How much RAM

[charm]

AQ

Some might say that my use of the famous Sherlock Holmes expression made it clear that I "found " the specs thru a process of logical deduction
Some other might even say only the obtuse would consider it lying

 

[charm]

F4780y

It is excusable. But to an old guy like me who still misses DOS and edlin , new does not always mean improved. A more recent example would be thr new coke fiasco

 

[charm]

Skull1

Thanks for the iOS apps explication. That does not seem to bode well for ipad2 users with their 512MB for future better apps

 

[Skull One]

Ah yes, New Coke.....

A ruse to allow them to switch from pure sugar to corn syrup. Such a sad time for cola drinkers in the US. Luckily my local store still carries Coke made in Mexico that uses the old formula with pure sugar.

 

[Skull One]

Skull1

Thanks for the iOS apps explication. That does not seem to bode well for ipad2 users with their 512MB for future better apps

Yes and no. This becomes subjective, in a sense, because of the iPad mini. Once we find out how close the mini is to the iPad 2 in architecture, then we should be able to extrapolate the overall ramifications.

Currently, I am of the opinion that the iPad mini will give the iPad 2 at least two more years of life from today.

 

[Kaykaykay]

Currently, I am of the opinion that the iPad mini will give the iPad 2 at least two more years of life from today.

That would be nice. My iPad 1 is showing its age -- RAM crashes and slowness. I see hints in my iPad 2 (original iPad 2) as well. IOS 5 led to crashes, which were greatly eased by 5.1 and 5.1.1, but there are still signs of slowing. And I haven't even updated iPad 2 to iOS 6 and won't indefinitely.

 

[AQ_OC]

AQ

Some might say that my use of the famous Sherlock Holmes expression made it clear that I "found " the specs thru a process of logical deduction
Some other might even say only the obtuse would consider it lying

Yeah, only the liars would say that.

 

[Sleaka J]

Okay finally got specs: 1GB LPDDR2 RAM. Plus twice the CPU performance and twice the graphics performance over ipad3 due to ARM cortex A15 Eagle engine
Charm

The A6 series is a custom ARM chip, it is not the cortex A15.

 

[biobunny]

Apparently the A6 chip has dynamic clocking speeds. I don't think 2GB of RAM would do so much. And Unix was successful because it was cheap, not because it was great. Go read the Unix Haters Handbook (It was made free legally).

Sent from K48AP, the classic

 

[Skull One]

Unix was far from cheap since Apple paid for a perpetual license and has done all development in house since then.

Can count on one hand how many OSes that don't have hater books on them. And all of them were mainframe OSes. Well there are Military OSes that have no books on them, but that is because they have never been seen by civilians. Plus I can't legally speak about them specifically . So a Unix hater book not only doesn't impress me, I would consider it the norm.

 

[biobunny]

Unix was far from cheap since Apple paid for a perpetual license and has done all development in house since then.

Can count on one hand how many OSes that don't have hater books on them. And all of them were mainframe OSes. Well there are Military OSes that have no books on them, but that is because they have never been seen by civilians. Plus I can't legally speak about them specifically . So a Unix hater book not only doesn't impress me, I would consider it the norm.

The Unix Haters handbook gives logical reasons on why Unix sucks (in that decade) because almost nothing worked properly. It's a nice read too, and if you're a *nix or unix user (OSX is officially Unix) then it's nice to know about it's history too. The early Unix' were cheap, what happened afterwards was that while FOSS started going huge, the propierty UNIX got in battle over standards and when the standards were developed, it became expensive to label your OS Unix.

Sent from K48AP, the classic

 

[Skull One]

The Unix Haters handbook gives logical reasons on why Unix sucks (in that decade) because almost nothing worked properly. It's a nice read too, and if you're a *nix or unix user (OSX is officially Unix) then it's nice to know about it's history too. The early Unix' were cheap, what happened afterwards was that while FOSS started going huge, the propierty UNIX got in battle over standards and when the standards were developed, it became expensive to label your OS Unix.

Sent from K48AP, the classic

LOL. I have been programming since 1983. Went full time professional in 85. AIX, Sun, Xenix and HP/UX since 86/87. And I lived it by doing it 14 hours a day for my first two decades as programmer, analysts and technician. So forgive me for not taking that book seriously when there were no real other options on the table.

Seriously. Microsoft was a Xenix shop to being with. And they wrote Windows so they didn't have to use it any more. Look how that turned it out. Most insecure OS in history. BTW I still have a working set of floppies for a Xenix install just to remind me of how good things used to be before Windows.

 

[AQ_OC]

Seriously. Microsoft was a Xenix shop to being with. And they wrote Windows so they didn't have to use it any more. Look how that turned it out. Most insecure OS in history. BTW I still have a working set of floppies for a Xenix install just to remind me of how good things used to be before Windows.

While I don't disagree, MS did have some issues making development of Windows harder than a ground-up development would have been. First, the notion of the internet didn't really exist, so the notion that things needed to be locked down wasn't even a notion. And of course, they had to maintain support for legacy hardware and software - the result of being the leader, but still a huge burden. Of course, what they put us through in those days would get them collective hanged by the eye-lids today. But I think people threat MS poorly compared to other OSes that didn't have the burdens that MS had to carry.

 

[Skull One]

While I don't disagree, MS did have some issues making development of Windows harder than a ground-up development would have been. First, the notion of the internet didn't really exist, so the notion that things needed to be locked down wasn't even a notion. And of course, they had to maintain support for legacy hardware and software - the result of being the leader, but still a huge burden. Of course, what they put us through in those days would get them collective hanged by the eye-lids today. But I think people threat MS poorly compared to other OSes that didn't have the burdens that MS had to carry.

I have been using the Internet since 1986. MS was one of the companies that was on the original back bone in the 80s. Heck I remember editing our host list for them while I was still in the USAF because DNS wasn't even spun up 100% back then. Windows 1 was released in 85 and Windows 2 in '87. Both of them could have been written for the internet and weren't. In fact the single largest event that should have gotten MS' undivided attention, because they were affected by it, was the Morris Worm from '88 (was active duty at that time and watched it cause a huge panic at NORAD). So MS watched the computer industry grow and simply didn't care enough to learn from the very events it was living thru.

Their thought process back then was very clear. If everyone didn't have it, they didn't need to care about it. So back in the day when 150 and 300 baud modems were the norm and maybe 1 out of every 1000 PCs had one, they didn't want to care. That line of thought lasted until 2001. And by then it was to late because they had already designed Windows 2000's Ring 0, 1/2 and 3 so poorly that they didn't know how to fix it much less how to do it right even if they went back to the drawing board. BTW, they finally got a clue with Windows 7.

The burden you speak of was brought upon them by them because they never learned from the past or could even remotely predict the future. Just look at how long it took them to make Windows Phone 8 and Surface if you want any conclusive proof that they don't understand how to deal with the future much less react to the present.

And supporting legacy hardware would be easy if they wrote proper code. Linux distributions today still work on PCs built over a decade ago because they understand how to do it right.

BTW, Install Windows 8 over Windows XP and watch what happens to your installed Programs. Heck install Windows 8 over Windows Release Preview and watch what happens to your installed programs. MS has no clue how to do things properly based on those two facts alone.

 

[charm]

As promised, I'm am back to confess error on the RAM etc. My "brilliant deduction" turned out to be more like the bumbling Inspector Clouseau than Sherlock Holmes. AQ, please serve me up the crow platter well done.
This breakdown iPad 4 Teardown Reveals A6X Chip With 1GB RAM, LG Display site claims

• Apple A6X Processor
• Hynix H2JTDG8UD2MBR 16 GB NAND Flash
• 2 x 4Gb Elpida LP DDR2 = 1 GB DRAM in two packages

I still think 2GB would have been cool.
Charm