The iPhone 5 News Blog

The iPad 3 has an explosive first weekend in sales, reinforcing Tim Cook’s claim that tablets will outsell traditional computers in three years.

Well folks, the first numbers are in for the New iPad’s first weekend in stores. According to Apple’s own press release, their third-generation tablet sold three million units last weekend, averaging a million sales per day. Not bad, Apple.

This news comes right on the heels of our article from yesterday, which outlined Apple’s major stock explosion, and the anticipation that the iPad 3 had a big first weekend, in addition to an avalanche of pre-orders that saw many of the New iPad models sell out within two days. There’s no doubt that today’s news will send Apple stock into a new wave of gains.

In spite of the fact that the new iPad 3 has been characterized by the tech media as a mere upgrade of the iPad 2, consumers have followed through on what was predicted to be a major success for Apple’s third-generation tablet, falling in love with its new Retina display and 4G LTE connectivity. It has also helped that Apple managed to keep the iPad 3′s price tag the same as the previous two models, even though early surveys showed that prospective iPad 3 customers would have been willing to spend more.

It appears that 2012 is the year where many people feel ready to own an iPad; all of the “late adopters” are finally getting on board (maybe you’re one of them?).

This theory would seem in line with comments that Apple CEO Tim Cook recently made to the media, wherein he stated that the tablet is now clearly in its mainstream adoption phase, and will come to replace personal computers in the very near future. According to FoxNews, “’Gartner estimates that the tablet market will be 325 million units by 2015,’ Cook noted.” The article goes on to report: “According to Ross Rubin, executive director and principal analyst for market research firm NPD Connected Intelligence, that switch over could happen as early as this year.”

Gartner and other tech think tanks are also quick to point out that PC sales will also continue to grow — just not nearly at the same pace as tablets. However, PCs’ last bastion is the business sector; it appears that tablets will be slow to take over for business users, who still see desktops and laptops as the most productive computing devices for the business world.

Apple is seeking to make the iPad more business compatible, however. The iPad 3′s hardware and software upgrades are seeking to make it a viable tool for shooting and editing video, as well as creating graphics. There have also been rumors that Microsoft Office will eventually be adapted for the iPad as well.

In the meantime, however, consumers are flocking to the iPad 3, and it appears that it will usher in a whole new generation of users who appear ready to make it their primary computing device.

By Michael Nace

Regardless of whether the New iPad 3 is a refresh or true “overhaul,” it is living up to sales expectations, driving Apple stock to new highs.

As is typical with all new Apple devices, the iPad 3 launched with lofty sales expectations, with analysts and surveys indicating that the new model would woo a plurality of Kindle Fire and other non-Apple tablet users, and enjoy massive sales as a result of it including 4G LTE connectivity. Both speculations appear to be coming true: the first 48 hours of iPad 3 sales saw the 4G models sell out first, and now all indications are that the New iPad’s first weekend in the stores is turning out to be a huge one.

On Friday, when the iPad 3 launched in stores, the scene was chaotic in most of Apple’s urban retail outlets. WSJ describes it thusly: “The scene at many Apple stores resembled a rock concert, with large crowds, barricades and Apple employees cheering customers as they bought the iPad. Those waiting included a mix of Apple devotees, first-time buyers and foreigners who couldn’t wait for the product to arrive in their countries. In New York, a line of more than 250 people stretched through an underground passage of Grand Central Terminal as they waited for the new Apple store there to open.”

The performance of Apple’s stock was equally energetic, with CNBC reporting that “The buzz helped propel Apple shares to touch a record high of $600 on the Nasdaq on Thursday, though they later erased gains and were trading at around $585 on Friday afternoon.”

At present, there are no hard sales numbers to report on how iPad 3 sales have gone this weekend. However, don’t be surprised to hear of reports later in the week that there is a New iPad shortage in the works: USA Today reports that “Consumers nationwide are forecast to grab 112.5 million tablet computers by 2016, according to researcher Forrester,” and it would appear that Apple will be siphoning the lion’s share of those tablet sales, beginning with the New iPad 3.

Of course, there are many in the media who are beginning to pan the iPad 3 as a mere refresh of the iPad 2, citing recent teardowns that reveal the component suppliers have not changed from the iPad 2, and that the overall design of the New iPad is little more than an iPad 2 with improved components. In spite of this, however, consumers are sold on Tim Cook’s marketing pitch — early polls indicate that the Retina display and 4G LTE connectivity are the two major driving forces in the iPad 3′s robust early sales.

To be sure, there are still plenty of rumored features and next-generation patents floating around that, once implemented on a future iPad, will most certainly constitute an overhaul. In the meantime, Apple continues to dominate the tablet market with the same essential design of the original iPad, simply because none of its competitors have offered a device that even comes close to delivering the quality, features, and performance of the iPad at its current price point. And apple seems to be content with dominating the market from two ends — quality and price — as the teardowns also reveal that the New iPad 3 does cost more to manufacture than the iPad 2, meaning that Cupertino is eating the cost of the more expensive components.

But as long as the sales continue to flow, Wall Street and Apple will be happy.

 By Michael Nace

Apple’s opting to go with a pretty much carry-over A5X dual-core CPU in the third-generation iPad hasn’t done a whole lot to clarify what processor chip will likely power the iPhone 5 later this year. In fact it’s somewhat muddied the waters.

It’s now been revealed that the “X” in A5 X refers pretty much to the new iPad’s quad-core graphics processor, and not to any speed tweaking of the main processor itself, which remains much the same dual-core Cortex A9-based chip that powers the iPad 2 and iPhone 4S.

The Vietnamese blogsite tinhte.vn has managed to obtain a third-generation iPad prior to the official release, and installed GeekBench software to benchmark its performance, which scores it at 756, which is about the median, or a bit lower, than scores for the iPad 2′s A5 CPU posted on this site:
http://bit.ly/Awc33r

It has been suggested that the A5X may turn out to be an iPad-only special chip engineered especially to support the new iPad’s big Retina display. The new iPad is equipped with 1GB of RAM, double the the iPad 2′s and iPhone 4S’s memory capacity, and quadruple that of the original iPad, but the A5X the CPU is still clocked at 1GHz. Whatever size panel Apple uses in the next generation iPhone, it’s not going to need the graphics processing muscle of the A5X. Michael Nace addressed that point at greater length here on Monday,

So the operative question becomes whether Apple will opt to continue using an A5 dual-core CPU in the iPhone 5, or choose to introduce a quad-core A6 CPU to the world in an iPhone rather than an iPad. That is of course provided that an A6 is ready for release in time for the new iPhone rollout. Arguably, the tradeoff between maintaining a fashionably thin and light form factor and ensuring satisfactory battery life is more critically acute with smartphones than it is with tablet computers, and there will also presumably be the complicating factor of LTE/4G support, which will almost certainly have to be incorporated in the iPhone 5 now that it’s available in the iPad as well as much of the Android competition. LTE will of course mean more power demand, which would make a quad-core CPU logical from that perspective, but would have to be reconciled with acceptable battery capacity and the dictates of fashion.

However, it’s been speculated that new battery technology applied to the new iPad is substantially more efficient in terms of bulk and weight vs capacity, and if that’s an accurate surmise, then it will be used in the new iPhone as well. I think that given the A5X’s decent, albeit not stellar performance in the new iPad while supporting LTE communications, Apple could probably get away with carrying over the A5 chip to the next generation iPhone if the RAM is boosted to the iPad’s 1 GB, although the possible addition of NFC to the mix along with Siri — which is not yet a factor with the iPad would also have to be taken into consideration.

Looking farther into the future, ARM, on whose technology Apple’s A-series CPUs are based, has unveiled a new Cortex-M0+ Processor which it says is the most energy efficient ARM processor available, further reducing energy consumption and increasing performance. ARM claims that the exceptionally small silicon area, low power and minimal code footprint of these processors will enable developers to achieve 32-bit performance at an 8-bit price point, bypassing the step to 16-bit devices. According to ARM, the chip’s optimized architecture with a core pipeline of just two stages enables the Cortex-M0+ processor to achieve power consumption of just 11.2uW/MHz (90LP process, minimal configuration), while raising the performance to 1.77 CoreMark/MHz.

Also looking more and more like a sure thing is a 7.85-inch iPad mini, confirmation of which appears to have been blabbed by an anonymous Samsung Electronics official interviewed by The Korea Times’ Kim Yoo-chul this week.

Commenting on Samsung’s continued robust business relationship with Apple notwithstanding the patent litigation battles they’ve been engaged in, the official is quoted affirming that “The contract [to supply Apple with components] is expected to rise to $11 billion by the end of this year, as Apple is planning to release a smaller iPad, probably with a 7.85-inch screen, and to sell more of its MacBook Air PCs using Samsung’s faster solid state drive (SSD) storage.”

Samsung makes the A5 and A5X CPUs and Samsung’s QXGA panels used in iPhones and iPads, and Apple bought $7.8 billion worth of components from Samsung in 2011, including displays, mobile application processors (APs), NAND flash chips and mobile DRAMs – making it Samsung’s single biggest customer as well as its patent litigation nemesis, the official noting that while “The amount of the current contract is around $9.7 billion,” but suggesting that the amount may go up to $11 billion, depending on demand for Apple products, and is expected to continue increasing until at least 2014 under the terms of the current contract between the two companies, observing that Apple products’ popularity lines Samsung’s pockets as well.

By Charles Moore

Breaking news today regarding the rumored “Mini iPad.” According to BGR, an unnamed source from Samsung indicates that the smaller iPad will be released later in the year, based on Apple’s recent ordering of parts from the components manufacturer. Zach Epstein reports: “While speaking with The Korea Times, the anonymous Samsung official said that Apple will likely spend a record $11 billion on Samsung-sourced parts for its various devices in 2012. ‘The amount of the current contract is around $9.7 billion,’ The Korea Times was told.”

Samsung is the current supplier of the new Retina displays for the iPad 3, and is rumored to be producing the display for the sub-9.7 inch Mini iPad, which will most likely feature a 7.85-inch screen. These screen dimensions would put the Mini iPad in the midst of lower-priced tablets, such as the Kindle and Nook, though the Samsung source gave no indication as to a comparative price point for the new Mini iPad.

It is well-known that Steve Jobs was on record as panning the notion of small-screened tablets, arguing that the smaller screen would blur the lines between tablet and smartphone so as to make it difficult to sell both to prospective users. Thus, a 7.85 inch Mini iPad would be a dramatic reversal for Cupertino’s design team in the wake of Jobs’ death.

By Michael Nace

Speculation about the future of the home button for both the iPad and iPhone was rekindled in the week leading up to the New iPad’s launch, thanks to an ill-advised teaser photo from Cupertino’s PR department. The photo, which appeared to show an iPad in landscape mode with no home button,was later refuted by late-breaking component photos of the new iPad’s front display piece, and then officially killed at the product launch, when the home button appeared on the New iPad, with no special attention paid to it either way by Tim Cook.

In the ensuing excitement and attention paid to the New iPad launch, few have stopped to question Apple’s decision to use the cryptic teaser photo. And while that story may no longer be of interest to Apple enthusiasts, the zeal for this story — the future of the home button on iOS devices — is worth noting. The size, shape, function, and use of the home button on the iPad and iPhone remains a feature that users feel is bound for an upgrade — or total removal from the device.

For the few days where a home button-less New iPad seemed possible, the rationale was based mostly on the new display; some suggested that the removal of the physical home button would be a result of either increasing the screen size or decreasing the bezel/chassis around it. Neither of those two things happened, of course.

Now that the iPad release is under our belts, full speculation will shift now to the iPhone 5 (and iOS 6 to a lesser extent). Considering that the home button remained on the New iPad, can we also assume that it will be there on the iPhone 5 as well?

From my perspective, there are a few things to consider in this discussion. First off is the popularity of the home button, and how that popularity coincides with Apple’s own design ethics. Anecdotally speaking, most iPhone (and iPad) users seem happy with the home button. In a way, the home button is a major part of the stability of iOS: you push it, you feel it depress, and then you’re back home. The more nondescript sense of tapping a touch-style home button (we have one on our Kyrocera Echo) doesn’t give you any physical feedback, so you don’t always have a sense that you really pushed it. Because of this, there is no tactile confirmation that you’re “going home” when you push a key like this. And the same would be true for a home button on the actual screen.

My sense is that Apple feels this way as well.

The decision to remove the home button would seem at face value to be about aesthetics more than function; it would allow Apple to perhaps make a completely minimalist iPhone 5 design — maybe with no physical buttons at all, and cut from a single piece of metal. Something like that. In this way, the idea would be in keeping with Apple’s past designs, which include computers with no hardware-style eject button for disk drives, no separate reset button, etc.

Of course, there is one scenario where we could imagine Cupertino removing the home button on the iPhone 5, while having chosen to keep it on the iPad 3: screen space. Just as Apple didn’t really have a need to increase screen size on the New iPad — 9.7 inches is actually considered to be rather large these days for tablets, as many competing models are getting smaller, not bigger — the iPhone 5 will be a different situation. Users are calling for a larger screen, but as we have argued here on the Blog, Cupertino seems to like the iPhone’s overall dimensions. It is possible that the iPhone 5 could be a shrinking or removal of the home button to accommodate a slightly larger 3.7-inch screen.

If this was the case, users would have to decide for themselves if the loss of the home button would be worth a slightly larger screen.

Of course, there is no hard evidence to suggest that it has to be one or another. Photoshoppers have already mocked up iPhone 5 concepts with the 3.7-inch screen, still retaining a home button. However, it can be said that the iPhone 5 has a better chance of losing the home button than the iPad 3 ever did.

In keeping with previous product launch successes, Apple managed to sell out of its stock of pre-order-ready New iPads in less than 24 hours. All indications are that they will be supply issues in the early going of the iPad’s official store launch date of March 16th.

If you were one of the millions of people who managed to get your pre-ordered New iPad, then congratulations: you were lucky. Less than 24 hours after the New iPad’s official announcement, Apple was already advising pre-order customers of shipping delays for certain models. As of right now, all models are delayed. This is indicative of an amazing sales achievement: Apple sold out of its pre-order cache of New iPads in just a few days.

According to Josh Wolford at WebProNews: “Less that 24 hours after Apple announced the device, some models had already pushed the date back to March 19th. The most popular models, by that measure, were the white 16 GB 4G model on AT&T and the white 64 GB 4G model on AT&T.” Considering that these 4G models are not the entry-level wi-fi models, it also shows a dramatic shift in focus among iPad users, who with the previous two iPad iterations coalesced around the wi-fi models. Considering that 4G models appear to be the hottest selling new iPad, it would indicate that consumer demand for 4G LTE devices is indeed on the rise — and that Apple was spot-on to make the New iPad its first foray into 4G connectivity.

These early iPad sales indicators are complete in line with what Wall Street expects will be yet another dominating year for Apple’s tablet sales. According to Apple Insider, the new, third-generation iPad is seen my analysts and consumers alike as a next-generation device that will continue to excite sales throughout the year: “Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster wrote in a note to investors that the new iPad is a “significant upgrade” to the iPad 2. He expects the device and a new version of iOS will help Apple maintain its lead in the tablet market.”

Munster is clearly pointing to both the iPad 3′s Retina display and 4G LTE connectivity as defining it as a “significant upgrade,” in spite of the fact that leading voices in the tech community, such as Richi Jennings at Computerworld who characterized his New iPad roll-up as thus: “Aside from the name, not much else was a surprise (except to those who backed the wrong rumors).” This perception, however, may be a byproduct of sensational, late-breaking rumors that never came to fruition, such as the rumor of an iPad 3 with no home button, an accompanying Mini iPad, or an early-morning press release from LiquidMetal technologies on the day of the New iPad release that suggested to investors that LiquidMetal might comprise a new iPad 3 form factor.

Since none of these form factor-related innovations showed up on the new iPad, lofty expectations from the tech rumor mill once again built up expectations that Apple could not meet.

These perceived disappointments are not mainstream, however, as Apple’s stockade of New iPads dwindle, and Cupertino struggles with relish to meet crushing demand for a New iPad that millions upon millions of consumers will come to own in 2012.

By Michael Nace

My first impression that Apple was being too cute by half in going with just “iPad” for the third-gen tablet is evolving. Peripherals and accessories manufacturers are already struggling with the unexpected name. For example, check out this from a press release I received today from Kensington:

Kensington KeyFolio Bluetooth Keyboard Case for new iPad®, iPad® 2 & iPad® (K39336US; $99.99)

“New iPad” will work for a bit, but what do they do for the next act? And what will we call it when the next generation is released and this one is no longer new?

I was underwhelmed by Apple senior vice president of worldwide marketing Phil Schiller’s explanation to The Wall Street Journal that Cupertino decided to call the new iPad simply “iPad” “because we don’t want to be predictable.” That manages to be both lame and supercilious simultaneously, and I’m not convinced that Schiller was being candid or serious about that. Others have suggested, more convincingly in my estimation, that it may be more that Apple wants to “generify” the iPad name, much the way the MacBook and iMac names are applied to various versions of their respective products. The aforementioned Pismo was the last Apple laptop to be popularly referenced by a development code name. Subsequent models have just gone by more generic nomenclature like PowerBook G4 or the various MacBook family designations, with versions distinguished by the dates of their release, eg: “late 2008,” or “mid-2011,” etc. — much the way automobiles are.

Consequently, if this change in Apple idevice naming conventions turns out to be a policy shift rather than just cocking a snook at the Apple rumorista cohort, the iPad model announced Wednesday would eventually be referred to as the “early-2012 iPad,” and the rumored 7.85-inch model, if it materializes in Q3 would be the “late-2012 iPad, and so forth.

And if that be the case, we may never see an iPhone 5; in fact, I’m now skeptical that we will. My inference could be mistaken of course, but I would rate the odds as less than 50-50 that a new iPad released later this year will be called “iPhone 5″ by Apple. More likely it will be “mid-2012” or “late-2012″ iPhone. Actually, that would be more precisely appropriate than iPhone 5 strictly speaking, since the current iPhone 4S is the 5th-generation iPhone.

Moving on, I’m also altering my provisional deduction that the next iPhone will share the new Apple A5X CPU with the new IPad, and my evolving POV has to do with the new iPad’s emphasis on graphics performance necessitated by the big Retina Display. The next iPhone, whose screen will be much smaller, won’t need nearly as much emphasis on graphics processing muscle.

Apple’s official description of the iPad chip is: ”Dual-core Apple A5X custom-designed, high-performance, low-power system-on-a-chip with quad-core graphics.” Not exactly crystal-clear what that signifies, but CNET Crave’s Margerite Reardon quotes fellow CNET blogger and chip guru Brooke Crothers explaining that:

“The new iPad’s graphics chip — which is based on Imagination’s PowerVR tech — is basically a quad-core version of the dual-core graphics chip in the iPad 2. That’s where Apple gets the two-fold performance increase. The upshot is that Apple is focusing on the GPU because it needs to devote all of the chip real estate it can to transistors that push around an amazingly pixel-dense display–which crams a resolution of 2,048 x 1,536 into a 9.7-inch display.”

So, the pertinent question for most readers of this blogsite is what Apple’s choice of processor silicon for the new iPad portends for the iPhone 5 (since Wednesday it seems prudent to consider that name a possible placeholder) coming later this year. My read of the tealeaves is that odds of the next iPhone having a quad-core A6 processor are looking even slimmer that they had been — I still think it’s more likely that Apple will launch the A6 in an iPad. That would be especially the case if the new Apple handset were to be released at the WWDC three months from now, as I don’t think it will be, ‘but I think it’s a very long shot even for a fall 2012 release.

I’m guessing now that iPhone 5 (or whatever) this year will be powered by another A5 variant, but probably one without the A5X’s quad-core graphics.

IDG News Service’s Agam Shah cites several analysts suggesting that the A5X, with its four graphics cores and heavy focus on graphics processing performance, may not be ideal for smartphone use, although they are crucial for providing smooth operation of the iPad’s 2048-by-1536-pixel display.

More likely the iPhone would get its own chip, possibly produced with a 28-nanometer manufacturing process (refers to refers to the size of the smallest circuits etched onto the chip) that would make it more power-efficient and cheaper to produce, but which wasn’t quite ready in time for the early 2012 iPad. Current ARM-based chips are manufactured with a 40-nanometer process and based on ARM’s Cortex-A9 technology, but it’s expected that a new more power-efficient 28-nanometer Cortex-A15 core family of ARM CPUs will be ready to ship later this year. Ergo, probably the A6, but not necessarily quad-core, at least for the iPhone.

By Charles Moore

Apple’s decision to include an A5X processor with quad-core graphics in the New iPad is in line with a growing quad-core trend for mobile devices. But a leading analyst believes that the iPhone 5 is unlikely to use the same processor.

In the months leading up to the release of the New iPad, debate swung heavily back and forth between whether or not Apple would equip their third-generation tablet with a rumored dual-core A5X processor or quad-core A6 chip. In the end, the A5x turned out to support quad-core graphics, and well-suited for the robust software features and high-definition display on the New iPad.

But for as much as the new A5x would appear to be ushering in a new quad-core movement in Apple’s mobile gadget ranks, a leading analyst argues that the high performance of the A5X processor may not be well suited for the upcoming iPhone 5. According to Macworld, “The chips used in the first two iPads, the A4 and A5, both made their way into a new iPhone soon after. But the A5X, with its heavy focus on graphics, may not be ideal for smartphone use, and Apple may wait for a more power-efficient chip built with a new manufacturing process.”

This perspective comes by way of Linley Group founder Linley Gwennap, who states that the A5X is simply too power inefficient, and thus the iPhone 5′s smaller battery will not be a good match: “I think that this new chip is probably just for the iPad… it looks like they planned ahead for this.”

The Macworld article also goes on to cite “Dean McCarron, principal analyst at Mercury Research,” who “also sees the current A5X as an unlikely candidate for the next iPhone, which won’t require as much graphics processing power as an iPad. The current iPhone has a display density of 326 pixels per inch, greater than the latest iPad’s 264 pixels per inch, but the iPhone has only a 3.7-inch display.”

Gwennap and McCarron are both imagining that, while the A5X chip supports quad-core graphics, we could be due for a dual-core A6 later in the year, which would be used on the iPhone 5, since matching the New iPad’s graphics will not be a priority, while offering an iPhone 5 with sustained battery life will be.

Apple enthusiasts may be disturbed by the prospect of a quad-core A5X chip being followed up by a dual-core A6 chip for the iPhone 6, sensing yet another odd naming convention, similar to the disconcerting nature of Apple’s decision to brand the new iPad simply as the “New iPad.” But in point of fact, it is much easier to justify the A5X’s name as a possible new sub-series for all of Apple’s future quad-core graphics chips: now, whenever “X” appears on the chip name, it may be indicative of quad-core graphics, versus the dual-core design of the A4, A5, and soon-to-be A6 chips.

More tricky for Apple, however, could be leaving off quad-core processing technology on the iPhone 5 altogether in the year where quad-core is being deployed heavily across a wide range of competing devices. We’ve already reported on the NVIDIA Tegra 3 chip, which is set to find its way onto Android smartphones this year. Similar to the issue of 4G LTE, Apple may not from a marketing standpoint be able to ignore quad-core processing on the iPhone 5 if it is perceived by consumers as a necessity for top-tier smartphone designs.

By Michael Nace

It was widely assumed that the third-generation iPad would be called “iPad 3,” “iPad HD,” or some other name with a qualifier in it. But the nondescript “New iPad” moniker leaves Apple enthusiasts with questions about the future of Cupertino’s naming taxonomy for both the iPad and iPhone.

There is a certain comfort and familiarity to the naming conventions that Apple has used over the years for its iPod, iPhone, and iPad product lines — an innate understanding that an “iPhone 4S” denotes a “refresh,” whereas an “iPhone 5″would indicate an “overhaul.” In the case of prognosticating the name of the third-generation iPad, expected names were “iPad 3″ or “iPad HD,” with the former being the most accurate identifier, and the latter a reasonable alternative, boasting of the new Retina display. “iPad 4G” probably would have also sufficed.

But Apple threw us all for a loop, opting for the minimalist “New iPad” instead.

The “New iPad?” Which new iPad? Is this the “New iPad 2?” That would make it an “iPad 2S,” right? Or, given the fact that this is the third-generation iPad, is this a de facto “iPad 3?”

Moreover, will the “New iPad” still be the new iPad 8 months from now? How about 15 months from now, when the 2013 iPad is released? Will that be the “New New iPad?”

The tech community sometimes derides Appledom for stressing over these naming issues, citing it as more proof that consumers’ devotion to the Apple brand is more of a cult-like obsession rather than a healthy passion for cool electronics. But whether or not that is the case, it is Apple’s marketing department that has ginned up its own customers by establishing reasonable naming conventions for its devices — and then wantonly breaking them in disconcerting fashion.

With the “New iPad,” we don’t really know what we have here. Is this a refresh of the iPad 2, or an overhauled design? According to the preponderance of evidence from the mainstream tech media, the New iPad has not impressed enough to warrant calling it an overhaul. Thus, even though the New iPad is the third-generation iPad, will there be an “iPad 3″ next year?

According to Apple, we shouldn’t expect much explanation. From the Wall Street Journal: “The company didn’t provide a detailed explanation. Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of world-wide marketing, simply said that Apple broke from the convention ‘because we don’t want to be predictable.’”

This academic discussion may remind you of similar arguments regarding the iPhone 4S, which is in actuality the fifth-generation iPhone. Many analysts believe that Apple should technically name the 2012 iPhone “iPhone 6,” skipping over the long-awaited “iPhone 5″ moniker in order to bring the sixth-generation iPhone’s name in line with its iteration. Whether or not Apple will do that remains to be seen — there is no evidence either way as to whether or not Apple will call 2012′s iPhone the “iPhone 5″ or “iPhone 6.”

And for all we know, they may call it the “New iPhone.”

One thing is for sure, Apple’s new name for New iPad has once again made it impossible to know for sure what brand name they will stamp on their next device, making it increasingly difficult to divine what Cupertino is up to in their R&D department. Of course, that’s exactly what Apple hopes to do.

By Michael Nace

Now that I’ve had a few hours to digest today’s third-generation iPad announcement, some thoughts and impressions are beginning to gel. First, the new Apple tablet turned out to be pretty much what I expected, and the rumor mills did a pretty good job of previewing what we were going to get.

Whether it’s “revolutionary” or not depends largely on how much value you put on the Retina display. Personally, I’ve been of the school of thought that wondered why the iPad needed a higher-resolution screen. The 1064 x 768 display in my iPad 2 has seemed perfectly adequate to me resolution-wise. Heck, that’s the screen-res. of my old Pismo PowerBooks, of which I still have two in production service. However, BetaNews’s Joe Wilcox in a blog yesterday suggests that for education, healthcare and publishing, a high-resolution iPad would be a transformative product, and contends that nothing currently available anywhere will be able compete toe-to-toe with an iPad offering 2048 x 1536 resolution, and that nothing likely will be able to for at least 12 months, perhaps longer, noting that current and announced Android tablets top out at 1280 x 800 resolution.

Photo Courtesy Apple

More importantly, Wilcox suggests that the Retina iPad will be positioned to further eat into PC sales, putting tremendous pressure on Microsoft as it prepares Windows 8 and Windows on ARM for future tablet sales, noting that for many people, the iPad will offer the best computer screen they can afford. I find this line of argument somewhat persuasive, especially since the curmudgeonly Mr. Wilcox is anything but an Apple cheerleader or fanboy.

That said, while I expect the new iPad’s Retina Display is truly spectacular and a glory to behold, I still don’t find myself as an iPad 2 user, Jonesing for more resolution at this point. Perhaps in the future something will come to light that will make it more compelling as a gotta’ have rather than a nice to have.

I have to say that I’m amused at Apple’s pulling the rug out of all,the speculation about what the third-gen ‘Pad would be called by not naming it anything beyond the generic “iPad.” I’m reminded of the Pismo PowerBook announcement at Macworld Tokyo almost exactly 12 years ago, with Apple calling their latest (and as it turned out, greatest G3 Series laptop) simply “PowerBook.” Well, strictly speaking its official moniker was “PowerBook G3 2000 FireWire, but for marketing purposes it was simply “PowerBook.” Of course, while that might have been elegantly minimalist, it didn’t really work very well in practical terms, and the machine immediately became known by it’s development code name, borrowed from a famous ocean beach near San Francisco.

Which begs the question of what name will end up sticking to the third-gen. IPad. I’m really glad they didn’t go with “iPad HD,” which had been bandied about for the past week or so, and which would have been lame. I would have been happy with iPad 2S, which would make logical sense to me at least.

I never put much stock in rumored speculation that this iPad release would have a quad-core A6 CPU, and especially not after Samsung started up its new state-of-the-art chip fabrication facility in Austin,Texas, making A5 chips. It beggared credibility that they would do that so close to the new iPad’s launch, if the latter were not going to persevere with the A5.Presumably, switching production to the new new A5X chip didn’t require any major production line retooling. The A5X features quad-core graphics, which Apple says offers double the graphics performance of the A5 chip used n the iPad 2 and iPhone 4S, providing the graphics processing muscle to support the Retina display while striking a balance between performance and power efficiency.

I was on the fence about LTE, however, it’s included, which will be important to some potential buyers, and will offer future proofing for those prepared to pony up the extra trickles. Academic to me, since I’m even out of 3G range where I live.

Speaking of pricing, I think Apple did well to maintain the price points of the previous generation models, and carrying the 16 GB and 32 GB iPad 2 models at $399 and $529 respectively is a shrewd move as well.

Having a nine month old iPad 2, I’m not even considering moving up to the third-gen, model, although I would love to have that 5 megapixel camera and better lens, since I’ve been using the camera feature in my iPad more lately.

That’s pretty much it for first impression analysis. As always, I’ll be interested to hear readers’ views.