Some casual thoughts on the iPad 2: An email response.

Today, I responded to an email from a friend asking about a debate that's going on about the next iPad. There have been numerous reports in recent weeks that the next version of Apple's iPad will feature a double-resolution display that takes it from the current 1024 x 768 resolution to a massive 2048 x 1536. The manner in which this would be accomplished is by simply quadrupling the pixels form the current display in the same way that the iPhone 4 doubled the resolution of the previous iPhone from 480 x 320 to 960 x 640. The reason Apple chose to exactly double the resolution was to make app scaling easy and seamless, therefore maintaining compatibility with all of the existing apps in its App Store. It stands to reason that Apple will take the same approach for the iPad, but there are technical and cost considerations that would have to be overcome. John Gruber of DaringFireball.net agrees that Apple will take this approach eventually, but poured cold water on that happening with the new version expected between now and April.

I won't summarize the arguments here. You can read the different predictions on Engadget, AppleInsider, or the above Daring Fireball link. What follows, however, are some thoughts on Apple's approach to product iteration in an email response this morning:

----------------------

Q: I wonder if Apple leaked directly to Gruber to dehype the frenzy over the retina display. Anything less than retina at this point is going to be a huge disappointment.

Gruber just seemed so sure of it. It must be a direct Apple leak.

Also, nobody has directly addressed how much RAM and CPU graphics power this will take. My guess is it is well within the specs for iPad 2. Cost may be an issue this year, but it would be cool to see Apple just go for it. They would be a solid 2-3 years ahead of anybody.

A: Believe it or not, I did wonder the same thing. When Apple gets near product announcements, I usually base my predictions on whether or not they've tried to kill specific hype. So "they" either leaked it on purpose or Gruber has some insane sources. You'll recall, I did doubt the retina display for this year...

As far as processing power and Apple just going for it, I think it matters how you view Apple and how they think. You say that they should just do it because they would be 2-3 years ahead of everyone else, but I think they already think they are. They are so measured in their updates when they don't feel pressured, and this is such a case. Tim Cook indicated as much in the earnings call Tuesday when he said the only obstacle seems to be production and that nobody had a product on the market that is competitive.

Think about it. They could refine the iPad this year with a few tweaks and still sell tens of millions. Then next year when it seems like they need another hook, they release a retina display. That keeps the iPad at the front of the line in 2012, AND enough time has passed that early adopters go ahead and buy a new one. All of these are just strategic decisions completely independent of supply costs and margins, which are so paramount at Apple. If the screens cost a ton, why put them in this year when they could still sell as many as they can make? There's always next year with lower costs.

Also, the reason nobody's addressed CPU and RAM requirements directly is because nobody knows how to. An optimized chip is an unknown with what looks like a Cortex-9 arm processor and some new mobile graphics chip. It'll be dual-core, but not much else can be said. I do have my doubts about it being able to drive that display well, though. The last thing Apple needs is to take a risk on performance when a lesser display works for now.

So... yeah. I hope I'm wrong, though. Kind of difficult putting Engadget and Gruber against each other, since they both are usually very reliable. What I will say is that where Engadget has been wrong in the past is in publishing information a product cycle too early, like when they said there would be apps on the new Apple TV. That could easily be the case here, as Apple will obviously double the resolution at some point.