News & Analysis
Comment
Jeff Dickey
It's funny that the app count has been a major competitive advantage for Apple. ...
VincePG
This is always the problem with Moto and Samsung and other hardware providers. ...
The iPad 2 faces crowd of dual-core tablets
Rick Merritt
3/2/2011 5:24 PM EST
PORTLAND, Ore. – The iPad 2 joins a growing chorus of dual-core tablets in what Apple chief executive hailed as the post-PC era. Although Apple lacks a jump on competitors in the current round, observers expect it will do well with its latest system and its new A5 system-on-chip.
Apple held a commanding 84.7 percent of the 17 million unit tablet market in 2010, according to International Data Corp., shipping months before its nearest competitor the Samsung Galaxy Tab. Fueled by many new vendors, IDC expects the market to grow to 44 million units this year and more than 70 million in 2012.
Last year, Apple has sold nearly 50 million systems using its single-core A4 processor, nearly four times as many units as Apple's x86-based PCs, according to estimates from market watcher IHS iSuppli.
Apple sells five products based on its single-core A4--the first-generation iPad, the AT&T version of the iPhone 4, the Apple TV, the iPod Touch and the CDMA iPhone 4 carried by Verizon Wireless.
The iPad 2 is Apple's first product to use its new dual-core A5. In 2011, Apple faces a host of top tier competitors all with GHz-class chips.
Hewlett-Packard has announced a WebOS tablet based on a dual-core Qualcomm Snapdragon processor. LG, Motorola and Samsung have announced Android tablets based on Nvidia's Tegra 2. And Research in Motion is ramping up a beta program for its Playbook tablet using a dual-core ARM Cortex A9 Omap 4430 processor from Texas Instruments.
"This is the year for dual-core tablets, there's no doubt about that," said Nathan Brookwood, principal of market watcher Insight64 (Saratoga, Calif.) who attended the original iPad launch last year.
The extra horsepower is helping shift tablets from content consumption to content creation systems, Brookwood said, noting Apple's new Garage Band and iMovie apps for the iPad. "That’s where the extra core will come in handy," he said.
"I was a little disappointed they are sticking with the same resolution [as the original iPad], however they do have an HDMI port on the iPad 2 to hook up to large screen TVs," he added.
"These are post-PC devices that need to be easier and more intuitive than a PC, and the software, hardware and applications need to intertwine in an even more seamless way than on a PC," said Jobs, returning from medical leave to launch the iPad 2 in San Francisco.
“In the new design paradigm of smart phones and tablets, computing efficiency trumps raw computing power,” agreed Wayne Lam, senior analyst, competitive analysis, at IHS. ”Designs like the iPad demand highly integrated microprocessors that emphasize graphics performance, lower power consumption and small space usage.”
Details about the Apple A5 chip and other iPad 2 electronics will have to wait until systems become available for teardown experts.
The A5 runs at the same GHz frequency as the A4. Adding a second core alone would not provide the doubling of performance a nine-fold increase in graphics Apple claims.
Brookwood suggested Apple may have shifted from the ARM Cortex A8 core in its A4 chip to a Cortex A9, upgraded a separate graphics core and thrown in a few other tricks as well.
|
|
|
|
|
selinz
3/2/2011 8:37 PM EST
Fundamentally, this is the same device. If they go smaller or bigger, people will complain. Interestingly, there is no bump in resolution. It will be interesting to see if their sunlight performance is better...
Sign in to Reply
chanj
3/3/2011 12:11 AM EST
2 cores = double the speed. It sounds to me like a marketing slogan. I am looking forward to Apple revealing the complete specification of iPad 2.
Sign in to Reply
GREAT-Terry
3/3/2011 7:29 AM EST
I like higher speed (even though it is not double) but I would like know more about any new special feature from this device that hopefully can rock the world!
Sign in to Reply
elctrnx_lyf
3/3/2011 2:12 PM EST
IPAD2 will receive huge competetion from other tablet manufacturers like Motorola, Notionink, HP, RIM and samsung. Tablet is not the same case as smartphone where iphone made a real significant difference from other smart phones all the time and even now.
Sign in to Reply
yalanand
3/3/2011 3:41 PM EST
iPAD2 will cost 499$ way cheaper than motorola-xooms 799$. I guess iPAD2 has several advantages compared to its competitors like light weight, low cost, access to 65000 Appstore. I feel iPAD2 is clear winner.
Sign in to Reply
jimcondon
3/5/2011 7:34 PM EST
Motorola has said a wifi only Xoom is coming out for about $600 and the rumor mills are saying Sam's clubs have flyers for $539.
At this price, the wifi only Xoom (with 32GB) is very competitive to the iPad2.
Sign in to Reply
James.DeRosa
3/3/2011 4:30 PM EST
Once the performance is adaquate, it's all about the Apps - most all seem to missing the key point.
Competition is a good thing, but as much as I hate to say it - game over - Apple wins for the forseable future, with Google is a distant second.
Sign in to Reply
GroovyGeek
3/4/2011 2:22 AM EST
"Once the performance is adaquate, it's all about the Apps - most all seem to missing the key point.
Competition is a good thing, but as much as I hate to say it - game over - Apple wins for the forseable future, with Google is a distant second."
And you seem to be missing the point that Android now outships the iPhone.
Sign in to Reply
Jeff.Petro
3/8/2011 10:59 AM EST
All companies can claim to have 1000 or 10,000 or even 100,000 apps. This is just a marketing number to obfuscate the clueless. Out of all those apps, I can bet you that the number of useful apps can be counted on one hand. Since all OS's have the same core (useful) apps, all platforms rate equal in my opinion. You'd be hard pressed to increase that specific app count on Apple, Android or Windows tablet/smartphone platforms.
An app that makes fart sounds may be comical for the first hour or two, but in the end, alls that it means is that you are out of pocket another dollar.
Sign in to Reply
jwc
3/3/2011 10:34 PM EST
Millions flock to Apple. But many chafe at the prospect of doing so and many are uneasy having done so.
Submitting to the whims of a sole supplier be it IBM in the 60's and 70's, be it Microsoft from the 80's past the millennium, be it Google more recently, and be it Apple now, makes many folks very uneasy (including many of the most committed of so-called Apple "fanboys"). The cohesion and efficiency gained by submitting to a true sole source is offset long-term by the evitable disparity in what is ultimately best for the customer and what is best for the supplier.
When there is true competition the reins are in the hands of the buyers, but when there is none a decade or two can go by while users make do with the decisions and offerings of a sole supplier gone stale. We've seen that it takes a sea-change to break these unfortunate sole-supplier locks.
If you could define (within reason) the ultimate in product and the ultimate in available suppliers and products and the ultimate in apps, what would you like to see?
Sign in to Reply
Robinho
3/4/2011 12:59 AM EST
Beyond a limit number of apps does not matter. If you have a few thousand apps there it probably has you covered. What is the point of having an app for every website you can visit?
Sign in to Reply
any1
3/4/2011 10:02 AM EST
The ipad2 does seem to be the tablet to which all others will be compared. But I agree with Robinho and others that while apps are important, once you reach a certain theshold more is not necessarily better. I believe the Android OS is likely to meet that test for most users in the near future. For other the other tablet operating systems out there it remains to be seen if they can reach reasonble app parity with Apple.
Sign in to Reply
LarryM99
3/4/2011 2:43 PM EST
As far as the hardware is concerned, iPad2 is pretty much at parity with expectations for the current generation of Android tablets. Pricing isn't all that different as long as you compare equivalent specs, but iPad2 does provide more low-range models currently than Android (that may change soon). The apps for Android will develop more quickly, since they don't have to go through an approval gate. Personally, I'm curious to see what enhanced reality apps make use of the back-facing camera. I am waiting for Wifi-only, though.
Larry M.
Sign in to Reply
phoenixdave
3/8/2011 10:37 AM EST
I found it interesting how quickly the iPad became the "poor cousin", with Apple immediately dropping the price a significant amount If there is not much difference between the two, this makes the iPad a pretty good deal right now.
Maybe they are perceiving the challenges ahead when the other tablets are released?
Sign in to Reply
Duane Benson
3/8/2011 10:57 AM EST
There's always been something different, but difficult to quantify, with Apple products. Certainly, there's a lot of gloss, polish and hype with Apple products, but it's more than that. Some people will say that they are more intuitive and easier to use, but it's more complex than that. You can probably find just as many people that say the opposite.
I suspect that it's in the completeness and in the little details. Apple products are closer to the "TV" type, just turn it on and go than just about anything else. They aren't always the highest performing or the most feature rich, but they try to be complete and self-contained. If you're an upgrade person, that's not for you.
Apple combines that completeness with a very well-thought out OS and fanatic marketing. It's the combination of those things that makes Apple stand out. Their market share will certainly drop as more tablet competitors join the market, but they will still stand out, even if they are eventually out-sold.
Sign in to Reply
jubilee9r
3/8/2011 11:37 PM EST
Most people purchase a computing device like a tablet on the basis if its' perceived functionality and ease of use. The first in the market sets the standards. The other tablet makers must provide better functionality or be less expensive to compete. How can Apple lose?
Sign in to Reply
VincePG
3/10/2011 12:33 PM EST
This is always the problem with Moto and Samsung and other hardware providers. People who are not engineers don't care about the specs of the hardware performance. Apple figured out a long time ago its ergonomics, industrial design and applications that sells technology, not the hardware specification. I’d hate to be the Moto or Samsung marketing guy: higher price and fewer applications, but our spec is arguably better. Also, the tablet market is new. No one has defined what "better" is yet. The safe bet is what ever Apple provides is "better". Anything more(feature-wise) will be deemed unnecessary by the market.
Sign in to Reply
Jeff Dickey
3/18/2011 10:00 PM EDT
It's funny that the app count has been a major competitive advantage for Apple. That used to be the excuse Windows defenders gave for never even looking at the Mac. Now that the shoe is firmly on the other foot, the phrases are the same. Only the names have been switched.
The Android market is fragmenting and burning by chasing the low end, with no truly useful, unique innovation able to stand up and say, "We let you do THIS while using the information you already have!" They're too busy shouting, "we're just as good, but $10 less." Not nearly the same excitement level.
The problem I and a lot of other longer-term customers have with Apple is that they succeeded by doing two diametrically opposite things. They saved themselves as a personal-computer company when they embraced the idea of building value on top of open standards, on excellence, and by providing maximum support and minimum friction to developers. That was The Mac Way.
The iDevice Way, on the other hand, delivers a quite good, reasonably discoverable UX, but closing and controlling everything else as much as they could get away with. They even tried to slap down people WHO WERE MAKING MONEY FOR APPLE but using development tools not under Apple's firm control. How unMaclike is that?
Apple, the Mac company (as the Apple II company before it) is a remarkable company, that engenders passionate loyalty from its customers and partners. Apple the iDevice company… is something else. Yes, I'll buy an iPad 2 — because, to use the phrase, I've got itches that that can scratch better than anything else currently available, or anything that any currently visible competitors plausibly offer. But no matter how silky-smooth the UX is, I'm not going to be *as* happy with it as I have been with my Macs. I OWN my Macs. So long as the Apple business model remains what it is, though, I'll feel like I'm only BORROWING or renting my iDevices, and I'll resent the moves Apple is making to make the Mac more iDevice-like.
Sign in to Reply