Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple releases Ipad 3

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 346 posts

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#331

Post by gte910h »

trotsky wrote: post #108
philiphodgen wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For publications you will use locally on the iPad, maybe. If you're intending to publish via Apple, I'd say wait. After two weeks of waiting for Apple to approve a book I yanked it and am having the manuscript converted for Kindle sale as we speak. The conversion from the .ibooks file to anything usable in the real world was a giant pain. All of which was predictable and I knew that going in. But as a book-writing to…

Doesn't Creator's license restrict you from publishing a book authored with it on a different platform?

Not the book, the output of the program. You'd need another tool anyhow because of the extensions.

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#332

Post by bstar77 »

shad0wfax wrote: post #285
bstar77 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of us moving up from the iPad2 already sold our iPads.

Agree, that is an option to make it easier to decide to upgrade. The question is are you (and the others who sold their iPad2) gadget freaks that lust for new stuff, or do you really see a value in the upgrade. What I am trying to figure out is, what keeps you(/me) wanting to upgrade to new tablets frequently, where as we are perfectly ok, running our 3+ year old Mac. Maybe the price point makes it more affordable to…

I purchased the iPad2 despite being disappointed with the screen, but I knew I would use the device to death. I basically went into the purchase knowing I would be selling it in less than a year since apple products hold their value so well. So this upgrade does have a huge amount of value for me as the ipad2 display is very limiting.

I am sort of a 'gadget freak', but I force myself to be on a budget and that usually requires me to sell my devices pretty frequently. With that said, I will probably use the ipad3 for the 2 year cycle unless I'm not impressed with the ipad5 (doubtful).

I still have a 27" 2009 iMac that I absolutely love and probably won't be upgrading for a few more years (when desktop retina displays are common place). Once you get into the apple product cycle, if you buy early in the cycle and sell late, upgrades are not that painful. When I sold my netbook 2 years later I basically gave it away... that was painful.

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#333

Post by kenrikm »

timknauf wrote: post #314
kenrikm wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems Apple uses a "modified" png standard for iOS (enabled by default) that compresses the images even more when they are added to the App Bundle. http://iphonedevwiki.net/index.php/CgBI_file_format#Decoding

True, though as jevinskie says, we're not talking here about the way images are stored on disk but about what needs to go in the GPU memory.

Totally understood, and I'm well aware of the increased memory footprint required once they are uncompressed. Way back in 08 when I was working on my first iPhone app you had to be very careful with memory a small animation with 120 images of 50k each could quickly max out the 50mb of usable memory the iPhone 3G had unless you cashed properly and released assets as soon as they were not in use. I should have been more specific in my original post.

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#334

Post by tomkarlo »

matwood wrote: post #179
schiffern wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I see this as the abandonment of resolution independence. Apple has always been about pixel-perfect graphics, and that's quite hard to do with vector assets. Fonts have to have all sorts of hinting to get single-pixel risers and joins to look decent. That's one of the reasons that fonts are so costly – now imagine that all your graphics require that level of care. Making pixel-perfect "@2x" graphics is much…

Actually, I see this as the abandonment of resolution independence. I was thinking the same thing. It's amusing to think that Apple found resolution independence harder than waiting for/making panels quadruple in size. Certainly good for marketing though :)

On mobile devices, it may still be prohibitive to continually convert from vector art to pixels. I guess they could do it at build time.

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#335

Post by batista »

batista wrote: post #330
beedogs wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know enough to conclude that it hasn't gotten more expensive to ship bits in the past ten years. Yet, here we are in the US, shifting from unlimited data plans to rate-limited, capped plans, and no one seems to have come up with a convincing explanation as to why that's occurring.

I know enough to conclude that it hasn't gotten more expensive to ship bits in the past ten years. Are you kidding me? We went from simple networks to 3G to 4G --which requires new infrastructure deployments every few years. We went from the mobile web being almost nothing to hundreds of millions of very capable mobile web devices in the past ten years (iPhone/iPad/Android...). Network usage increased exponentially w…

Downvoted? Really? Are these statements of fact and a simple analogy too controversial?

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#336

Post by tomkarlo »

matwood wrote: post #179
schiffern wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I see this as the abandonment of resolution independence. Apple has always been about pixel-perfect graphics, and that's quite hard to do with vector assets. Fonts have to have all sorts of hinting to get single-pixel risers and joins to look decent. That's one of the reasons that fonts are so costly – now imagine that all your graphics require that level of care. Making pixel-perfect "@2x" graphics is much…

Actually, I see this as the abandonment of resolution independence. I was thinking the same thing. It's amusing to think that Apple found resolution independence harder than waiting for/making panels quadruple in size. Certainly good for marketing though :)

Even if you want to move towards resolution independence, when you have a huge universe of apps at a particular resolution, simply doubling the screen size is the easiest way to let them migrate with minimal pain. It's a lot easier to tell them that the _minimum_ thing they have to do is double their measurements than force them to jump entirely over to a non-pixel-based regime. At the same time you can start introducing resolution-independent UX for new apps.

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#337

Post by cageface »

rbarooah wrote: post #315
cageface wrote: post #239

It says a lot that the longest thread thread here is about data plans. I guess this is a logical iteration of the iPad 2 but they really seem to have left the door open for an Android manufacturer to leap ahead here. Both this and the 4S feel like Apple on autopilot.

What would suggest they should have done to stay ahead?

If I could answer that question I'd be Steve Jobs.

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#338

Post by potatolicious »

cletus wrote: post #276
Aloisius wrote: post #10

It should be noted that the limited data plans for both AT&T and Verizon mean that at the max 4G speed of 73 Mbps, you could use all your bandwidth for the entire month in less than three and a half minutes (2 GB plan). The overages of $10/GB per month on both services mean once you go over your plan, you'll be looking at a little over $5/minute in new charges. It is possible (though highly unlikely) to rack up over…

I'm disappointed the "top" comment on this announcement is nothing more than a sideways swipe at an unrelated topic from someone who clearly has an axe to grind. In Australia, the ACCC banned the use of the word "unlimited" (with respect to Internet access, wireless or fixed-line) unless it truly was unlimited. No shaping, hard or soft quotas, excess usage charges and vague "fair use" provisions. The result? You get…

> "Having it be able to do 1080p is great"

The resolution is kind of awkward for moving watching no? There's no 1:1 mapping of source pixel to hardware pixel, so you're going to get some filtering regardless. But, a step up regardless. The current iPad screen is downright painful to look at once you've been spoiled by high-DPI screens.

> "although I think it's high time they up the flash storage at this point. 64GB doesn't go that far at Full HD."

I actually don't think this is a big issue. It would seem to me that Apple is moving slowly towards the Amazon model - cloud-based content provision of everything. It used to be that you'd have to download giant files to a "mothership" computer, then pipe it over USB to your mobile device, but with iCloud and now downloading your movies over the air, this seems positively archaic.

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#339

Post by sneak »

speleding wrote: post #305
sneak wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"why not iPad 3? Seriously!" The video shown at the end of the announcement event has an Apple employee referring to it as "the third-generation iPad". This seems very strange to me, considering how on-message Apple has ALWAYS been in the past. It's just... sloppy. I wonder if Apple has a future beyond its current momentum. I'll be convinced otherwise ifwhen they release another world-changing product that wasn't inv…

Apple uses the same terminology with MacBooks and iPods. "Sixth generation iPod" etc. Apple is known to focus on details, so they probably thought this through and have a good reason to back away from the numerals.

No, the official model names of the computers have dates in them, e.g. "Late 2010", "Mid 2011", etc. I have, for example, an "iMac, 27-inch, Mid 2011".

My point is that they're not being consistent. They call it "the new iPad" in the presentation, but then the guy in the video calls it "the third-generation iPad".

Re: Apple releases Ipad 3

#340

Post by sneak »

rbarooah wrote: post #290
sneak wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"why not iPad 3? Seriously!" The video shown at the end of the announcement event has an Apple employee referring to it as "the third-generation iPad". This seems very strange to me, considering how on-message Apple has ALWAYS been in the past. It's just... sloppy. I wonder if Apple has a future beyond its current momentum. I'll be convinced otherwise ifwhen they release another world-changing product that wasn't inv…

What exact is sloppy? Third generation is one of their terms for it.

Apple hasn't historically had multiple names for a single product before. That's what I see as sloppy about it.
Post reply on HN