Here we go again!Apple announces a new gadget. Most people love it. A few decide to jump the gun and rip into it.
This is happening right now, just 48 hours after Apple announced the new iPad. But there’s a new trend with some gadget reviewers and tech critics: if Apple’s new iThing isn’t a complete redesign from the previous model, it’s an automatic disappointment. Specs and new features be damned.
We saw it with the iPhone 4S last year. Now it’s happening with the new iPad.
The biggest offender I’ve seen so far is Lance Ulanoff, the editor in chief of Mashable. Ulanoff got to see the new iPad at Apple’s event on Wednesday. He didn’t like it.
Because the new iPad looks just like the iPad 2. Because it’s simply called “iPad” and not “iPad HD,” “iPad 3,” or “iPad Plus Some Other Ridiculous Suffix.” Because Apple’s new processor is called the “A5X” and not the “A6.”
Each of those complaints are then backed up with a “well, it’s still kinda great” qualifier, making the whole piece feel twisted and confusing.
For example, here’s Ulanoff on the iPad’s new processor:
Apple wasn’t even willing to completely swap out the CPU. Instead of an A6 chip, we got an A5X. The update is necessary — there’s no way you can run 3.1 million pixels and some of the cinematic effects I saw today on Infinity Blade: Dungeons without quad-core horsepower.
I wonder if Apple decided it would confuse people if they used a brand-new CPU while leaving the rest of the iPad in incremental upgrade land. Not that the A5X processor isn’t new. It’s certainly better than the A5, but you signal “new” with a new name. I see it as an update, or perhaps, a re-architecting.
Except Apple did swap out the CPU. It’s a brand new chip that performs much, much better than the chip in the iPad 2. If you’re going to complain about branding and aesthetics, you’re completely missing the point.
I could go on and on and on picking apart Ulanoff’s post, but I think you get the idea. Read the rest of it if you want.
It’s not just Ulanoff either. I’m highlighting him because his analysis is the most egregious and nonsensical of them all. There’s also this article from the Financial Post’s Matt Hartley. And this one from John C. Abell of Reuters.
I don’t see how you can’t be impressed with the new iPad unless you simply hate Apple or amazing technology in general.
Here’s the breakdown of the most important stuff: high resolution Retina display (just like the iPhone’s), 4G LTE data speeds on AT&T and Verizon (both are great), faster processor for graphics and gaming, and the same excellent camera found in the iPhone 4S.
How is that not enough?