Re: [Fed-Talk] New Ipad: More or less likely to be allowed for official use?
Re: [Fed-Talk] New Ipad: More or less likely to be allowed for official use?
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] New Ipad: More or less likely to be allowed for official use?
- From: "Villano, Paul Mr CIV USA TRADOC" <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:37:45 -0500
- Priority: normal
I just meant that there was nothing that would get it on the network faster or keep it off of the network more than it already is than Ipad *2* :o)
And what I was expecting was SIRI.... ::SNIFF:: Though I can understand the thinking behind not including it. It is already on the edge of overwhelming servers and Apple just got through that crisis by the skin of their whatevers so having Siri (I HOPE) on Iphone *5* :0) will just pick up maybe a few thousand above current levels on that server but introducing it ot an entire new device would add MILLIONS.
As a side note I noticed with interest listening to the event the inference that the "new" Ipad will be the impetus to drive the quickening of the 4G LTE network growth across the board. I'll have to wait until the new phone to see if I become a Verizon customer or allow AT&T to continue telling me I'm getting "unlimited" data while they choke hold the pipe.
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Schroeder <email@hidden>
Date: Thursday, March 8, 2012 12:22
Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] New Ipad: More or less likely to be allowed for official use?
To: "Villano, Paul Mr CIV USA TRADOC" <email@hidden>
Cc: Fed Talk <email@hidden>
> On Mar 8, 2012, at 9:42 AM, Villano, Paul Mr CIV USA TRADOC wrote:
>
> > SO now that the "new Ipad" has been unveiled (why didn't they
> just call it "3"?)
>
> Because even though it's being called "the new iPad", the product
> name is just "iPad". Just like "MacBook", "MacBook Pro", "Mac
> Pro", "iMac", etc., even though there are many models of them.
>
> It will have a unique service name, probably something like "iPad
> (Spring 2012)", again just like each unique generation of Apple
> product.
> If this weren't Apple, it would have been called something like
> "iPad 3 HD 4G LTE", which is exactly what drives ordinary people
> away. I'm glad Apple went this route, and frankly I hope they do
> the same thing for the iPhone.
>
> > is it more or less likely to be allowed for official use/on
> networks?
> Neither...?
>
> What will make it more likely is when the security and
> cryptographic subsystems of iOS are approved via various federal
> standards processes...which Apple could certainly help with. (Hey
> Apple, what's the latest on this, by the way?)
>
> > I didn't see anything change except speed & resolution. Did I
> miss something?
>
> What were you expecting? ;-) Greater resolution than full HD is a
> pretty big change, as is the A5X processor required to run it. 4G
> LTE with a world chipset is a pretty big deal, too, for those who
> need it. Doing all that while maintaining the same battery life
> isn't bad...
>
> - Dave
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden