Rumor: Pegatron to build 50-60% of 'iPad mini' orders, breaks Foxconn's iPad monopoly - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasanman69 


Answer me this. How much ridicule would a competing device get on this forum if it had those specs and was announced tomorrow?

I'll answer that, but let's set the context.   Apple first releases an iPad mini that fits their standards.  It's a 7.85in Retina display, the A5X chip with 1GB RAM, a 5mp camera with FaceTime front cam, etc.  Essentially a smaller, lighter, thinner version of the iPad 3.  And Apple brings it in at $399.

Then next year HP releases a 7.85in Android copycat tablet with the specs listed by that previous poster for $299.

Once you frame it that way, you can see how the battles would play out around these parts.  We'd be chiding HP for skimping on quality for the sake of market share and proud of Apple for releasing the best product they could make, even if it meant a higher price tag.  For creating a brand new product because it makes us look at tablets a little differently, not to lower the iPad price floor.   If Apple releases a smaller tablet then this is how it should play out; anything else and it's the start of Tim Cook taking Apple into the generic electronics abyss. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacVicta 

What way would that be?  Leave out the cameras?  Give us the shittiest screen they can get their hands on?  That isn't the Apple we know.

 

I just find it incredibly hard to believe that the iPad mini and iPod touch 5G would both start at $299.

The iPod touch 4G 16GB currently sells for $199.  It has a retina display and camera.  The iPad 2 16GB currently sells for $399.  Apple could clearly fit something in between.  Their historical practice in iPhone and iPad is to make small margins on the base model, and make most of their money from people willing to pay through the nose for extra flash memory.  And they don't need to make much money on the iPad mini -- it's worth a lot to them to avoid letting competition get a foothold in the tablet market.  The iPad mini base model may be a very good deal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacVicta 

I'll answer that, but let's set the context.   Apple first releases an iPad mini that fits their standards.  It's a 7.85in Retina display, the A5X chip with 1GB RAM, a 5mp camera with FaceTime front cam, etc.  Essentially a smaller, lighter, thinner version of the iPad 3.  And Apple brings it in at $399.

 

Then next year HP releases a 7.85in Android copycat tablet with the specs listed by that previous poster for $299.

 

Once you frame it that way, you can see how the battles would play out around these parts.  We'd be chiding HP for skimping on quality for the sake of market share and proud of Apple for releasing the best product they could make, even if it meant a higher price tag.  For creating a brand new product because it makes us look at tablets a little differently, not to lower the iPad price floor.   If Apple releases a smaller tablet then this is how it should play out; anything else and it's the start of Tim Cook taking Apple into the generic electronics abyss. 

Apple doesn't make limited use disposable stuff for the low end?  They sure do.  Quality standards of what?  A good quality Nano?  Shuffle?  Lots of stuff that makes no sense (between the stuff that does click) if you plug it into an Apple meter of highest quality and caring not about the low market.   They fill whatever $200 market there is to fill.  They make plenty of "quality" hardware that's cheap enough to give as a gift and useless enough that you wouldn't give one to yourself.  Apple has made Shuffle/Nano end stuff for ages, under Jobs, and they're good only for the few things they feebly do and only for their gym niche market.  Never stopped them from revamping them.

You may not see why a smaller Pad with less than stellar resolution, the best camera, and fastest processor has any reason to exist, but those are the very reasons FOR it to exist, and it will no way come out at $399.

And it'll sell a gagillion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacVicta 

I'll answer that, but let's set the context.   Apple first releases an iPad mini that fits their standards.  It's a 7.85in Retina display, the A5X chip with 1GB RAM, a 5mp camera with FaceTime front cam, etc.  Essentially a smaller, lighter, thinner version of the iPad 3.  And Apple brings it in at $399.

this $399 price tag would work only until the iPad4 isn't there. Because then the iPad3 would have that same price tag of the iPad mini, with the same specs but smaller screen.

Could we expect Apple not releasing another iPad for... how long? or the newer iPad wouldn't be 9,7 inch but bigger, for higher price tag than the actual new model?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasanman69 

.
Kids in kindergarten, really? At that age pencil and paper is much more beneficial

There are iPad Stations in the Childrens rooms of some Brooklyn NY Public Libraries, at least the Park Slope Branch I was just in.   Several iPads, connected to a table.  Very popular.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasanman69 


What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.

It's a good example because some people can't understand why anyone would want such a limited function, no frills, limited "user experience" smaller device for less $$$, and some even say Apple doesn't go there.   With some of the reasoning given why a 7" less than fully decked out cheaper tablet is very bad idea these wouldn't never have existed, so it negates much of that reasoning.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton 

 

Yes, but these days, that just means they outsourced all of their manufacturing to mainland China.

Would be really funny if Pegatron outsourced to Foxconn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlandd 

Apple doesn't make limited use disposable stuff for the low end?  They sure do.  Quality standards of what?  A good quality Nano?  Shuffle?  Lots of stuff that makes no sense (between the stuff that does click) if you plug it into an Apple meter of highest quality and caring not about the low market.   They fill whatever $200 market there is to fill.  They make plenty of "quality" hardware that's cheap enough to give as a gift and useless enough that you wouldn't give one to yourself.  Apple has made Shuffle/Nano end stuff for ages, under Jobs, and they're good only for the few things they feebly do and only for their gym niche market.  Never stopped them from revamping them.

 

You may not see why a smaller Pad with less than stellar resolution, the best camera, and fastest processor has any reason to exist, but those are the very reasons FOR it to exist, and it will no way come out at $399.

 

And it'll sell a gagillion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasanman69 


What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlandd 

It's a good example because some people can't understand why anyone would want such a limited function, no frills, limited "user experience" smaller device for less $$$, and some even say Apple doesn't go there.   With some of the reasoning given why a 7" less than fully decked out cheaper tablet is very bad idea these wouldn't never have existed, so it negates much of that reasoning.

The reason iPods are a bad example is because they are VERY expensive for what you get. the Shuffle cost 3x as much as most 2GB music players with even less of a UI than most and the Nano has always costed 2-3x more than it's competition as well, and we see how expensive the new iPod Touch is...

And what's with the "limited user experience" thing? I'm pretty sure everyone expects the iPad Mini to do everything the big iPad can do for half the price. It's not going to be a book reader only. If Apple were to make it, it would probably still be well equipped just with older internals than the other iPads.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dasanman69 


Answer me this. How much ridicule would a competing device get on this forum if it had those specs and was announced tomorrow?

None at all. Proven hardware using a proven OS. Smaller form factor, different heat/power requirements and hence a good reason for using recent but not bleeding edge components.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaneur 

Nobody is considering that the target market for an iPad mini might range from little kids in kindergartens and elementary grades to casual users who can carry one in a jacket pocket without worrying about it, situations where an expensive retina display would be overkill. The selling point would be sturdy metal construction that doesn't offend the parents' or the kids' sensibilities, and the Apple ecosystem, in which parents and teachers can load the tablets with good stuff for kids easily.

Everybody here except maybe herbapou is assuming the target buyer is themselves. They may get the retina screen eventually, or even right away for more money. But Apple shouldn't let the kinder market suffer with cheap plastic and laggy software. They have kids in Cupertino too.

I actually think the iPad 2 is better for really young children. I was at the Apple store on Saturday and the kids were having fun on the iPads. The buttons are really big in the learning games. A mini is better suited for adults who can more precisely manipulate smaller interfaces.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andysol 

I was all on board with an iPad mini and thought it would be a great seller and do amazing.
Then the iPod touch came out- $100 more than it should have been. That kills the iPad mini- period.
A4? Faulty A5s? Are you all delusional? Yeah- let's have Apple use 2-3 year old hardware and price it $100 MORE than the competition. I'm a "user experience" vs "specs" (android) guy as much as the next- but that would be absolutely ridiculous and apple would lose all credibility.
The iPad mini needed to be the exact specs of the iPod touch. And at the iPod touch price (could have been 8gb). That would have been $100 over the competition- but the quality build, Retina display, and iOS would have made it easily worth it.
As it stands- if the ipad mini comes out- you won't see it until late 2013- when the currnt iPod touch drops to $199 and they release the iPad mini @ $299.
The bottom line is the touch is ridiculously overpriced for what you get. I would've bought one at $199 (8gb is fine). But $299 is crazy- and I believe the sales will show it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andysol 


I can buy a 2 year old one for $199? And it launched in 2010 at $229? What a deal!
No- I wanted the new one at $199. The A6, LTE, 1gb ram, 16gb, 8mp camera, bigger battery, amongst several other things could shave tons of cost over the estimated $168 it costs to make a new iPhone.
Give me the 4" retina screen, and 8gb memory (or 16- really, the cost difference wouldn't matter) for $199. Or- scrap the touch altogether and give me a $299 iPad mini that has the exact same guts, but is a 7.85" screen- doesn't even have to be retina. Either/or is fine.
$299 is crazy for a touch. I believe it will sell terribly at that price. The mini would have had slightly less margins (if no retina display)- but it would have sold tenfold over what the overpriced touch will- there is no question. Now- they wont make a mini for a while and likely won't sell many touches at all. The touch won't hurt apple- but it won't help. The mini would have helped a lot.
Just one guys opinion.

Completely agree.

When the new Touch was announced Apple pretty much put a nail in the "iPad Mini" coffin.

Honestly all the iPods last week released are overpriced. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackbook 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andysol 

I was all on board with an iPad mini and thought it would be a great seller and do amazing.
Then the iPod touch came out- $100 more than it should have been. That kills the iPad mini- period.
A4? Faulty A5s? Are you all delusional? Yeah- let's have Apple use 2-3 year old hardware and price it $100 MORE than the competition. I'm a "user experience" vs "specs" (android) guy as much as the next- but that would be absolutely ridiculous and apple would lose all credibility.
The iPad mini needed to be the exact specs of the iPod touch. And at the iPod touch price (could have been 8gb). That would have been $100 over the competition- but the quality build, Retina display, and iOS would have made it easily worth it.
As it stands- if the ipad mini comes out- you won't see it until late 2013- when the currnt iPod touch drops to $199 and they release the iPad mini @ $299.
The bottom line is the touch is ridiculously overpriced for what you get. I would've bought one at $199 (8gb is fine). But $299 is crazy- and I believe the sales will show it.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andysol 


I can buy a 2 year old one for $199? And it launched in 2010 at $229? What a deal!
No- I wanted the new one at $199. The A6, LTE, 1gb ram, 16gb, 8mp camera, bigger battery, amongst several other things could shave tons of cost over the estimated $168 it costs to make a new iPhone.
Give me the 4" retina screen, and 8gb memory (or 16- really, the cost difference wouldn't matter) for $199. Or- scrap the touch altogether and give me a $299 iPad mini that has the exact same guts, but is a 7.85" screen- doesn't even have to be retina. Either/or is fine.
$299 is crazy for a touch. I believe it will sell terribly at that price. The mini would have had slightly less margins (if no retina display)- but it would have sold tenfold over what the overpriced touch will- there is no question. Now- they wont make a mini for a while and likely won't sell many touches at all. The touch won't hurt apple- but it won't help. The mini would have helped a lot.
Just one guys opinion.

 

Completely agree.

 

When the new Touch was announced Apple pretty much put a nail in the "iPad Mini" coffin.

 

Honestly all the iPods last week released are overpriced. 

I don't agree!  The iPod and the iPad (including the iPad Mini) are two (possibly three) different target markets.  I see no problem with the iPod pricing as Apple has little competition in the pmp market.

The full-size tablet is dominated by the iPad at several price points... however Apple has no entry in the "mini" tablet market.  Here, IMO, Apple needs to have a full-featured (by Apple standards) price-compteitive (within $50 of others) offering -- even if it has to sacrifice gross margin to enter the market.

Apple will place a stake in the ground saying "this is what a mini tablet is, and this is the price".  

Then the tablet buyer will have 3 choices:

1. an inferior [competitive] mini tablet at a slightly lower price
2. a superior Apple iPad Mini tablet at about the same price
3. a superior Apple iPad (full size) at a higher price (but still unmatched by competition)

In reality, the buyer only has two choices -- the iPad Mini or the [full size] iPad.

Apple has never been afraid to let prices overlap for different categories or when addressing different target markets.

From a "total tablet market" perspective, an iPad Mini with models priced $249-$399 makes perfect sense.

Then, Apple will need to determine if it needs to address the market (if any) for an 11" - 17" tablet.

Originally Posted by dasanman69 
So don't learn how to write is your take? Offer it as an optional art class. How about math? Just let them use calculators? It's you're thinking that's making our kids dumber

Hardly. Inability to use a computing device in this day and age would constitute "dumbness". 

I'll never have kids, but I would have absolutely wished them to not only know how to write, but write in cursive. In addition to being on the bleeding edge of technologies and operating things that even I would consider "newfangled stuff". 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Originally Posted by dasanman69 
So don't learn how to write is your take? Offer it as an optional art class. How about math? Just let them use calculators? It's you're thinking that's making our kids dumber

 

Hardly. Inability to use a computing device in this day and age would constitute "dumbness". 

 

I'll never have kids, but I would have absolutely wished them to not only know how to write, but write in cursive. In addition to being on the bleeding edge of technologies and operating things that even I would consider "newfangled stuff". 

As a career, being a cutting edge technology expert will probably pay a living wage, but if you want your kids to be financially successful you should hope they become lawyers or politicians.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstone 

As a career, being a cutting edge technology expert will probably pay a living wage, but if you want your kids to be financially successful you should hope they become lawyers or politicians.

You forgot moderators.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell 

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstone 

As a career, being a cutting edge technology expert will probably pay a living wage, but if you want your kids to be financially successful you should hope they become lawyers or politicians.

 

You forgot moderators.

You can never forget moderators....

...Like the legendary Larry Wilcox -- one of the great moderators of all time!

OT:  has Apple released the total number of iP5 preorders for the weekend?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstone 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Originally Posted by dasanman69 
So don't learn how to write is your take? Offer it as an optional art class. How about math? Just let them use calculators? It's you're thinking that's making our kids dumber

 

Hardly. Inability to use a computing device in this day and age would constitute "dumbness". 

 

I'll never have kids, but I would have absolutely wished them to not only know how to write, but write in cursive. In addition to being on the bleeding edge of technologies and operating things that even I would consider "newfangled stuff". 

As a career, being a cutting edge technology expert will probably pay a living wage, but if you want your kids to be financially successful you should hope they become lawyers or politicians.

Sad, but true... note my sig!

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackbook 

 

 

 

The reason iPods are a bad example is because they are VERY expensive for what you get. the Shuffle cost 3x as much as most 2GB music players with even less of a UI than most and the Nano has always costed 2-3x more than it's competition as well, and we see how expensive the new iPod Touch is...

 

And what's with the "limited user experience" thing? I'm pretty sure everyone expects the iPad Mini to do everything the big iPad can do for half the price. It's not going to be a book reader only. If Apple were to make it, it would probably still be well equipped just with older internals than the other iPads.

The "limited user experience" was just riffing on the famous Jobs line about why Apple wasn't considering a smaller form tablet, which some folks here still take literally, even as we know now he was just playing us.  My point is that, regardless of the spin, nobody is expecting a smaller, less expensive, lower res iPad to provide the same or comparable user experience as the top end model, yet it offers something that most definitely fills a niche.  When MacVicta says the only scenario that makes any sense is for a high end iPad that's just a smaller size and sells for $399, I say, that's the scenario that doesn't make any sense and won't happen.  The "Apple can't sell for less than xxx because they only make high quality products" is forgetting about a huge segment of consumers who do buy Apple, but they look at the lower end.