or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Smaller iPad seen boosting Apple's sales to schools, gamers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Smaller iPad seen boosting Apple's sales to schools, gamers

post #1 of 87
Thread Starter 
A smaller, more affordable iPad could increase Apple's tablet sales not only to schools and students, but also to people who play games on mobile devices, a new analysis concludes.

Ben A. Reitzes with Barclays Equity Research said his recent research continues to lead him to believe that Apple is planning to expand the iPad lineup this fall. Various rumors have repeatedly suggested that Apple is exploring a smaller device with a 7.85-inch display that would run at 1,024 by 768 pixels, a resolution identical to the first-generation iPad and iPad 2.

"We do not feel that a smaller, lower priced tablet will dilute the quality of the iPad brand and iOS ecosystem either, despite prior comments by the company," Reitzes wrote in a note to investors on Tuesday.

Instead, he believes that a smaller and less expensive iPad would help Apple promote the use of its touchscreen tablet for education and e-books. A smaller iPad would help expand the tablet market, he said, allowing it to reach as high as 350 million sales in 2015.

In addition, Reitzes also believes that a smaller iPad would increase sales among gamers. He expects that iOS gaming will continue to become a bigger platform for Apple in the future.

The analyst acknowledged that a smaller iPad would cannibalize some sales of the existing 9.7-inch model, but he believes it would be worth it in exchange for increasing Apple's total addressable market, and also fending off lower priced competitors.

iPad


Reitzes noted that the price drop of the 16-gigabyte iPad 2 to $399 in March has gone a long way in combating Amazon's $199 Kindle Fire. Earlier this month, IDC revealed that shipments of the Kindle Fire plummeted from a 16.8 percent market share in the fourth quarter of 2011 to just 4 percent in the first quarter of 2012.

But Amazon is also expected to expand the Kindle Fire lineup this year with a new model larger than the current 7-inch variety, which could motivate Apple to expand the iPad lineup accordingly.

Reitzes also said on Tuesday that he expects Apple will make its Mac platform more affordable with a new $800 MacBook Air, $200 less than the current low-end model. Rumors of a $799 MacBook Air were first reported last week.
post #2 of 87

tumblr_m3b3nfCNs81r5zyzpo6_250.gif

 

I'm getting tired of these 2008 reruns.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 87

Why not just upgrade iPod Touch to 5"? Wait!  The iPod Touch is selling over $200.  How could Apple sell a 7" iPad for much lower than $300? 
 

post #4 of 87

I'm sick of hearing Ben's wishes and dreams for new product being trotted out as discussion of an upcoming product. The other analyst with the stiffy for an Apple TV as well. Tired of wild-eyed speculation that people read as analysis of future product. I'm getting really tired of sites that give these market fixers page space as well.

post #5 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

tumblr_m3b3nfCNs81r5zyzpo6_250.gif

 

I'm getting tired of these 2008 reruns.

 

I will see your Whose line and raise you an

 

 

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #6 of 87
Still could go either way. I think there's probably a market for one as the iPad is a bit of a beast to take out with you.

But it also depends what they do with the iPhone and iPod touch. If they both stay at the current screen size, then it makes even more sense to have a 7 inch device. If they up then to 4 inch, then the need drops quite a bit.
post #7 of 87

PLEASE!  NO!  MORE!

post #8 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Instead, he believes that a smaller and less expensive iPad would help Apple promote the use of its touchscreen tablet for education and e-books
 
This why oh why did Apple go to all that fuss to make iBooks Author and get those textbook companies in on a game that is designed to work with the larger screen. Why not wait and release that stuff with this new smaller iPad
 
In addition, Reitzes also believes that a smaller iPad would increase sales among gamers.
 
so would more games between designed to allow you to use your iPhone as a controller, or a 3rd party 'nintendo' style bluetooth control. And then there's Airplay tricks like Real Racing uses. or go ultimate and have a game that does the whole Airplay AND allows you to use another controller. imagine something like Real Racing like that. You use your iPhone as a controller for a game running off your iPad where it airplays the first person view to the tv and on the iPad you get your track map. 
 
 
 

Reitzes noted that the price drop of the 16-gigabyte iPad 2 to $399 in March has gone a long way in combating Amazon's $199 Kindle Fire.
Perhaps a little but not as much as the new even better iPad or simply the fact that the Fire sucks in many folks opinion and Amazon pulled stunts like no parental controls or even requiring your password to buy stuff. 

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #9 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaren View Post

I'm sick of hearing Ben's wishes and dreams for new product being trotted out as discussion of an upcoming product. 

 

bloggers and commenters are just as bad. They trot out their wishes as "must have" features the lack of which makes the product crap and the company doomed

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #10 of 87
So in June Apple will update almost everything to Retina, and in the Fall they will introduce new non-retina devices? I just don't see this happening. Maybe if the resolution was quadrupled this rumor would be more plausible, but even then...
post #11 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Why not just upgrade iPod Touch to 5"? Wait!  The iPod Touch is selling over $200.  How could Apple sell a 7" iPad for much lower than $300? 
 

Smaller devices are more difficult to engineer.    

 

 

An iPhone 4S is $649 for 16GB  an iPad with larger hirez screen, larger battery and LTE cellular is $629.  In electronics making something larger is the easy 

task.  Making it small and functional is considerably more difficult. 

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #12 of 87

More more more!  Until it comes out, then I'll buy one.  I want it.

post #13 of 87
What's wrong with a 10" iPad that's meant for consumption and production (i.e., a laptop replacement for many), and a 7" iPad that's aimed more at consumption (books, magazines, video, iTunes U, gaming)?

So when's the 13" iPad coming? No one talks about a larger device. Could it be made light enough? Android keeps making their phones larger and larger, why not tablets? Or would that cut into laptop sales too much?
post #14 of 87

Finally, someone who shares the same opinion as I do on a smaller iPad.

iPad Mini - $299

• 8GB 

• WiFi only

• Perfect for iOS gaming and as an e-reader for textbooks

• Use as a controller or input device for upcoming Apple tv app store or possible iTV

• Gives users a choice of devices at every price point

• Brings users into Apple's ecosystem (iCloud, iTunes, App Store) where they will be much more likely to upgrade to future Apple products

 

In short, I really can't see a downside except for a small amount of cannibalization of the full-sized iPad. But, Apple has the profit margins to do this and shut the door on all rival tablet makers, especially the Kindle Fire.

 

And I don't want to hear about the touch targets being too small on such a device. If you can use an iPhone or iPod Touch, this would be even easier. As it is, I can never hit the autocorrect spelling and get it to register. Kid's fingers are smaller and they would be a large portion of the market for such a device.

 

Then, Apple can slightly increase the iPhone display to 4" along with the iPod Touch for a nice refresh this Fall.

post #15 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Why not just upgrade iPod Touch to 5"? Wait!  The iPod Touch is selling over $200.  How could Apple sell a 7" iPad for much lower than $300? 
 


Oh my god!!!

Things change? Please say it isn't so! Everything MUST stay the way it was in the past.

post #16 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

Why not just upgrade iPod Touch to 5"? Wait!  The iPod Touch is selling over $200.  How could Apple sell a 7" iPad for much lower than $300? 
 

 

That's the thing.  Even if this guy is right, it's not an iPad mini he's talking about but an iPod touch.  Even if it happens, and even if the price can be lowered, it would still be an iPod with a slightly bigger screen and a better price point, not an iPad mini.  

 

All the uses that iPad is good for, require the bigger screen.  

post #17 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

 

bloggers and commenters are just as bad. They trot out their wishes as "must have" features the lack of which makes the product crap and the company doomed

 

Yeah, but I don't get paid for my crappy analysis.  This donut is probably making bank.

post #18 of 87

Maybe this is really going to be the next iPod Touch which just also happens to run iOS or a sub set of iOS rather than a 'smaller iPad' as such.

Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #19 of 87

From an owner of a 27" iMac i7, iPhone 4, new iPad 64GB WiFi, iPod Touch, and (3) iPod Shuffles.

 

The other thing missing is multiple users on iOS devices

post #20 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacinScott View Post

Finally, someone who shares the same opinion as I do on a smaller iPad.

iPad Mini - $299

• 8GB 

• WiFi only

• Perfect for iOS gaming and as an e-reader for textbooks

• Use as a controller or input device for upcoming Apple tv app store or possible iTV

• Gives users a choice of devices at every price point

• Brings users into Apple's ecosystem (iCloud, iTunes, App Store) where they will be much more likely to upgrade to future Apple products

 

In short, I really can't see a downside except for a small amount of cannibalization of the full-sized iPad. But, Apple has the profit margins to do this and shut the door on all rival tablet makers, especially the Kindle Fire.

 

And I don't want to hear about the touch targets being too small on such a device. If you can use an iPhone or iPod Touch, this would be even easier. As it is, I can never hit the autocorrect spelling and get it to register. Kid's fingers are smaller and they would be a large portion of the market for such a device.

 

Then, Apple can slightly increase the iPhone display to 4" along with the iPod Touch for a nice refresh this Fall.

 

You mean the 2,000 other posters who say "I want a smaller iPad for $200" aren't enough?

 

Still asinine.  It's a given that Apple could sell a functionally identical iPad in a smaller size for $200-$299.  Just like it's a given that a smaller, but similarly-featured Lexus GS-series priced at $10,000 would be a runaway best seller.

 

The only issue is "does it make sense from a business standpoint?"  None of these "fantasy CEO"-players have given that a single thought.  It's all part of the "I want it"/"why shouldn't I have it?"/"choice is good" mantra.

post #21 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post

What's wrong with a 10" iPad that's meant for consumption and production (i.e., a laptop replacement for many), and a 7" iPad that's aimed more at consumption (books, magazines, video, iTunes U, gaming)?
So when's the 13" iPad coming? No one talks about a larger device. Could it be made light enough? Android keeps making their phones larger and larger, why not tablets? Or would that cut into laptop sales too much?

 

The problem is that a 7-inch screen is bad for consumption compared to a 10-inch device like the current iPad. The 10-incher is just adequate for watching video so if you go significantly smaller, watching video is far less enjoyable. Reading is better served by a larger screen. Playing games is better served by a larger screen. 

 

There is only a few downsides to the bigger screen. It is too large to slip into an average-sized pocket and can get a little heavy to haul around for long stretches. Yet a seven-inch device (closer to eight inches as rumoured) would remain too large to slip into an average-sized pocket. Where you would bring along a 7-inch tablet, you certainly could take along the existing version of the iPad. We're not talking a gigantic device that is unusable as a portable computing solution. 

 

There are two ways in which Apple can address the concerns regarding the current iPad form factor. One is to engineer out weight with successive generations. I really see that happening, especially as more light-weight screen technology comes along. The other is to make a larger Touch though not so much larger that it loses the convenience of being a true pocket computer. The thing is, it's one or the other. You don't make a larger Touch and bring out a 7-inch iPad. Far too much overlap, especially in terms of price. So you have to choose. A 5-inch Touch or a 7-inch iPad. The larger Touch makes far more sense especially since I could easily imagine situations in which such a Touch model would be suited to settings for which the current iPad isn't well-suited. With a 7-inch iPad, not so much. 

 

As for Apple doing this to fend off competitors. What competitors? The competition was out of this one right from the start.

post #22 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98 View Post

So in June Apple will update almost everything to Retina, and in the Fall they will introduce new non-retina devices? I just don't see this happening. Maybe if the resolution was quadrupled this rumor would be more plausible, but even then...

If the size is to believed, and the resolution is to be believed, then it may in fact become retina just by the fact of the DPI on it (which is 163.06).

Well, maybe not, but they may give it that name. 1wink.gif

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply
post #23 of 87

8GB for tablets is too low IMO. 

 

NAND storage is getting much cheaper 

 

http://news.softpedia.com/news/SSD-Prices-to-Go-Low-as-0-4-dollars-per-Gigabyte-267666.shtml

 

16GB should be the minimum. 

He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #24 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston View Post

If the size is to believed, and the resolution is to be believed, then it may in fact become retina just by the fact of the DPI on it (which is 163.06).
Well, maybe not, but they may give it that name. 1wink.gif

The name "Retina" is based on scientifically based research on optics and which provided a mathematical formula for determining the limits a human eye can discern. They can't throw that label on anything without changing its meaning and making it pointless term. That's simply not going to happen.
post #25 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Smaller devices are more difficult to engineer.    


An iPhone 4S is $649 for 16GB  an iPad with larger hirez screen, larger battery and LTE cellular is $629.  In electronics making something larger is the easy 
task.  Making it small and functional is considerably more difficult. 

All things being equal, sure, but the iPod Touch benefits from the iPhone's selling price and use of pretty much the same type components. It saves cost by not having as much of the same HW and by using much inferior HW (like the display).

I can't see how a a smaller iPad, which would not only need engineering for new HW but a new UI for the new size and new SDK for 3rd-party apps that are design specifically for it, could fit into that price point. If they go the same route as the iPhone v iPod Touch and remove most of the HW people love with the iPad like the built in mic, speaker, IPS display, etc. I think it would be remiss to call this an iPad at all the same way it wouldn't be good for Apple to call an iPod Touch that only had the cellular HW added an iPhone. You don't want soil your branding as it's usually impossible to rebound from that.

For that reason I'd think such a device would be better off being only for education (not available for the average consumer) or being marketed as a Touch (or at least not an iPad). But those options seems like a bad move from a cost perspective. To me the best option seems to be to keep producing the 9.7" iPad and just sell the older models for a couple generations and sell at increasingly lower prices without any of the engineering, testing or other costs associated with a new device, just like they do with the iPhone.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #26 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98 View Post

The name "Retina" is based on scientifically based research on optics and which provided a mathematical formula for determining the limits a human eye can discern. They can't throw that label on anything without changing its meaning and making it pointless term. That's simply not going to happen.

Apple's definition is based on science and math but since Apple created the marketing term they did have the right to define it as they see fit. That said, for them to call it Retina Display they had to address the definition in a mathematically logical way for people to take their definition seriously.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #27 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venerable View Post

You mean the 2,000 other posters who say "I want a smaller iPad for $200" aren't enough?

Still asinine.  It's a given that Apple could sell a functionally identical iPad in a smaller size for $200-$299.  Just like it's a given that a smaller, but similarly-featured Lexus GS-series priced at $10,000 would be a runaway best seller.

The only issue is "does it make sense from a business standpoint?"  None of these "fantasy CEO"-players have given that a single thought.  It's all part of the "I want it"/"why shouldn't I have it?"/"choice is good" mantra.

Please do yourself a favor and get $200 out of your head. It's not going to happen.

$299 is very plausible. $249 is just barely within the realm of possibility, although I doubt it since the margins would be greatly reduced. A 7" iPad is about 50% of the size of a 10% (or, if it's 7.85", that's 65% the size of a 10"). But many of the costs do not change significantly with size, so the price can't be reduced by the same percentage. The cheapest current iPad is $399 - so you'd need to reduce the price by 50% to get to $200. Not a chance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston View Post

If the size is to believed, and the resolution is to be believed, then it may in fact become retina just by the fact of the DPI on it (which is 163.06).
Well, maybe not, but they may give it that name. 1wink.gif

Not unless you're viewing it from twice as far as the 10" - which isn't going to happen.

Frankly, I don't think it matters. The 7" device is a lower cost, entry level device. I don't see that retina is necessary. The original iPad was widely praised as having a sharp, clear screen. This device would have the same resolution in a 35-50% smaller area, so it would be even sharper even without quadrupling the resolution. To me, that's more than good enough for the entry level device.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #28 of 87

Having just bought my mother a Kindle (just the regular one, not the fire), and had a good look at that, it's really shown me how weak the iPad is as a straight reading device.

 

I know the Kindle is designed just to be a reader, so you would expect it to be better at that, but I did find myself thinking that for travel purposes, I'll probably be getting one.

 

If there was an iPad around that size, I'd go for it over the Kindle, as I'd rather pay more for a device that can do more, but in terms of screen size, for book reading, the 6" of the Kindle did seem to be pretty much the sweet spot, for me.

post #29 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacinScott View Post
Finally, someone who shares the same opinion as I do on a smaller iPad.

 

As… though you're the only two? Maybe the only two who aren't joking or trolls. lol.gif

 

Quote:

• 8GB 

 

Too small to be of any use.

 

Quote:

• Perfect for iOS gaming and as an e-reader for textbooks

 

You really want a book that small? You really want games that small?

 

Quote:

• Gives users a choice of devices at every price point

 

They're already offered a choice of devices at every price point.

 

 

Quote:

And I don't want to hear about the touch targets being too small on such a device.

 

Right, because you don't understand how that works.

 

Quote:

If you can use an iPhone or iPod Touch, this would be even easier. 

 

It's a different UI with a different UX and different use case.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #30 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Please do yourself a favor and get $200 out of your head. It's not going to happen.
$299 is very plausible.

 

Neither $200 or $299 are in my head.  The very limited Kindle Fire costs nearly $200 in parts alone.  I don't see a smaller format iPad being any less than $249 in parts.  That translates to $399 retail (cost of parts is not equal to "costs").  This $299 or under talk is all nonsense.

post #31 of 87
I'm getting tired as well of hearing these rumors of 7-8" iPad mini, if Apple can keep around the iPhone 3GS, then Apple will definitely keep the iPad 2 around for a longtime and setting that at a lower price point than the new iPad next year.

iPad 2 16GB for say $199-249
iPad (3rd gen) 16GB $399
iPad (4th gen) 16GB $499

They wouldn't need to change anything at all. They save money in manufacturing costs, all the apps work just fine and they've successfully eliminated any Kindle Fire debacle.
post #32 of 87
I'm getting tired as well of hearing these rumors of 7-8" iPad mini, if Apple can keep around the iPhone 3GS, then Apple will definitely keep the iPad 2 around for a longtime and setting that at a lower price point than the new iPad next year.

iPad 2 16GB for say $299.. who would'nt pay 100 bucks more to get a better product than a kindle
iPad (3rd gen) 16GB $399
iPad (4th gen) 16GB $499

They wouldn't need to change anything at all. They save money in manufacturing costs, all the apps work just fine and they've successfully eliminated any Kindle Fire debacle.
post #33 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Not unless you're viewing it from twice as far as the 10" - which isn't going to happen.
Frankly, I don't think it matters. The 7" device is a lower cost, entry level device. I don't see that retina is necessary. The original iPad was widely praised as having a sharp, clear screen. This device would have the same resolution in a 35-50% smaller area, so it would be even sharper even without quadrupling the resolution. To me, that's more than good enough for the entry level device.

Maybe so, but Apple seems to be developing their products in an opposite direction, that's what makes this story implausible.
Edited by johndoe98 - 5/15/12 at 3:39pm
post #34 of 87

A 7.85" iPad using a 3:2 format would have these dimensions: 7.85x6.53x4.35

A 7.85" iPad using a 4:3 format would have these dimensions: 7.85x6.27x4.72

 

I don't think that is easily pocketable at 4:3, so it still doesn't pass that test.  You still have to add bezel to that.  I've seen some jeans pockets that people could stuff a Kindle Fire into, but it's dimensions are 8.85x7.5×4.7 including bezel.

post #35 of 87

I've had the iPad 1 2 and 3.

My approx usage percentages are now approx...  iPhone: 30%, iPad 65%, Mac, 5%.

 

Having thought this through, I'm pretty sure that if there were a 7.85" iPad with retina display, 64G memory and good camera, I'd roll down the 2 to my daughter and my 3 to my wife and use the 7.85.

I've come to the conclusion that I don't need 10".

 

That surprises even me.

post #36 of 87

It's far more likely that Amazon will release a 10" Kindle Fire at $299, than Apple releasing a 7" iPad at $299.

post #37 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venerable View Post
It's far more likely that Amazon will release a 10" Kindle Fire at $299, than Apple releasing a 7" iPad at $299.

 

10" tablet (even a gimped one like that) at $299?

I'd honestly be impressed.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #38 of 87

I think some of the main reasons for a smaller, less expensive, iPad are being overlooked.  The main one being: a less expensive iPad allows for a lot more people to purchase one.  I don't think the people who want an ipad, but want it for cheaper, care too much about 64GB of ram, retina screen, or the 9.7 inch screen.  If the people holding out are doing so because of price, an iPad at $299 or maybe even a little less, will win them over.  I think it's the price, not the "I need to have a smaller iPad", that is driving Apple's decision to make such an item.

"We are what we repeatedly do.  Therefor, excellence is not an act, but a habit." --Aristotle

Reply

"We are what we repeatedly do.  Therefor, excellence is not an act, but a habit." --Aristotle

Reply
post #39 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

10" tablet (even a gimped one like that) at $299?

I'd honestly be impressed.


Archos sells 10" Android tablets at that price.  Not a big stretch.

post #40 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venerable View Post
Archos sells 10" Android tablets at that price.  Not a big stretch.

 

Who, now? lol.gif

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Smaller iPad seen boosting Apple's sales to schools, gamers