Execs say Apple could lower iPad price if market demands it - report - Page 3

[QUOTE=rain;1568276]
Well Mr. "Professional on such matters",

1) Most of us pay utterly no attention to marketing rubbish. We purchase functionality.

2) There are over 1 billion pc's in the active population. About 90% of them are Microsoft based products from a raft of companies like HP, Asus, Levono, Acer and Dell. Throw in a handful of Linux based boxes. How would you rate the marketing prowess/branding/public image of all of these companies?

3) Apple is the proof of the above. If marketing mattered, they would have the "about 90%" share.

I think in the population of people more than happy to purchase over a billion products from companies without hardly a notion of marketing, Apple can afford to lose a few sales to people more concerned with a name (do I hear self image, perhaps self-doubt) than with functionality.

I really like the design and would probably buy one, but without Flash I would not want it at any price. The Lack of Flash would kill the whole "Greatest Web Experience" thing in my opinion....

I guess I will wait for:

1) Camera

2) Price drop ( or significant memory increase )

3) Flash Support ( Not likely ) or HTML5 is finally standardized and the entire internet switches to it ( several years away )

4) multitasking...

5) Built in USB port ( Come on even Android phones have them )

I would settle for #3 and probably buy one, but I am not holding my breath. Plus there are several Android Tablets the might offer much more bang for the buck well before Apple get the whole package sorted out....

what's the product differentiation for your above user requirements compared against macbook air or macbook pro. You are very business savvy

The next version will have wings.

Apple could double the capacity for just a $50 increase and drop the 16GB iPad.

Yes, every "professional" I know makes references to homos with rainbow man-bags.


Yes, because calling it the iYuk is both professional AND not mocking the name.


But I suspect that soon you will be by many...


Yes, you would know this because you're a "professional".


Yes, you aren't mocking the name at all.


I've met some really bright elementary school kids that could design content for it.

You probably aren't one of them.

This is because the infantile mind is easily fixated on bodily functions.

want a "wild" guess?

in september when introducing new iPods Apple will show us their latest update on how well the iPad sold.

"But..." Steve continues "... sales figures showed us that most people want the either the 16gb or the high end model of 64gb. And with many new apps that make the iPad especially useful as a mobile device we think that it should only come with 3G equipped. So as today we build in 3G in all iPad models and offer it to the price of the Wifi only. And to make it even more attractive to our customers we will offer iPad in 2 different versions now. A 32 model starting at 499 and a 64gb version at just 599. All with 3G built right in. We think this is something really attractive for our customers and we want to be aggressive with this during the holiday season... bla bla bla"

Anyway.... to make it short: I think 3G will soon be in all iPads. Offering 6 different models is pretty unlike Apple.

Damn! I can't wait for the iPad, yet I know I should wait!

What should I do?

Hellooo...WiFi b/g/and N...it has not just a little better screen, it has a MUCH better screen. Also the iPads software adds value, also the casing made out of aluminium. Also the battery is not just a little larger battery...oh and the iPad has a built in microphone.

299 for a 32 GB ipod touch
add 150,- for the HQ IPS-screen/bigger touchpanel/glass, add 20 for 80211 N, add 10 for a Mic, add 20 for the better speakers, add 40 for aluminium casing, add 65 for better battery.
Total: $604,-
And the 32GB iPad is 599,-
So when you pay a hundred dollars less, you don't get 8GB as it is the case with the iPod Touch, but 16GB.
It all sounds reasonable to me.

Sorry, I was being awfully English in my understatement. $499 is a good deal in my book.


Sure, it's here. The breakdown only covers materials though. R&D and support costs are not included.

Perhaps somebody can tell me why this posting is allowed.

Reported Feb 9, 2010

Yeah, and I remember the early phone introduction of ah whatzit...Skype 'iPhone' they had the name iPhone FIRST !!!!! Everybody was sure this was going to steal Apple's thunder. Yeah and Sarah Palin was the brilliant GOP last minute nominee that was going to upset the election.

Shows where your mind is now doesn't it. But how long can the media dwell on this?? (We may yet be surprised). Two months from now they will be talking about the publishing deals being made. They called it iPad because no matter what they called the thing, people would say 'my new i...ppppp....pad' anyway.

Similar to the iPhone. no matter what they called it people would have called it the iphone. All started with the iPod.

No question, a bit obsessional. This is kind of interesting, especially when you consider the number of people who were totally convinced that it was going to be called iSlate -- which in any language, and by any interpretation, is a piece of rock.

Just glad I don't live there to see it.

Obviously, you have no clue about component pricing:

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...apple_219.html

[QUOTE=Eye Forget;1568684]
This is, of course, nonsense. If marketing was the ONLY thing that mattered, Apple might have 90%. But there are a lot more considerations than marketing in buying a computer - many of which work against Apple (price, network effects, Analysts who were snubbed by Jobs and want to stick it to him, and so on).





Then go build your own. Or don't buy one.

What's with all this whining about price? A month ago, everyone was talking about a base model at $999. Apple came in at half that price. When you compare it to an iPod Touch which can run up to $400 with vastly lower capabilities, it's quite reasonable. If you don't like it, don't buy one - - millions of others will (several countries have already shut down preorders because demand exceeds projected supply).


That is, of course, absurd. Flash is used on the most creative web sites? Evidence?

Flash is dying. You can already get Youtube without it. Today's Disney announcement suggests that Disney will drop it. New York Times is offering their newspaper without flash on the iPad. Hulu is reported to be dropping it. Heck, Microsoft Mobile won't even be supporting it in the future. And that's all just a start.

There's almost nothing out there that requires Flash and isn't already in transition - except Farmville. If your life revolves around Farmville, buy something else.

the sanitary pad jokes were old as of 2006 (see MadTV) and just getting older. In a few months, no one is going to give a hoot. It's a juvenile joke that won't last long. So funny that it always seems to be males making the joke, when they most likely don't have much experience with feminine products, but DO have experience with notepads and sketchpads.

Speaking of sketchpads, I've wanted a digital sketchpad for so long now that I'm freaking out to get my hands on one of these. I've never been a early adopter, but I might for this. Which is why I don't understand this article. While it's common guess that the price will drop, whey would Apple leak this?
It just makes me slap myself and remind myself not to be an early adopter. Won't this info actually lead to slower initial sales.

I keep wondering if we're not going to see some more surprises before it actually launches. perhaps a price drop right off the bat?

Also, re flash: I guess I won't mind seeing it go, even though I've spent a lot of time learning actionscript and Flash. But there's that article, somewhere on the interwebs, pointing out that at least one of the sites shown in Apple's video is displaying a flash ad. What do y'all make of that? It's not 'shopped into a still. it's a video. I doubt Apple super imposed the website video. I understand the iphone OS "doesn't allow" runtime environments like Flash. Is this to say a runtime environment CAN'T run on it, or it's not allowed due to performance reasons? If so, Apple is certainly monitoring the chatter on this, knowing that flash video is important to people, don't they have the ability to allow it, and simply have a warning that says something like "If you allow this content to run, you're batteries may drain quickly and your browser may crash. you've been warned"? Clumsy imagingary msg aside, COULDN'T THEY? I don't know the tech side of this, but it seems they could.

Should be mentioned, the only likely reason Apple let this information out was to put potential competitors on notice that Apple doesn't plan on giving them any price protection. That may scare some competitors off before they even think of jumping into the tablet computer market, knowing that Apple has the ability squeeze them on price at any time. One thing they aren't doing is telling consumers to wait for a lower price.

that's a good point. Though it might have that effect, whether or not they intend that.

What's up with people being surprised that the parts cost roughly half of the selling price? No company would stay in this business if they sold at cost. Looks like a very standard markup to me.