You have been answered on the SSD issue, so I will address the retina display. Since they came out with the retina display on the iPhone, the public has been clamoring for it on the iPad. From what I have read, Apple went to their screen manufacturers and challenged them to find the best option for a retina display, and they probably had a team of Apple engineers working with them. When it came time to make the decision, they decided the failure rate on the IGZO displays was too high. You will note that two of the manufacturers that Apple uses, could not managed to get retina IPS screens with the required quality into full production until after the introduction of the iPad. That is 3 million screens that only one company managed to build for Apple. If they made $1 on each screen, that is $3 million that their competitors could not share in, and the loss of status in the world when their failure became known. Until they are fully confident that the IGZO screens are a better product, and as reliable, they will not approve them
It has been my experience that when Apple commits to technology, they will stick to it. They do not like to over reach technology because there is more chances of error. With the current screen, they have a known product, that will only improve with continued production. They devoted a lot of effort into getting this ready for the 3rd generation iPad. Now they will want to focus on other areas for the next model. From what I have read, under normal circumstances, they would be moving the storage capacities to 32 Gb, 64 Gb, and 128 Gb. However, they are losing part of their profit on the new screens, so they decided to hold off until next year. They keep their prices consistent by using the trend of electronic to progress quickly. They know that processors and hard drives are going to get faster, bigger, and cheaper with time. With the right timing, they can continue to improve the product, without a price increase.
