12.9" iPad Pro with 2732x2048 screen is "confirmed"

[StinkyPinky]

I totally agree. I have three Minis, one first gen (awful) and two newer ones (2 and 3) and they're all sluggish vs my wife's iPad Air 2.

It's very frustrating since I can't stand the 10" size...

I will probably sell all three of my old ones to buy a 4, especially if it's using a faster chipset.

My son has the original ipad mini and it plays most games fine, but it's funny to see him try and play Fallout Shelter. It just kills it.

I'm surprised to hear the mini 2 is so slow? It has an a7 chips like the 5s. I thought it would be quite snappy, that's disappointing to hear.

 

[boomhower]

I just can't see it being a big iPad. They have to be using some type of OS X on it. While I can see some use cases for a 12" iPad that is essentially an overgrown air but not enough to justify the production of one.

 

[Eug]

iOS 9.1 makes perfect sense. OS X is too cumbersome for even a 13" iPad.

In fact, I'd say even for enterprise usage - IBM - iOS 9 is preferable.

http://www-01.ibm.com/software/lotus/category/mobile-wireless/apple/

And yes, ARM.

 

[jpiniero]

I just can't see it being a big iPad. They have to be using some type of OS X on it. While I can see some use cases for a 12" iPad that is essentially an overgrown air but not enough to justify the production of one.

It's possible that 9.1 is similar to how Apple dealt with the original iPad - a special iPad Pro exclusive version of iOS which will contain some new interface elements that will then be integrated into the main OS branch. It might get announced at the same time of the 6S but it won't be released until some later point in the year.

 

[Eug]

It might be useful on that 13" iPad to have two instances of Safari side by side in portrait mode. That currently is not possible on the iPad Air 2. You can have Safari and another app, but not Safari + Safari. And actually, a 50:50 screen split for 2 Safaris is too cramped on the iPad Air 2 IMO. What works much better is the 2/3rds + 1/3rd split.

Subtracting the width of the bar in the middle, in split view mode you get a screen width of about 97.5 mm or about 3.8". Height is just over 5.8". For comparison, an iPhone 6 plus is 4.8" tall by 2.7" wide.

What this means is that on the iPad Air 2, the Split View mode gives the equivalent of two 7" 3:2 aspect ratio screens. So, each screen area is noticeably smaller than an iPad mini's.

With a 12.93" iPad Pro, each view would be about 7.75" x 5.1", effectively two 9.3" 3:2 screens side by side. Note that the iPad mini is 6.3" x 4.7". And iPad Pro's screen would actually be bigger than two iPad minis' screens side by side. That could work well for two instances of Safari side by side.

It should be noted that on the iPad Air 2, the 2/3rds 1/3rd split gives a 5.25" screen width for the larger area. That looks decent for Safari, and it is only a shade larger than the screen width of the 50:50 split of a 12.9" iPad Pro.

tl;dr:

With an iPad Pro with 12.9" screen and 50:50 Split View, you effectively get more than two iPad minis side by side.
Furthermore, for use with Safari, that 50:50 split is much more usable than on the iPad Air 2. (The iPad Air 2 does better with a 2:1 split.)

 

[Kaido]

I just can't see it being a big iPad. They have to be using some type of OS X on it. While I can see some use cases for a 12" iPad that is essentially an overgrown air but not enough to justify the production of one.

I have a 17" Android tablet, it's awesome in the kitchen. I can see it being useful in say the medical field or as wall-mounted touch interfaces in production shops.

 

[JAG87]

All I have to say is, if this runs iOS as it is today, and is priced higher than the Air, it is DOA. Especially if the price gets dangerously close to the Macbook line.

If on the other hand it brings OSX capabilities to new lower price range, it will be a huge success.

 

[Eug]

If it ran OS X, I probably wouldn't be too interested, unless it was designed as a hybrid.

 

[Artdeco]

It'll be iOS, I have no doubt, Apple's idea of a hybrid is the new retina MacBook, IMHO.

I thought the rMB was stupid, but after watching M. Brownlee's review suggesting it was a tablet replacement, I bought one and love it.

 

[Eug]

I thought the rMB was stupid

WHHAAAA??????

The rMB is the machine I've been asking for ever since the Airs and Retina Pros debuted.

Basically what I've been asking for, for YEARS, is a 12" Retina 2304x1440 laptop under 2.5 lbs, with full-sized keyboard and Apple trackpad, SSD, reasonable performance, long battery life, 802.11ac, and dual USB 3.

Apple hit every request I asked for, with a couple of gotchas:

1) The keyboard isn't my fave, but is OK.
2) The trackpad isn't my fave, but is OK.
3) Only one USB port, which also doubles as a charging port, so you can't use it and charge at the same time unless you're using a big dongle.

The rMB isn't a hybrid, since it doesn't function as a tablet, nor does it have a touchscreen. It's simply a laptop. A very nice laptop and a very light and small one, but a laptop nonetheless, not a hybrid.

 

[Artdeco]

WHHAAAA??????

The rMB is the machine I've been asking for ever since the Airs and Retina Pros debuted.

Basically what I've been asking for, for YEARS, is a 12" Retina 2304x1440 laptop under 2.5 lbs, with full-sized keyboard and Apple trackpad, SSD, reasonable performance, long battery life, 802.11ac, and dual USB 3.

Apple hit every request I asked for, with a couple of gotchas:

1) The keyboard isn't my fave, but is OK.
2) The trackpad isn't my fave, but is OK.
3) Only one USB port, which also doubles as a charging port, so you can't use it and charge at the same time unless you're using a big dongle.

The rMB isn't a hybrid, since it doesn't function as a tablet, nor does it have a touchscreen. It's simply a laptop. A very nice laptop and a very light and small one, but a laptop nonetheless, not a hybrid.

I know, but I think it's as close as Apple will come to making one for a long time.

As I posted, love mine, using it right now, it is literally the best PC I've ever owned, it's amazing.

 

[dagamer34]

1366x1024 is a weird ass resolution and not quite 3:4. That's 683x512 doubled. 683 is a friggin prime number.

1366x1024 points lets you run two iPad apps in landscape side-by-side to each other. :whiste:

By the way, points != pixels.

 

[Oyeve]

Wow, they still waste desktop real estate with the icons.