All I would have wanted was a faster iPad

All I would have wanted was a faster iPad

I've mentioned this several times already on the iPhone & iPad Live podcast, in the new iPad round-table, and on Twitter, but I wanted to get something up here as well. The Retina display is great, but I'm not a designer or a photographer and I still read more on a computer and on paper than I do on my iPad. I have a Wi-Fi iPad so LTE isn't a consideration for me. Dictation is great and will make a huge difference to people who prefer to, or need to, talk rather than type. But for me, none of that is truly compelling. For me, instead of supporting a double density display or a faster network, I would have loved the extra power of that Apple A5X chipset and that extra RAM to do one thing and one thing only -- make my iPad faster.

I hate waiting. I watch lower resolution videos because I hate waiting for streaming to start or buffering to finish. My iPad turns on instantly and I love that. But then when I launch a website, I'm still waiting for pages to render and when I launch a game, I'm still waiting for it to load. Because things like turning on are so fast, when you do have to wait for something it feels so much more apparent.

The iPad 2 was such a speed increase from the original iPad that it I noticed it immediately. Even the iPhone 4S is fast enough compared to the iPhone 4 that I noticed it immediately. The new iPad... is about the same as the iPad 2. That it's the same given a Retina display is awesome, but I can't help wishing it would have stuck with a regular display and been twice as fast again.

iPad photo gallery

The resolution of text or images never bothered me; the speed of getting them to show up on screen did. Maybe that wouldn't have been as sexy and upgrade, or maybe "thinner, lighter, faster" wouldn't have been a strong enough selling point two years in a row, but I'm willing to bet it would have been welcome by many.

Also, let's not forget battery life. It's remarkable that the new iPad gets a Retina display and keeps the same 10 hour battery life as an iPad 2. Imagine how much battery life it would get without it? Probably 17 hours.

Retina display and LTE now done, next year's iPad will probably lose the extra bulk and speed up again, maybe even get longer battery life as well. he upgrade I'll be waiting for.

In the meantime I'll be waiting for my web pages to load and games to start...

Steve Jobs sometimes liked to quote Henry Ford -- "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses". Instead he gave them something they had no idea they wanted until he gave it to them -- a car. With the new iPad, however, I suddenly find myself on the opposite side of that equation. All I would have wanted was a faster iPad.

Have something to say about this story? Leave a comment! Need help with something else? Ask in our forums!


Senior Editor at iMore and a practicing therapist specializing in stress and anxiety. She speaks everywhere from conferences to corporations, co-host of Vector, Review, and Isometric podcasts, and should be followed on Twitter @Georgia_Dow.

More Posts



← Previously

Apple, Google, and the value of iOS

Next up →

Apple and publishers reportedly willing to abandon iBooks "agency model" to appease Justice Department

Reader comments

All I would have wanted was a faster iPad


I see your point, but I disagree. I'll wait a few fractions of a second or a few seconds for something to load, but I stare at the page for much longer and a better, easier on the eyes display is more important. To each his own, I guess. (By the way, I don't play games on my iPad--still can't understand why people waste time with video/computer games...yes, I'm over 50--can you tell?! ;-) )

That is an excellent point. I didn't really think about that myself. I was on the fence between the iPad 2 and the New iPad but your point makes a lot of sense. If the main idea or reason for an iPad is to look at it, the screen quality is of the upmost importance.

What you describe in your article is a symptom of a slow Internet connection. My iPad is as faster as my brand new iMac I purchased just a few months ago. I have a 20mb connection and web pages load with no hesitation.

I agree with you, the symptom she describe is really just slow Internet. Even iPad was 100 times faster, I bet it wont make a difference to her when it comes to web browsing

Infinity Blade 2 synchronizes with your game center account, so you keep playing where you left. So yes it may have something to do. Even with that IB2 is nastily fast.

It does that on the iPad 2 as well. And the iPad 1.
As far as a I know, 802.11n functions at the same speed on both the iPad 2 and the new iPad.
And again, iPad 2 is significantly faster than the new iPad.
Like I said, I don't care. I'm happy they went with the Retina display, and I'm happy if people disagree.
I'm just not sure what the hell connection speed has to do with this discussion. They're equal.

Ummm.. No.
Load times may be connection dependent but rendering times are CPU dependent. JavaScript intensive websites, even with JIT in Nitro, are significantly CPU dependent.
I'm also hard pressed to figure out how "she doesn't know the difference" when it comes to launching a video game like Infinity Blade. Is that pulling heavy internet data?
Our tests showed significant speed improvements between the original iPad and the iPad 2 in both web rendering and app launching. They didn't show any perceptive difference between the iPad 2 and the new iPad.
For me this doesn't matter, I think the Retina display is worth the tradeoff. For Georgia (and others) it does and it isn't.
That's fine. There's an argument to be made there, and intelligent people can disagree intelligently about that.
Condescendingly -- and mistakingly -- brushing that aside is neither of those things.

Hi Rene,
It's nice to see that you're standing behind your team in their articles. I realize that this is an opinion piece but since you're the editor and you have commented, i'd like to point out that you might not have considered the validity of these comments with enough thought.
I just think that the choice of examples could have been better and the issue is the proportion of the wait time that is connection-dependent vs. processing dependent. Web page loading and streaming movies are traditionally more connection dependent than processing dependent. Even if the wait time is 50% connection and 50% processing (which in reality it's more like 70-30 for web pages and 90-10 for streaming), than improving the processing component by INFINITY would only yield a 50% decrease in the wait time for these tasks. More realistically, the possible improvement to processing is 40% at most, so you would really only get a max of a decrease of 20% in wait time even with these extremely generous estimates. Also, as one commenter mentioned, IB2 loads slowly because of the syncronization it does at the beginning of the game. My understanding is that games/graphics are actually quite a lot better on the new ipad because of the quad core processor. Given this information, it's a weak argument for wanting a faster ipad bc and so the article feels like it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Just my 2 cents. I genuinely admire the effort to filter out the junk in the blog-sphere here at imore. I understand that this is not a technical blog but perhaps getting an extra editor with a more technical background could help with understanding what's going on at Apple because they would have a better understandinng of what's physically possible to do with today's silicon.

The problem with some of the replies isn't that they disagree, it's that they're condescending and insulting, and some aren't technically accurate.
Georgia has an iPad 3. She tested a bunch of games to see what, if any, difference she could find. The came to an informed opinion that there wasn't a big one -- for her.
For the things she cares about, based on the tests she conducted, she determined that the original iPad to iPad 2 was a much more meaningful upgrade, in her use case, than the iPad 2 to the iPad 3. That's not a weak argument. That's the opposite of a weak argument.
She's not betraying Apple or punching puppies, she stating an informed, contextual opinion.
We don't need more technical editors. We may need to figure out away to get more people to read the articles before commenting :)

The issue is that the article is written on the assumption that a different allocation of resources in the design of the new ipad would in fact make it better for Georgia's use-case. I belive people are trying to point out that this is a bad assumption. Keeping the new ipad on lower res and directing the extra processing power to other things (the suggestion is iffy at best as well) will not improve the wait times of her tasks in a significant way! You're right that commenter's can be condescending, especially when they come across very presumptuous.

All the article says, in essence, is that Georgia preferred the iPad 1 to iPad 2 upgrade than the iPad 2 to iPad 3 upgrade.
Not sure what about that rankles so many people. I love the iPad 3 upgrade, but that doesn't mean I don't respect the opinion of those who don't.
Disagreement doesn't have to be disagreeable.

I still have, and use and love, my iPad 1. I was considering the new iPad but the more stuff like this I read, the less i see the reason to get a new iPad over an iPad 2. Especially a refurbished iPad 2. I know the Retina display is fantastic on the new iPad (although I have not yet seen one) but for me I am not sure that alone is worth $100-$150 dollars. I am not a heavy game player, mostly things like Words WIth Friends and Angry Birds, so that extra graphics power would be lost on my for the most part. I have a feeling they needed that "X" part of the chip to drive that display and realized they could use it as a selling point for things like games.
One thing is very apparent in every review about the new iPad that I have read: The iPad 2 is a great device. So great, in fact, even its successor is living in its shadow.

Yup, pretty much. I got the iPad 3, and honestly, besides the Display and LTE, there is nothing different about the iPad 3 from the iPad 2. If you really want the iPad 2, I say go for it. Or hold out til the 4th Gen iPad, maybe that will have more to offer.

Playing games, restarting and loading does not require internet connection. In all these tests the new iPad does not outperform the iPad2 in terms of speed. Pushing more pixels yes but more speed no. Pretty straight forward

You tell them Georgia - I am guessing that is the name you prefer rather than 'she'? ;-)
I was initially going to skip iPad 2 and get an iPad 3 next week but having read your readable and straightforward article, not to mention a few others, I am thinking of moving up to the iPad 2 and wait for next years new iPad. We all know apple will already be designing the next one, tweaking here and tweaking there.
Then again, a friend has suggested that I get an ipad 2 and iPad 3 side by side, but that only gives me one advantage, the screens ;-)
I use my iPad to write, read, email and play Mahjong, so will the iPad 3 give me anything extra from the iPad 2?
Keep the articles coming Georgia, I for one appreciate your viewpoint. We all have different opinions, which is what makes life so interesting ;-)
Cheers from England

Emails are much crisper on the new iPad. I had the 2 also and wOuld not go back. If your going to buy a new iPad spend the extra 100 and get the 3. Much better quality text.
I can't believe people comment without even seeing the new iPad. They probably hav sold tvs with digital tuners and haven't upgraded to HD

Yet, Georgia, you have the new iPad and I guarantee you are not returning it. I know you said on the show you were considering it, but I guarantee once you've stared at the retina display for a week, you can not pick back up your old iPad 2 and continue without noticing the enormity of the pixels.
I disagree with your whole premise. It doesn't have to be "either or." You could be hailing the accomplishment of the new retina display and LTE, while expressing disappointment that they went with A5X over A6.
If you are hat concerned with speed, return the new iPad, and wait for the iPad 4 which will likely be similar to this iPad but quad core. I guarantee you will not return it, the retina display makes a huge difference.

I jus t think that Georgia's picking needles out of haystacks. Its a valid point of wanting the New iPad to be faster but even my play station 3 (that has way more gaming power than my iPad 2) won't allow me to play games instantaneously.
As far as web pages go thats mostly an connection issue unless you think that web pages should appear instantaneously as soon as you hit the search button.

The point is that the new iPad has a good deal more computing power, especially with the GPU and a lot more battery life. If the screen were kept at the same rez as the iPad 2, it would be WAY faster and last a lot longer. Apple choose to throw all those extra resources to drive that new display and just stay even with the iPad 2.
I'm with Georgia, as the iPad 2 is really as good of rez as I really need (roughly the same dpi as all the other computers and laptops I use). On a phone, it makes sense, as you often hold it much closer and are incredibly pressed for screen real-estate. But, I typically have my iPad roughly as far as I'd be away from my LCD at the desk or a laptop anyway. And when I do have it closer, I don't find the rez bothers me (of course, my eyesight isn't what it once was either).

I created an account just to post on this article.... I would not own an iPod were it not for the new retina displays. After moving up to the retina iPhone, I could not stand the lower resolution on the iPad 2. Retina was the only decision for me ...period.

Contrary to this opinion. The iPad 2 not having retina after having an iphone 4 is the reason I waited the whole freaking year to get it. I can't get tired of feeling how fast it is and how beautiful.

I would agree with Georgia . I have now had three new iPads and still not happy. The screen is good but that's it. The LTE only works about half the time. The dictation well let's put it this way again you can not count on it. I use mine to run my business everyday and I need to know that it will work right when I need it. That saided it might be time to go back to the ipad2. I could at least count on the 3G to be there when I needed it.

Turn LTE off. You obviously live on the outskirts of a LTE section. Mine works flawlessly. How's that the iPads fault??? What are you trying to do with dictation that it won't do??? Dictation works just fine. Are you trying to write the next chapter in your book. Here's a hint, quit, um, ummm. If you knew what you wanted to say a spoke it then you'd see it works fine. Giving you're not in a crowded ass restaurant and trying to dictate something. I think you seem to be one of those that'll find fault no matter what.

Well for starters I am not on the edge of the LTE network . Second dictation does work every time and I may try to do a sentence or 2.

Are you with AT&T or VZW? If you're not on the edge of a LTE network then something is not right. Try a restart. I had that issue with mine. I turned it on out of the box and had spotty LTE connectivity (VZW). I did a restart and it's been flawless ever since.

I kinda prefer the retina display over a faster speed. I really like looking at the crystal clear text. I can even read pages without zooming in.

I think Georgia has a point. This update didn't get the speed, it got double the resolution. It's more of a complete ipad 2.
But she should take comfort in the fact that future ipad refreshes will most likely have to do with processor front and center, although i'm sure they'll work on thinner and lighter. The screen is as good as it gets for a long time.
Let's just say future ipad speculation won't be much fun. Faster processor? Check. Thinner & lighter? Sounds good. Improved battery life? Please. Call it a day after that. It's not like Apple will worry about sd slots, usb connections, etc.

The new iPad wasn't made for iPad 2 owners, but for no-iPad or iPad 1 owners. The original iPad was the clay, the subsequent ones have all been the chisel. iPad 4 won't be for iPad 3 owners (though I'm sure the web will have no end of "unimaginative" and "iterative" criticisms for it).
It does lead to an interesting question -- what happens when Apple achieves the exact hardware they've always wanted? They've always said they're a software company who makes hardware only to support that software, but their revenues are based on hardware.
How far can you tweak what's essentially the hardware behind a giant screen? And what do you do when there are no real tweaks left to make? (Transparent aluminum Avatar panels aside...)
Does it become like the iPod, where the base models really don't improve much any more, but something new takes its place?

I'm sure they will keep tweaking the form-factor and look over the years a bit (though, once you get a good design, why change it? Look how long the MacBook has been quite similar.). But, just like with computers, there will always be want for a faster CPU, GPU, more RAM, more storage, new type of interface or camera, etc. especially for the more advanced applications.

"The new iPad wasn’t made for iPad 2 owners, but for no-iPad or iPad 1 owners." - Agreed.
In general, I think most users skip a generation of hardware update of iPads. I forced myself to wait and then made sure that I bought one that was carrier-specific to available LTE coverage in my area. For me, the new iPad is a BIG jump in CPU speed, RAM, Graphics, and a Huge jump in Internet connection speed - not to mention the inclusion of cameras. I couldn't be happier with it!

Thank you. That's what everyone should start off with. The new iPad is not for iPad 2 owners but people with no iPads or iPad 1 like myself.

Or, for people with an iPad 2 who need the extra rez. I have a few friends who do have super-sharp eye-sight who were actually bothered with the iPad 2 when using it up close.
Also, there are some specific industries or applications that need the rez (like medical) or might use the better cameras to scan product UPCs, etc.

I can't believe that people are that impatient that they can't wait 2 seconds for a web page to load. I find it sad. Yeah, faster is always nice but why would that be the only reason to upgrade? I guess I can't relate at all. Retina display had me from the start.

Yea, I don't know how much faster it needs to get. The iPad 2 seems almost there to me for the current level of applications and UI. The iPad 1 certainly left room for improvement. The iPad 2 was well worth the upgrade just for the speed gain. I think if it were to double in performance, it would be more than fast enough for all but the most advanced apps. After that, it just becomes important for power tasks.
This is the same as laptops and desktops. They are now generally fast enough for all but power apps, in that the UI is plenty snappy enough and typical apps are plenty fast. This used to not be the case 10 years ago... and certainly wasn't for the first-gen tablets.

I wish I could afford any iPad let alone complain about how my new iPad disappoints me because it is equally as fast as my old iPad 2. This article made me feel poor :(

They aren't inexpensive for sure, but in the realm of computers, they aren't out of reach of the typical computer buyer. If you can't afford a computer, then that is understandable. I think many of us have been there. I remember the days of counting change and deciding between the gas station and a burrito. I hope your situation improves.

First off your site is great I have used it several times for i-related things. But you have got to be kidding right? Is this a test to see how trolling works if started by the author instead comments from readers? Wanting slightly faster load times (cause that is what it would be to be instantaneous) on web pages over stunning graphics and text is like wanting the lag removed on DVRs when switching channels on HD TV over the incredible graphics we now can't live without. If you want faster channel surfing go back to a tube tv I dare ya.

I think Georgia is underestimating the impact of the incredible new screen. The old 1024x768 resolution just wasn't good enough for me. That's why I never got an iPad. Just didn't get there for me.
But to be able to get an industry-leading screen, with a vastly more powerful GPU, at the same price? Sold. I'll be getting an iPad in the next few months.

Can't wait to see what's next since I have the 2 and have no want or need for the current iPad. Scared to see what the next iPhone is since I already have a 4S I'm thinking the. Next phone will just be LTE...

I have been listening to the iPhone/iPad live for a while. Though I do not agree with your point as I would prefer better display and usability instead of raw CPU power if apps don't take advantage of them (I have horrible experience with the Galaxy Tab claimed better CPU power ended up cannot even do a smooth screen rotate).
However, I use a lot more on my iPhone 4 than my ipad2, upgrading ipad2 to new iPad is not my current consideration.
For this, I don't agree with you, but it does not mean I will rush for the new iPad.

We did get a faster iPad quad-core graphics 4x as fast. And LTE faster data. But what we really want is optimized performance or quad-core (SOC).
Also we will never get a web that loads instantly or apps or games that load in seconds it will always fell slower.
And if you want spec pissing match go to androidcentral and buy a Transformer Prime plus

Transformer Prime is better than the new iPad in most every way, other than screen, and that will be handled shortly with the release of the new TP. Matter of fact, the Motorola Xoom outperforms the iPad, also.

I tend to agree. Fatter, heavier, less battery life, and no faster - I don't think Steve Jobs would have released it...

From what I gather reading about his "reality distortion field" it would have gone something like this:
SJ: You're all d**kless idiots. I want it thinner, faster, and battery life that's twice as long.
Engineers/Designers: Steve, that's impossible. Literally. For REAL this time.
SJ: I want a prototype to play with by this Thursday
Thursday comes
SJ: (holding operational prototype) See? Told you we could do it.
Engineers/Designers: Sure, we just had to create a few new periodic elements, and...
SJ: (interrupting) Why isn't Siri 100% functional yet?
Tim Cook: (mumbling in corner) ...something something Amazing something something...

Justify your purchase all you want, but Jesus... the woman just stated her opinion. A "retina display" is easier to market and advertise as the new must-have thing, compared to a faster CPU - which people tend to expect at every product launch. Plain and simple. Some of you Apple fanatics are hilarious: you scream about how "specs don't matter - it's the user experience", but when an Apple user (and fan) suggests that HER user experience would've benefitted by a different avenue taken by the company, all of a sudden she's "unknowledgeable". Comedy.
I happen to agree with Georgia on this, and while I enjoy my retina iPad and hardly find it 'unbearably slow' for my needs, a speed increase would've been more welcomed IF I had to choose between the two upgrades. Faster device, smaller file/app sizes (one of my apps went from 89MB to 483MB, with the only improvements listed being "includes support for the new iPad retina display"), dramatically-increased battery life... and for the love of God, improve the Facetime camera, if you're gonna update either of them. For a device that is essentially all screen, I won't try to undersell the importance of an HD screen, however at its size the previous resolution was more than sufficient. (See? The same argument for the improved screen can be made for a faster processor.) I also agree that the next iteration will see a slimming down of the chassis, as well as a more powerful CPU. Forget haptic feedback - not happening.
If iOS 6 has half of what I'm hoping for, a 'faster' iPad would've served people far better than this detailed screen. I would hate to think that this new iPad (and iPad 2) may have similar issues with the new upcoming iOS that many original iPad owners experienced on iOS 5.

Hi Goergia
I am in your camp also as my EVO 4G on Sprint here in Florida is painfully Slow as a WIFI. hotspot. It would be nice if they could switch the quad graphics density off and on, but I would guess this would take logic design change vs. Software change.
I also have the iPad2 and HTC FLYER with BT Scribe pen input which works well for things like draw something if I had artistic skills. The Flyer gets a lot more use than iPad because I carry with me in a front pocket all the time. I mean ALL THE TIME. Carrying the iPad is just to bulky, but works fine around the house if sitting at table or laying on my lap. It is almost like a laptop as I use a BT keyboard with it if typing alot. Laying in bed, the Flyer is definitely preferred over iPad or just use phone if I am listening to your podcasts as video is slow for me.
It would be nice to have Rene have a hybrid podcast that was mainly audio and insert static images when you have something to show. For example, I am looking forward to your review of pen inputs and would like to see them with good resolution.
Enough for now. Keep up the good work. I like your open attitude. ffastffrank
PS. Have you heard of FoxFi hotspot for some androids? No rooting required.

I actually bought an i Pad2 this week. My 50+ eyes don't see the separate pixels anyway and it will be 2014 before LTE comes to my country. I'm not unhapppy about the 2's speed: I wanted space! A 128 or 256 GB iPad was on my Christmas wishlist. Since it's not forthcoming, why not take advantage of the stock clearance sales going on at the moment?

I did the same thing. I do care about resolution, but that alone wasn't enough to persuade me to spend more on an otherwise pretty similar device. The other selling point, 4G capability, is useless to me as I live in Europe where 4G either runs on frequencies the iPad doesn't support or isn't available at all. Hopefully the next iPad (whatever it will be called) will have a gorgeous retina screen AND be faster and have more storage.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion but this is pretty ridiculous. First of all the iPad 2 and the new iPad are plenty fast, and at some point there is a limit to how fast pages can be delivered to a device. There are other components involved such as the router, modem and ISP that determine Internet speed. It's not a fault of the iPad.
How you can work for an iPhone/ iPad focused tech site and not consider a major advance in screen technology a worthy upgrade is beyond me. These devices are all about the screen.
Maybe you should consider a different line of work.

And thus Georgia, you have mentioned the reason why I opted for the iPad 2 versus the iPad. Between the fact that the new iPad is no faster than iPad 2 and the price drop, I opted for the iPad 2. I am a designer, amateur photographer, and artist, but also a musician and thus speed is very important to me. My Macbook Pro is lightening fast compared to any Windows Laptop I've ever used. My iPhone 4S blew away my old HTC EVO. But the new iPad isn't faster and thus, just wasn't worth getting. Nice Retina display, but I was looking for a Quad core CPU, not Quad core graphics without a Quad Core CPU.

You say you're these things but as someone whose business comes from images. I'd think you'd be willing to spend the extra bucks and the precious few seconds(seeing how the 3rd gen is just as fast most of the time) to have a better showcase for your work. There just isn't any comparison between displays.

Perhaps you need a Retina display. I do not, hence, I got the iPad 2 because that fulfilled my needs. Everyone doesn't have the same needs. We're all different people. Some of us read articles and agree or disagree. Others need to work on their English before responding to comments on the Internet. Either way, I got what worked for me and it wasn't the new iPad.

A Writer dares to post an article that isn't a giggling fan girl epic of love for the new iPad and you don't like it? Go read CNET. They gush about the new iPad. It's called choice and if this article didn't do it for you, throw your iPad at the wall and go to Android Central or better yet, read up on how RIM is choking today. Journalism is on occasion, the writing of opinion pieces. You don't have to agree with everything you read, but you can disagree in a respectful manner, no?
Great article Georgia. I agree with you. The new iPad isn't faster and thus, would be a let down for anyone wanting a faster iPad.

How fast do you need it. I don't see it being a set back in the least. If you're near a good wifi source, pages load instantly. If you're bitching about it being fast for business, almost all apps load within 2 seconds. I don't understand the need for some to say they "need" a faster iPad. I use mine for business every day. In the morning I close all apps that don't do with my daily routine. Safari,Goodreader,iPad,iBooks,Mail,and my company's app stays open and in memory all day. Once they are loaded they are instainous in switching fro one to the other. The speed is there. Utilize it and the screen is worth everything. What's the one thing you're always doing when using the iPad??????

I agree with Georgia's perspective and disagree with yours. If you're happy with your new iPad, then great. I'm happy with my iPad 2. It fits my needs. What you will not find is me bitching on some internet forum at someone for not agreeing with my choice in iPad2 and criticizing someone on the internet for choosing a different product than mine or having a different perspective than mine. I don't live in Russia or China, where there is no individuality and expressing a perspective that differs from yours might be considered a crime. The new iPad wasn't necessary for my needs, irregardless of the Retina display or your opinion. The iPad 2 fills my needs and I neither make any apologies for that perspective, nor do I really care if you agree with me or not. I support and agree with Georgia's article. You don't. Go read CNET. They love the new iPad there.

They had to sacrifice the processor to give us the Retina Display and the LTE radios with almost the same battery life. If people are complaining right now about their iPad getting warm imagine with the A6 processor. People is never going to be satisfied
Another thing, you guys should make a poll to see what the people should had preferred, Retina or Speed.

Buffering happens, blame your ISP and the source. iPad 2 was fast, the new iPad is fast.
The new screen with what appears to be the same speed?
Totally worth it.

And I want to have chip integrated to my brains.
Nothing is enough for consumer it seems in these days.
Look at the size of the product you are holding, you can´t have everything in it - it´s not PC Box, it would overheat with too heavy hardware.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the problem that I have about Georgia's is that her opinion discounts one of the Major features of the new iPad and my personal favorite (LTE). She has a WiFi only iPad so her reasoning comes off as un-informed. She doesn't know what she's missing with LTE (and neither do LTE iPad owners who don't live in LTE (not HSPA+) coverage areas). Opinions are fine, but at least give an Informed Opinion. If she had an LTE iPad in LTE overage area) and still said that she would've preferred CPU speed over connection speed, then okay. Many new iPad owners who didn't think that LTE would be a big deal to them are displaying the exact behavior given by her Henry Ford quote - they didn't know how they wanted it until they got it. I would advise people on the fence to spend some time using LTE on a new iPad (maybe at an Apple Store if possible) and then turning the LTE switch off to compare. Many people say that they can't go bak from Retina Display and I love that too (I'm big on photos), but LTE is far & away the biggest jump for me and the feature that I can't go back from. For someone who doesn't like waiting, as Georgia describes herself, it's very strange to hear such an argument. The difference between 3G & LTE (specifically, not other flavors of 4G) is Huge - at least 10X faster and in many cases much more. That jump in connection speed is more impactful (to me) than the CPU jump - I'm coming from an iPad 1 to a 3. If LTE isn't available, then okay, that's an okay argument for personal preference of buying one I guess, but to say that the Apple should've chosen to offer a faster CPU over this much of a jump in Internet connection speed sounds like someone who hasn't experienced LTE (on a battery-efficient device) or someone who doesn't use the Internet much on their iPad.

I agree with EsJay for the most part. I own an (wifi only) iPad 2 and plan on purchasing the New iPad mainly because of its LTE connectivity. To be able to use an iPad with the same connectivity speeds i have at home is major jump for me. Throw in the retina display, camera, and I have to say that its a pretty substantial up grade.

You're going to love it, CarolinaMic.
One thing that I forgot to point out is that I was pleasantly surprised to discover that my LTE connection is Twice as Fast as my WiFi connection at home!

Georgia's article is about the WiFi iPad, so it isn't uninformed about THAT. Georgia's article has nothing to do with the LTE iPad and claiming it's uninformed about LTE has nothing to do with what the article is ACTUALLY about- Her perspective on the speed of the WiFi iPad. She spoke of load times for web pages, programs, and games. That deals with how the CPU loads software. To a point, that also deals with how fast web pages are rendered. Perhaps she expected more speed from the quad core graphics and that is the source of the disappointment, but none of that has anything to do with the LTE iPad, so even bringing LTE into the discussion is adding an element that isn't even in the article, thus making your claim that her opinion is "uninformed" due to not making this article about a completely different subject (LTE iPad), invalid.

LTE is very much a part of the article. The whole premise of the article is that Georgia would've preferred for Apple to have NOT included support for a faster network (LTE) & Retina Display in the new iPad since they use processor resources that would've been available for extra processor speed.
Georgia wrote,
"For me, instead of supporting a double density display or a faster network, I would have loved the extra power of that Apple A5X chipset and that extra RAM to do one thing and one thing only — make my iPad faster."
The article makes sense for activities on the iPad where that added processor speed would impact performance more-so than the added speed that LTE gives over 3G (and WiFi). Basically games and processor-intensive activities fall into this category. But not surfing the Internet. The speed-jump that LTE gives is more impactful for Internet browsing.
Georgia says, "I watch lower resolution videos because I hate waiting for streaming to start or buffering to finish."
LTE eliminates the need to sacrifice resolution for streaming speed. Watching video over LTE and not having to wait so long for buffering (because of the increased bandwidth of LTE) is one of the biggest differences that I notice in my new iPad.
Georgia states early in the article that she has "a Wi-Fi iPad so LTE isn’t a consideration for me."
I guess that's a way of countering the point that she knew would stand in contrast to her point. It partially does, but if speed is the important thing to her, then why wouldn't she choose an LTE iPad. She isn't saying that cost is the issue - she's strictly making a case for performance. Anyway, it's an opinion piece so I respect her opinion - I just don't see how her reasoning (hate to wait) supports her opinion (preference of the absence of Retina Display & LTE for increased (Internet) speed. Commenters also have the right to disagree with opinion pieces, so there's no reason to be offended by our comments.

Your LTE is not all it crackup to be. One not all areas have the same speed. Second your LTE hand off is not the greatest. If you use your iPad in the car watch it the signal will drop out. I know I used mine for last week. I can tell you how many times I have seen on my screen NO DATA CONNECTION ,

The difference in LTE Internet connection speed & 3G is huge - at least 10X when compared using (website or app). Of course, if you have bad (or no) LTE coverage in your area, then it does you no good. One huge factor, which was a huge differentiator when buying mine, is which carrier-specific model iPad you have. Only one of the two available carriers has LTE in my area. While AT&T has 4G in the form of HSPA+ rolled out in many areas, it only has 4G LTE rolled out in about 25 cities right now - and LTE is MUCH faster than HSPA+ even though they're both considered '4G). Verizon has LTE rolled out in over 300 cities. I would advise anyone to find out which carrier (if any) has the best LTE coverage in your area before buying one of the two carrier-specific LTE iPads because LTE does you no good without LTE coverage. A good app to find out coverage areas is 'Coverage?'.

Georgia, I must say, I am surprised by the coherence of this article and the use of valid claims and concerns.

I understand the basic idea of the article, but it leaves out a significant element: Apple released an upgraded iPad at the SAME PRICE POINT.
I could see the complaint if Apple sold the New iPad $100 for $200 more. But in this case, it just sounds like whining.

Georgia's article has nothing to do with Apple selling the new iPad with a Retina display for the same price. That isn't the topic of the article. The topic is her perspective on the speed of it's quad core graphics in rendering web pages and the perception of software load times. The price of the new iPad relative to it's technology upgrades is a different topic that has nothing to do with this article. A completely different discussion, just as a discussion about the perception of LTE iPads (which she doesn't even have. Hers is WIFI ONLY), is invalid.

Hey Rene,
I'd be curious what percentage of the buying public can consistently tell the difference between the iPad 2 and new iPad based on screen resolution during normal, every day use.
For me the boost in resolution between iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 was obvious, but having compared the new iPad and iPad 2 at Best Buy, I had to look in settings to confirm which was which. Now granted, they weren't "almost touching" side by side, which may have made it more obvious, but the question remains how many of us can really tell when using the device day to day?
In a perfect world -- where marketing didn't matter, my guess is the answer to that question would mean a bump in processor speed and battery life would be more universally valued.

I don't know what the deal was with your and test just now. I just did the same thing with my wife's old iPad 2 and my new iPad and both were a hair faster on the new iPad.
I think that was an aberration.

I couldn't agree more. There is nothing about the new iPad that is a serious draw for me, and I'm still using an iPad 1 because it does exactly what I need. I, like you, would simply like it to do exactly what it does now twice as fast.

How much faster do you want it?!? I've owned all 3 iPads and every iPhone. This iPad is the fastest one yet. And even if the new iPad is "slow" how much faster can it get with the applications currently in production? .0008 ms faster? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

And for what it's worth, I'm really glad you new iPad owners are so happy, but it's not a religion guys, it's a tablet. Georgia not agreeing with you isn't going to send her to hell. Having an opinion that doesn't jibe with yours doesn't make her wrong or confused. It makes you pricks.

What you said bears repeating.
One would think we were discussing religion, politics, sexual preference, or people's weight, in this discussion. A young women bought a new iPad and is disappointed because she had expectations that were not met. HER EXPECTATIONS. NOT MINE. NOT anyone else's. She doesn't have to explain herself or apologize to anyone for having a perspective that differs from anyone else's. Some of the responses here are from people who seriously need to take a chill pill, switch to Decafe, and find a better way to relax than arguing over someone else's opinion differing from theirs. I watched the Keynote along with everyone else and while the Retina display is impressive along with the fact that LTE is now available in the USA for the new iPad, neither of those upgrades impressed me enough to make me want the new iPad. I got the iPad two. Some will agree with that choice. Others will not. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter who agrees or disagrees with her take on the speed of the new iPad. It's her opinion and she's entitled to write an opinion piece on this site about it. Anyone who doesn't like it, doesn't have to read it. Again, CNET Gushes about the iPad daily. Go read there. There are plenty of Type A's over there for several rounds of pointless opinion arguments.

I agree with everything you said except the last sentence. Quite hypocritical don't you think?
Georgia is entitled to her opinion, as is everyone else. Doesn't make em pricks tho. Let's play nice.

While a few people sure would have been happy if Apple had released an entirely different iPad, or perhaps two new versions (which actually would have been however many versions Apple has to make already, times two), the reality is - it didn't happen. We get the products we get.
If Apple had made a new iPad with the old screen plus the new iPad with the retina screen, what would they have cost? The same price? That's ridiculous. Anyone buying the low res screen version would have cried foul since they would be getting less tech for the same price. Would Apple have to sell the low res version for less than $499? That's silly too. If anything, this would have led to an increase in the base price for the new retina iPad.
It makes no sense for Apple to start complicating their iPad strategy. At least, not yet. Not while the platform is so young and the buyers are so new to it. Most people have never owned an iPad yet. The worst thing Apple could do for customers who are new to the iPad is complicate the process of picking one.

Well, you can't please everyone. Coming from the iPad 1, I am pleased with the iPad 3's performance. The Retina display is a huge battery drain and personally, I would choose Retina+10 hr battery life over increased clock speed+decreased battery life. Users that demand more raw performance will have to wait for the iPad 3S/4 when Apple will have figured out how to include a Retina display + A6 processor + 4G LTE without compromising battery life. Overall, I believe Apple made the appropriate design decisions for the iPad 3 and if you are not satisfied with the product then you can always vote "no" with your wallet.

As a sidebar, if pure raw clock speed performance is what you're looking for, then go with an Android tablet. If you are after the user experience and Retina display, then choose Apple.

The problem is that the OS really sucks on Android tablets. One of my good friends has one of the best Android tablets made and it bugs him to the point that he hardly ever uses it. He's shown me videos of him using it, and I can certainty see what he means. Even the way it responds to touch and picks things on-screen is a pain. Basically, it's a really poor user experience, but it has little to do with Retina display. The Retina display is just kind of like icing on the cake.

I agree wholeheartedly. The user experience on Android tablets is nowhere near as good as on the iPad. However, Android's focus is not on the user experience like it is for iOS. Instead, Android tablet manufacturers focus on raw clock speed performance and desktop-like functionality. My point is that Apple makes design decisions that favor user experience (e.g. Retina display, faster graphics, uncompromising battery life) over raw clock speed performance, and as the market currently stands if you want a tablet that focuses on raw clock speed performance you can always vote Android with your wallet.

I agree with Georgia. I would much rather have a thinner, faster iPad 2 with better battery life or 120gb than a retina display. Different people look for different thing, that doesn't one is better than the other. Any chance Apple might decide to release an upgraded iPad 2 with the specs if the Ipad 3 minus the retina display ?

What about people who only want the new screen but don't need the massive battery or faster processor? Ooh, ooh, I know! Apple should specifically make iPads geared toward them too. Then, when a new customer goes into an Apple Store, they'd be faced with a myriad of new iPads and options to figure out.
Or, how about this: instead of three entirely different kinds of new iPads (Awesome screen but slower with less battery life / So-so screen but faster with huge battery / Decked out version with everything) maybe Apple should just make THE NEW iPAD with the best of the best even if it outperforms the needs of some people?
That's what I'd do if I were at Apple. Come to think of it, that's what Apple did. It just makes sense.
I mean no offense, but the more I think about it, the more ridiculous this article is. Sometimes, iMore really does a great job of providing excellent well thought out content. Other times, we get stuff like this.

Agreed and well said. From a journalistic perspective this article is of poor quality. However, if the author's intent was to spark lively discussion, then the piece served that purpose.

As much as the new iPad looks great with its amazing retina display, it's not very much to fall back on. My friends all ask me if they should upgrade their iPad 2 to the new iPad and the real truth answer is. Do you NEED it? I made the mistake of buying an iPad 1 because I wanted one but I soon realized that I didn't need one at all. My iPhone 4S was incredibly sufficient enough to fulfill my everyday needs for Internet means. I also asked my friend to bring along his iPad 2 and bring it to AT&T to compare both devices and it is definitely noticeable with the new iPad having a nicer display. I am currently waiting on what the next iPad will have to offer because that's what we all would like to see is the next and new iDevice from Apple. Also people who say "You can't make everyone happy" I mean seriously, humans have opinions and it's not like everyone is going to buy "every" little thing puts out on the table. If I had an iPad 2, I would NOT buy the new iPad considering its not much of an upgrade. People use the retina display more of an excuse but you didn't see millions of people complaining about the iPad 2's screen. It's an opinion and I believe both devices are amazing, just have to look at with a little more perspective from where you stand with what device you own and if each new device is really a "want" or "need".

I couldnt be happier with my new iPad. The screen is a huge deal to me--always has been. People act like they can do without it but its the most important thing if you ask me. I skipped the iPad 2 but just because my husband wanted one for himself (he didnt have iPad 1) and I figured ok, I can wait till the next one to upgrade. It was a long hard wait for me. I was so jealous of my dear hubby with his gorgeous iPad 2. What made it gorgeous to me? The screen. It was so much brighter than my old iPad. I loved the slim form factor and the camera capabilities. Everytime he face timed or skyped on it while all I could do with mine is was torture! Now I have an even better screen than his and this really awesome camera to boot for the same price he paid for his! No complaints from me whatsoever! Georgia, I'm sorry you aren't as thrilled as I am.

I Agree with you.
A better screen is NICE! BUT. Sad to say content are always falling behind the resolution of the display. Even apps at retina resolution, may not be truly pixel perfect. I hate to wait to load and rather stream at a lower resolution. LTE is not fully international standardized and the rates are $$$.
HEY for that kind of resolution. They should make things on springboard SMALLER. Like allow more icons on same page!

This should be filed under the obvious category, same processor same processing speed, whoot what a surprise. And 4x graphical power to push 4x the pixels, same speed, again, damn obvious.

In the 50s our Good Humor truck was a tired Chevrolet conversion. Once my brother kept the driver busy while I flooded the truck by pumping the heck out of the gas pedal. While the driver was trying to get the truck started, the kid down the street was screaming for ice cream but ran in the house when the frazzled driver finally got there. We were rotten.

Often times I knit to relax. I find many of the patterns available nice but occasionally I make up my own patterns. It takes a bit of the relaxing nature of knitting out of the project but I still find it fun. I am always much more confident when knitting from a pattern even though I know it is not uncommon to find mistakes in printed patterns.

Great weblog right here! Also your website so much up fast! What web host are you using? Can I am getting your affiliate link for your host? I wish my site loaded up as quickly as yours lol

I enjoy, result in I discovered just what I used to be having a look for. You've ended my four day lengthy hunt! God Bless you man. Have a great day. Bye