted for the 13" for portability - dual core i5.

 

I have a Dell 27" that I use as an external display when at the desk.

 

So far, the system has never slowed me down. About the only issue I have had is the 256GB SSD was not enough so I upgraded to an OWC 480GB.

 

I'm not sure if that helps you at all but I would say that, to answer your question, it really depends on how CPU intensive the tasks you are doing are. Have a look at the software you intend to use for batch processing and if disk IO or CPU is the requirement that most deserves attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input. I do some fiddling around with HDR images, and do some montage work with images sourced from RAW files. So the files aren't too big to start with, but they do stack up pretty quickly, and my current PC starts to stutter and make angry noises at me. From your experience it sounds like the 13" should have more than enough power, and given the top spec one has the 512GB HD it would be the better pick over the 15".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To call it less sensible would be to imply that websites would never be optimised for higher density pixel displays. If you look at what is occurring both on the tablet front as well as new models of notebooks coming out from a variety of companies, I would say that going for a higher resolution display would actually be quite a sensible thing to consider.

True, over ambitious maybe?

No argument its heading that way, just to take so many products to that level so soon, on the consumer focused market feels a little 'quick' is all.

 

 

I don't believe it is if you understand the section of the market Apple is targeting. Ask a normal, regular Mac owner how often they turn over their PC. For the people I service, I can't think of one that does it prior to it getting very long in the tooth.

 

Fucking solid point there.

Odd isnt it though, the mindset of people though? They'll get new iphones\ipads (or android etc) as soon as they come out while their old one works fine, but PC's seems to rot forever. Despite a lot of families still spending a huge ammount of time on the fmaily PC (students, taxes, pron, etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because it intrigues me (peoples uses), can I be so nosey as to ask what you will primarily use the ipad air for?

And on that note, if you have a recent smart phone, or older ipad also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure.

 

We have an iPad 1st gen that is starting to show it's age (no iOS 7 for it!) and an iPad gen 3. I have a small smartish phone with have I rarely use for anything other than talk and text.

 

I spend a lot of time websurfing and on casual games on the pads, often while watching tv. "Real" gaming is still on the PC.

 

The missus watches a lot of stuff mostly through ABC iView usually while in bed at the end of the day.

 

Neither of us use other apps all that much, the ebay app, Opera and Google maps being the most commonly used.

 

 

Plan to sell/donate the old pad and maybe the gen 3 one too if we decide to get a retina mini.

 

 

Odds are a cheaper/simpler tablet would easily do what we want but the familiarity of the iPad, the fact they are attractive and the number of apps available are the selling points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odds are a cheaper/simpler tablet would easily do what we want but the familiarity of the iPad, the fact they are attractive and the number of apps available are the selling points.

Thats what I was looking for. Not as a personal attack. It actually makes me happy to see people knowledge "I coulda saved money, but familiarity sold me".

Sounds like it fits the bill. It'd be ncie for TV in bed with retina thats for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the new ipad air. It's so fast, which makes it appear more touch sensitive. Certainly does ios7 justice. Didn't hesitate grabbing one to replace the 3. I won't know myself with 128gb to play with.

 

The thing with ipad is it's one of one things you don't realise you need until you have one. I keep finding more uses for it all the time.

Edited by NightOwl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×