I wouldn't characterize it as a trap. It is a business strategy that is often successful. Simply fill all the niches so your competitor has no where to go. It works fine until someone comes up with a disruptive device. That's what happened to Nokia when the iPhone came along. Currently with only incremental improvements in smart phones it isn't a bad strategy.
A tablet that can be used as a phone makes a lot of sense in the business world, so I don't think this product will only apeal to lower incomers. If Apple responds I'm sure they will find an innovative way to get past the technical issues that some have posted about.
Based only on what I've seen in TV ads, Blackberry might have a way to do multiple windows. Rather than displaying them both, the top window appears to slide off the one behind it. I don't know if that is exactly how it works with the BB but something like that would certainly be an improvement over double clicking the home button.
I find the current IOS fine on my phone. A few tweaks here and there are always nice but I don't think that would require a more powerful processor. A 20nm A6 should use less power though and would extend battery life. IOS on the iPad though has lots of room for improvement so a more powerful processeor is likely needed there. On that note it's likely that iPhone and Tablet IOSs will soon start to diverge.
AniPad retina display (264 ppi) would give the iPad mini a non standard 1420x1064 display. In order for the mini to have a standard display it would have to be equivalent to iPhone retina display (336 ppi), giving the mini a standard 2048x1536 display. I don't believe there is much cost difference in iphone size displays but it will take a while (perhaps the next iteration?) before a mini size retina display is economic. Conclusion Economic 101 does explain the non...