“A new iPad Pro is expected to find a happy medium between the standard-sized iPad Pro and the largest model,” Brooke Crothers reports for Forbes. “10.5 inches will be the new sweet spot: expect to see a new iPad Pro design with a 10.5-inch display, Rhoda Alexander, Director Tablets and PCs, at IHS Markit, told me in a phone interview. ”
“The beauty of the new 10.5-inch iPad is that the device size will stay the same as the 9.7-inch iPad Pro because of a smaller bezel, according to Alexander,” Crothers reports. “‘You end up with a unit that’s the same physical size as the 9.7 inch,’ Alexander said. That works well for Apple because it means accessories like the Smart Keyboard can be used with 10.5-inch iPad Pro, she explained.”
“The display resolution will also increase, according to Alexander, to 2,024-by-1,668 from the current 2,048-by-1,536. ‘That maintains the same PPI,’ she said,” Crothers reports. “A new ‘value’ 9.7-inch iPad may go as low as $299, according to Alexander… Pricing on the new 10.5-inch iPad Pro is less clear. The current 9.7-inch iPad Pro starts at $599. Apple could lower the price of the current model by pushing the 9.7-inch down to $499 and then ‘sliding’ the 10.5-inch iPad into the $599 slot, she said.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Soon*, it will become very clear for millions upon millions that it’s finally time to replace their aged iPad 2 units!
*as early as next month or by June at the latest, according to analysts
Amazon.com… new reading glasses please…
There is still no reason to upgrade from an Air or Air 2. The new iPads have almost zero functionality improvement and still perform the same functions adequately for most people.
The iPad was designed to be improved upon with each iteration, allowing users to slowly replace their laptops, if they were not power or professional users. Because Tim Cook is CEO, the iPad has not been improved upon. Thereby power and pro users still rely heavily on their laptops… and will for the foreseeable future.
Why? Why bother writing such inaccurate drivel?
Whiner.
You don’t have Touch ID on the Air1, which alone is probably reason enough to upgrade. After that though, I do see your point. Sure the processors keep getting faster, but real world differences are less obvious to come by.
With faster hardware comes software/apps that can utilize that. The faster hardware has to come first and it takes time before you can realize the gains, but you’ll notice snappier performance even with existing apps.
Just because your current apps and usage don’t require faster hardware doesn’t mean we should stop advancing forward. In time your faster processors will come into play. If you want to buy it, fine, don’t need to whine about the necessity of technological advances.
Needs to have IOS-PRO…. with roubust user managabale fike sys and i/o……..and should have the capacity to run full fleged Application.. (ex. photoshop….etc). Not just snippets of Apps.
Without those ipad is mainly a consumption device and the moniker Pro is nothing but bullshit … imo.
I agree. It’s past time that iPad have a more robust OS than the iPhone.
Yes! absolutely agree, are you listening Apple? You want sell more iPads please make a more robust OS for the iPad.
Yes, until the iPad works exactly like a Mac.
Doing this would force them to hire anyone who meets the racial profile. You’re basically forcing them to be racist. This is treating a symptom, not a problem.
For some reason my comment is on the wrong story.
Yea, I suppose it’ll be time to update soon. The old 30-pin connector has about has it.
My iPad 3 still works fine, but it is getting a bit slow in comparison to recent models. And the dock connector is clunky compared to the lightning connector on my new (old) iPhone 5S. The lightning port is quite compact, so I don’t see any reason for Apple to move away from it anytime soon, unless the company wants to standardize on the USB-C port configuration used on the new MBPs.
Anyone else think that the predicted resolution is strange? The aspect ratio of iPads has always been 4:3. The 2024×1668 is 4:3.3.
I think that is a typo and the resolution should be 2224 by 1668.
The article has been revised — now reads 2224×1668