“Apple updated the iPad on Wednesday with a high-definition screen, faster wireless connection and several other refinements,” Nick Wingfield reports for The New York Times.
“As recent history has shown, though, even those relatively modest changes could be enough for the company to attract waves of new buyers for its tablet computer,” Wingfield reports. “The company said the new iPad would go on sale on March 16 for a starting price of $499, unchanged from the last generation of iPads. The product will have a screen that provides a comparable level of clarity to the iPhone ‘retina display,’ with higher-resolution than conventional high-definition televisions, according to Apple executives.”
Wingfield reports, “And in a sign that Apple intends to more seriously protect its market share in the tablet market, the company said it would continue to sell its second generation iPad, dropping the price to $399 from $499… The new iPad, the third generation of the device, looks virtually indistinguishable from its predecessor, without any of the bold outward design changes often associated with new products from the company. It features a faster processor — an A5X quad-core chip — and a higher resolution screen — 2,048 by 1,536 pixels, more than 3.1 million pixels, or four times more than the current iPad. It will also operate on the fourth-generation cellphone network technology known as LTE. In the United States, the new iPad will work on AT&T’s and Verizon’s networks.”
Full article – Think Before You Click™ – here.
MacDailyNews Take: The New York Times seems hellbent on reducing its credibility to a sub-tabloid level.
What’s next, a report claiming that the sky is chartreuse with pink polka dots? Fscking idiots. How out-of-touch do you have to be to think that you can report obvious lies and make people believe it’s the truth?
“Modest changes?” Puleeze. And they wonder why they’re hemorrhaging readers.
UPDATE March 8, 12:45am: Sometime between the publication of our article and this update, The New York Times article text and headline have been revised while neglecting to note that any revisions had been undertaken. Wonder why. 😉
See related article: Why did The New York Times revise their ‘iPad modest changes’ article and neglect to inform their readers? – March 8, 2012
Related articles:
Apple unveils new iPad featuring Retina display, A5X chip, 5-megapixel iSight camera and ultrafast 4G LTE – March 7, 2012
FLA President: Foxconn factories ‘first-class; way, way above average’ – February 15, 2012
Apple CEO Tim Cook calls New York Times supplier report ‘patently false and offensive’
Same was said with iPhone4s – modest changes.
With iPad3 you need to SEE and TOUCH it to decide on these changes.
I believe The New iPad qualifies as a modest improvement because it didn’t have any killer features or surprise us.
The retina display is great, but is just bringing the iPad up to speed with what’s already available on the iPhone. The New iPad doesn’t have a quad core processor or a display with haptics technology. There’s no low-price mini-iPad, nor any surprise on the price of iPad2. It doesn’t appear that the mobile carriers (ATT, Verizon, etc.) will be subsidizing the price of The New iPad — though if they had, The New iPad might have been priced in the $200-$300 range.
I do think Apple will continue selling the iPad in large numbers, but don’t think this is a game changer. It’s more of the same, just one year later.
The new iPad has a quad-core GPU. And there’s no “just” about Retina displays–no competitor has come close.
By the way, I don’t consider the new iPad with its 4x higher resolution, better color saturation, quad-core GPU, 4G/LTE support, 5 megapixel iSight camera with 1080p live stabilization movie mode, integrated system-wide voice dictation, and WiFi hotspot capability to be “more of the same.”
Sheesh…
If you’re going to use the work “Fucking” in your response then spell is as is or don’t use it as all. “FSCKING” is just lame. That being said, so is the NYT.
It means “file system check” in Unix. It’s a common word among computer techies. And it’s being used humorously as a substitute for a more common, but less polite, intensifier. Granted, techies are both lame and profane…
I agree the NYT has deteriorated — along with the majority of mainstream print and broadcast news. And it’s obvious the tone of the article is tepid instead of unbiased or neutral. But, for the sake of journalistic accuracy …
“As recent history has shown, though, even [THOSE] relatively modest changes could be enough for the company to attract waves of new buyers for its tablet computer…”
Read it with, then without “those” and the meaning changes. I wonder if the NYT removed it, or if MDN somehow added it. (In a copy/paste process?)
Similar to my earlier observation that a defter writer would have said “apparently modest” instead of “relatively modest”
Goes to show, for the 6.02*10^23rd time, how a simple word or two can lead to vehemence, which can lead to vilification, which can lead to violence
..which leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and hate leads to ANDROID!! Then copy intellectual property, you will!
Was that a reference to “avocado’s” number? Talk about violence! 😀
It just popped into my head, as I had been thinking about Eric T. Mol
NYT, erased, deleted. Just like Google and Samsung crap.
The good news is there are no changes in the NYT reporting. They are still Clinton ass crawlers who wouldn’t know journalism it poked them in the ass.
And the dumbass idiots continue to write the same bullshit about the iPad, then have to eat their words when it outsells everything.
Nothing new here.
I say, until the new iPad can act as a transporter and beam me a cup of coffee from the nearest Starbucks, any upgrades are “modest.”
This is what you get if you try to email him:
Thank you for contacting us.
We could not process your request, please try again later. Sorry for inconvenience.
Crap reporter, crap newspaper.
All of this and no Stylus?
I have a Box Weave capacitance stylus that is good for some things on the iPad.
I have the Wacom Bamboo Stylus CS100K for iPad. I like it.
Whenever I read comments in on any tech site I immediately skip over any that have “fanboy” in it. You have lost any credibility whatsoever. It is the same as bringing up Hitler and invoking Godwins Law.
Anyone that still uses “fanboy” needs to grow a set and learn to get their argument across with facts not emotion and complaining about someones else’s emotions.
I’m with you, sort of. First, there seems to be no easy way to inhibit the trolling, prevent flame wars, or moderate a discussion without injury. Who would give up freedom and openness for the paternalistic tyranny of a walled garden? Only passionless wimps, in which case you wouldn’t be here at all. Second, I have tried time and again to replace the Nazi metaphors with a new set based on the almost equally well-known Alexander the Great, and that has not had any effect. People enjoy Nazi metaphors even more than they enjoy invoking Godwin’s Law. Third, “fanboy” as a single word should not be a deterrent to reading a site’s comments. It’s lingua franca
I was happy to cancel my Times access. And I told them why.
because you found a blog that tells you all sides of a story? not bloody likely.
some people don’t want listen to other points of view. they claim that one-sided narratives make them adequately informed. i call these people idiots, and the USA is now overrun with them.
My first reason was their biased coverage of the Foxconn situation. My second reason was the cost. My third reason was my need to actually _call_ them in order to cancel, when their policy was to sign up online and then use an opt-out only system. Sick. I’m gone, never to come back.
Nick Wingfield’s report for The New York Times is appropriately moderate and objective. I fail to see a justification for the rant of MacDailyNews on this piece of reporting.
To heck with the rants here, read the ones on the NYT article.
Let’s face it. If Apple had any competition at all in the Tablet field, they may have made more changes. As it is all the changes made will lead to even more buyers this time round.
What pisses me off is the expectation of an external change. Apple is at it’s minimalist best with the iPad. How do you change perfection?
Do you expect the iMac or the MBP to change exteriorly every year?
I bet it is beautiful to behold. I remember the first time I looked in to my iPhones Retina display and I was truly marveled. Now, am I going to sell my current iPad 2 to go out and buy this one. I am quite happy with my current model. I don’t use the camera much and the display is more than adequate.
Wingfield doesn’t get that Apple only changes designs if it feels it would enhance user experience. If it isn’t broken, why fix it! If Wingfield doesn’t feel the changes are enough, then don’t buy the new iPad. Personally, I think Wingfield is not happy about the new IPad because Apple didn’t market it as “iPad 3”. But at least Apple didn’t call it an iPad 2S. Now THAT would have been disappointing! 😛
Seems a perfectly fair assessment from the NY Times. Much better than the one sided commentary we get on this website. Professional journalism is about balance not deliberate bias. Personally I think this was a modest update. Nothing that would make me want to upgrade.
So what was the NY Times expecting the new iPad to feature? A direct line to God?
People who have achieved the status of columnist for the nyat never allow themselves to be impressed, it is considered déclassé.
of course, i meant to type, nyt, not nyat.
I like nyat. Reminds me of a child’s playground jeer.
I went for my usual run this morning and found that I had modestly improved my time, having completed it in 4 minutes rather than my previous best of 40 minutes. Then I made breakfast and while doing so discovered that my vision had modestly improved to the extent that I could clearly read newsprint 10 feet away rather than my usual 2.5 foot reading distance.
All in all, I’m okay with my modest improvements.
If you are concerned about your blood pressure there are different types of medication you can take to help control or lower your pressure. You might try some lifestyle changes first before opting for medicine. Remember that sometimes medicine is the only way you might be able to lower it. Different lifestyle changes do not always work on their own. First you might consider your diet. Do you consider yourself a healthy eater? Do you think you have a pretty healthy diet? Your diet could be affecting your blood pressure. High amounts of salt and sodium intake can raise your blood pressure. Try to limit your salt intake and eat more fresh fruits and vegetables. If you love salt, consider substituting it with a different seasoning. There are so many different kinds of seasonings available you can easily find something to your liking.^
Our web portal
<http://www.healthmedicinelab.com/pinched-nerve-in-back/