Who here ordered the iPad pro ?
Can't wait til mines arrive
>>53681786
English much, you corporate cuck?
>>53681815
can't wait til mines arrive :^^^^)
Why didn't they just call it "iPad Air 3"?
>>53681866
Pen support, smart keyboard and a better display.
redidit
>>53681786
>Can't wait til mines arrive
It won't change because you have an applel product...
Ordered the iPad Mini 4 64gb instead for $390
How did I do?
>admitting you're gay
>dat A9X
well done OP
>>53682282
Do you prefer 7.9 or the 9.7 inch screen
>ipad pro
>ARM processor
>pro
>>53682400
It doesn't matter to me. They're both the same resolution and seem great at showing textbooks.
>>53682449
I'm debating or not to buy the mini or the 9.7 tablet. I mostly want to use it as a e reader but the pen support seems nice
>tfw you will never be stupid enough to feel the pure joy of owning an apple product
>>53682481
Best buy currently has the mini for $100 discount. That pretty much was the deciding factor for me.
>>53681786
I have arrived with your mines, comrade.
>>53682439
>memes
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/11/ipad-pro-review-mac-like-speed-with-all-the-virtues-and-limitations-of-ios/4/#h2
http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles/15/11/12/apples-new-ipad-pro-is-faster-more-affordable-than-microsofts-surface-pro-4
>>53682684
the problem is ARM
>>53682684
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3006268/tablets/tested-why-the-ipad-pro-really-isnt-as-fast-a-laptop.html
>>53682684
You don't get it do you? ARM is inferior and less energy efficient than x86. When you're paying $1,000+ for fucking tablet the least you could get is a shitty cherry trail SoC.
The iPad pro can't run OS X or any x86 software at all.
It's literally an oversized iphone. Might get 120fps on angry birds but that's about it.
>>53682781
>arm can't run x86
Fucking duh. Neither can Intel chips run power PC code, or vice versa. Which is why Apple made its Rosetta Stone software.
It's funny when benchmarks point in the favor of non Apple everyone loves them, but when it's the other way around " muh arm meme" gets thrown.
>>53681786
I like the iPads the most of all tablets i have tried. I have a nexus 7 tablet, 2 cheap chinese, and am about to recieve a free win10 tablet. My friend once borrowed an iPad to me and it was enjoyable.
Sent from my iPhone.
>>53682825
>Fucking duh. Neither can Intel chips run power PC code, or vice versa. Which is why Apple made its Rosetta Stone software.
They actually can (emulation). ARM can also run x86 code but with a huge bottleneck.
>It's funny when benchmarks point in the favor of non Apple everyone loves them, but when it's the other way around " muh arm meme" gets thrown.
Because x86 is the best cpu architecture to date, why do you think over 90% of servers/supercomputers use x86 (specifically AMD64).
>>53682781
>arm less efficient than x86
holy shit this is some kind of advanced retardation.
>>53682781
>or any x86 software at all.
It's not IBM PC compatible? Does it not run MS-DOS 3.0 or later? Does it not even have a Sound Blaster 16 or compatible?
Surely it runs Lotus Notes and VisiCalc? How can a device be considered pro without it?
>>53682950
It's true though, something armcucks don't want you to know is the ipad pro barely has better battery life than the surface pro 4 DESPITE having twice the battery capacity.
>>53682684
>more affordable than a surface pro 4
>can't even run a full version of photoshop, not to mention the hundreds of other applications it can't run
>can't install stuff outside of the app store
Buying an iPhone is one thing, but buying a locked down tablet and saying it is just as good as an actual computer (SP4) is something completely different.
>>53682950
Sorry to burst your bubble but it's true.
>>53683219
You post this same bullshit every time an ARM device is mentioned. Is Intel paying you to shill x86? Or did you just buy a Surface RT and get burned?
Because as a disinterested observer your behaviour makes no sense. If x86 was indeed leagues better than ARM then all phones and tablets would use x86 chips. They don't, because it isn't.
>>53683320
x86 processors tend to generate more heat dipshit
>>53683365
Because they use more power. More power usage = more heat.
>>53683425
x86 is inherently superior though. ARM can execute x86 code but at an extreme bottleneck, not to mention you have no chance of using OSX or even windows on it.
>>53683320
Phones and tablets use ARM because it's CHEAPER. They could use skylake core-m chips (android can run on x86) but don't because it would make phones expensive as hell.
>>53683459
>muh 1970s corporations use this architecture therefore it must be the best
>>53681786
Using a product image with Helvetica Neue. Apple logo off center. Vignette on all corners.
Yep it's made by a teenager who just learned how to use Photoshop.
>>53683459
Why would I want to run a non tablet os on a tablet? I've used a surface and while the hardware is great the software is terrible. Normal Windows applications are garbage with a touch screen and the metro apps are barely half as good as android/ios.
>>53683680
>Why would I want to run a non tablet os on a tablet?
What is a tablet OS other than a rehashed phone OS?
Why would I want to use an OS designed for a 4" device on a 10" device? They don't even let you have more icons on the desktop.
desu disregarding retardation in this thread, ARM is not much "inherently better" than x86 in terms of energy efficiency (they both suck, and even ARM64 is not much better).
Of course intel has a fab advantage and much more resources to throw at engineering. But A9X is incredibly strong too (thank you for the shit-wrecking Jim Keller). At the end of the day the results are not too dissimilar.
I'm glad Intel can't get into mobile because the last thing we need is $800 phones with $400 SOCs, fortunately it doesn't look like they'll ever achieve that because they've burned enough partners already that everybody has learned the lesson and the only design wins they score are the ones where they give the chips away for free (and the Surface, because MS is fucked and has no other choice - enjoy your nosales)
>>53683955
>I'm glad Intel can't get into mobile because the last thing we need is $800 phones with $400 SOCs
Too late and the 4GB RAM/64GB ROM zenfone 2 is only $300.
intel doesn't need to push phones with core-m chips like the dumbass up there was talking about, they just need to release goldmont atom SoCs. They do that and convince samshit or Asus to use it on their phones and intel will win especially since people will realize how good the battery life on the phones will be.
You have to remember that old 22nm x86 silvermont cores used on the zenfone 2 match or exceed performance of krait 400 cores and are more energy efficient and miles more powerful than Cortex A53 cores. Goldmont atoms will be on 14nm process and will be significantly better over airmont atoms (which is just a dieshrink of silvermont btw).
>>53683193
This.
>>53684137
Do you know that Samsung is a fab, and they make their own SOCs? It's literally impossible for Intel to get Samsung to use its chips.
Nobody buys a fucking phone or tablet because it's whatever% more power efficient, unless you're talking about huge factors (like 2x or so). With no market lock-in, Intel has nothing to do here.
They have to beat the ARM price of ~$15, and they can't, not in the long term. They also pulled out of the NAND Flash business once the competition started heating up.
>tablets
rofl
>>53682272
What a glorious pic, should be r9k sticky.
>>53684344
>They have to beat the ARM price of ~$15, and they can't, not in the long term.
True but maybe they don't have to. I think UMPCs are the future and paying more than you would for an average $600-700 flagship would be worth it especially if the phone had precision stylus input (like the samsung note series) to act as a mouse.
>They also pulled out of the NAND Flash business once the competition started heating up.
Yeah intel fucked up with that and x-point can't beat v-nand/mlc nand if it costs more and offers no noticeable useful improvement.
>>53681786
it must run facebook really swell
>>53681836
>using the smiley with a carat nose
>using the smiley with 4 carat noses
I want the 12.9" iPad Pro because I like comics. A $700 tablet feels a lot less expensive after reading a few dozen $20 books on it for free.
>>53682060
Kek
>>53685778
Do you like your sister as well?
>>53685883
No, I'm an only child, but I sure do like yours.
>>53685948
I'm an only child as well, you sounded like you had a sister.
>tfw we must both live our lives without an imouto
I sometimes hope that I get a little sister in the next life (if there even is one)
>>53685948
>>53686011
Siblinglets, when will they learn?
>>53683955
Intel will get serious into smartphones with surface/win phone, dell is releasing theirs soon enough and it will aggressively target business.
Soon enough /g/ will want these full blown "business" phones.
>>53686036
hey, fuck you senpai
>>53686046
Yeah, okay. People have been saying bullshit like that about Windows phones for literally years now.
http://www.wired.com/2012/06/why-idc-predicts-windows-phone-will-surpass-ios-by-2016/
>NOT ONLY WILL Windows Phone outshine BlackBerry in the worldwide smartphone market, it will surpass Apple’s iOS and become the second-most popular smartphone platform by 2016, states a forecasting report released by IDC on Wednesday.
>IDC’s report forecasts that Windows Phone market share will grow from its current total market share of 5.2 percent to a whopping 19.2 percent in 2016.
Yeah, how'd that work out for you shitheads? Well, that was 2012. Here's what IDC said in 2013:
https://bgr.com/2013/09/05/windows-phone-2017-market-share-projection/
>The latest projections from research firm IDC predict that Windows Phone won’t reach a double-digit share of the global smartphone market until 2017, when it will account for 10.2% of all smartphones shipped.
So, that was 2013, and all that happened was that projections got revised, downward, heavily. Let's fast forward to mid-2015, shall we?
http://www.geekwire.com/2015/new-forecast-windows-phone-market-share-will-still-be-single-digits-in-four-years/
>The report shows Microsoft’s mobile operating system climbing to 5.4 percent market share in 2019, on 103.5 million unit shipments, up from 3.2 percent market share on 46.8 million shipments for the current year, according to the new IDC report on global smartphone growth trends.
Wow. Just wow. Windows Phone really took the world by storm, didn't it? Why, at this point, would you ever, *ever* bet on Windows Phone? Every previous bet on Windows Phone has been a complete and total loss.
>>53686295
Because the poo in loo are going to be fired.
Hopefully. Trump may bring the jobs back and microshaft will change.
>>53686295
Things could change if microshaft began selling phones with full blown desktop OSs and sold them as UMPCs.
>>53686400
You are making a critical error. You are counting on Microsoft not fucking up at least one essential element and tanking the whole effort. Not a good bet.
>>53685178
nice chinkpad dipshit
>>53686400
Phones with full blown desktop OS have not market though.
>>53681786
Waiting to sell my Air 2 t.b.h.
>>53686467
They might. Nobody has taken UMPCs seriously because they have so far been fucking shit. Stylus input would be required to make UMPCs enticing however.
