Originally Posted by boeyc15
Hmmm. Seems like a larger iPod touch would be more appropriate... But that's just me.
Any comments on why 7.9 has 'better attributes' over the present 9 inch...just doesn't seem significant benefits????
Seems to me a 5-6 inch version would be a sweet spot... But that just me again.
No significant benefits? It's just over half the size (60 square inches vs 100 square inches). For lots of people, that's a big selling point. When you consider that the bulk of non-iPad tablets are 7", that suggests that a significant number of people fit into that category.
Originally Posted by dm3
I still don't see it.
Apple never competes on price. Look at Netbooks. Macbook Air is hardly a cheap netbook, yet between the Air and iPad, Apple has killed the netbook market.
Many "analysts" had all sorts of rumors than an iPhone mini was coming out. All sorts of talk that they needed to have a lower price model to compete. Instead Apple has kept selling older models and dropped the price.
The iPad2 currently sells for $399. Its miles better than the Fire or Nexus. Why would Apple bother with a smaller device?
Apple hates having lots of different products. Even worse is having lots of different development platforms. Today there are only two iOS display resolutions, the iPad & iPhone/iPod-touch and their pixel doubled counterparts which can be automatically pixel doubled by iOS w no change to the app. Adding a 7" model who's sole purpose is to be cheap, while adding another product to the lineup and another screen resolution to worry about is not a good move for Apple.
What apple tends to do is take an existing older product and lower its price.
Not necessarily true. No one suggested that Apple should compete on price. The current 7" tablets tend to be around $199. Even if Apple charges $249 or $299, it will sell like hotcakes. Apple has a lot of significant advantages, so making this a price war would be silly. That does not, however, mean that they can't offer a lower priced model. Should they offer only dual CPU Mac Pros? Should they offer only a 13" MBA? Should they offer only a 64 GB iPhone?
While it made sense to start with a single size of iPad, the market has grown enough that Apple can easily support two different sizes - just like the iMac, MBA, MBP, and so on.
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
I'm at a loss as to why this would have high demand. Is it supposed to replace Kindle readers because I don't exactly see the benefit of having it as a scaled-down iPad. Will it be used as a hand-held gaming console? I can understand why consumers might buy Kindle Fires and other 7" Android tablets because they're cheap in price. However, I don't see consumers buying a $299 7" iPad to save money. I'm guessing that Apple would have to leave out a number of features to reach that price and I personally think it's a bad idea to remove any features from a smaller iPad that the normal-sized iPad has. I still think the analysts are wrong on this iPad mini and there must be something they're misunderstanding. I'd be happy if an iPad mini could disrupt all sales of the smaller Android tablets, but that's about the only thing that would be worthwhile from it.
There are a lot of possible uses:
- eBook reader (for the person who isn't going to do much other than read books)
- K-12 tablet
- Educational tablet for toddlers
- Games (where the 10" tablet is too large and cumbersome)
- Second tablet in the family
- Watching movies on airplanes where the 10" is possibly too large for the cramped space (particularly when you have a drink or snack on the tray table
In the end, look at what is being sold in the market place. Clearly, the iPad is the dominant leader. But if you look at all the Android and other non-Apple tablets, 7" is the predominant size, so the market is substantial.
Plus, offering a 7-8" product would help to prevent the competitors from getting a strong foothold that they can then use to attack Apple on the high end.