Apple reveals iPad mini: 7.9" display, 7.2mm thin, starting at $329 - Page 7

The way Apple pitched this product was a mistake IMO. They should've ignored the competition and focused on how the product was thinner, lighter and a smaller form factor. Focus on the build quality, highlight some of the features like front and rear camera, fast wifi, cellular, etc. And then have a software/app focus to really sell the device. Maybe something education related. But the way Phil sold it was basically focusing on web browsing and saying its better than the 7" tablets because it has a bigger screen. It was kind of a head scratcher that he really didn't say anything to make the higher price seem justified.

I would guess SJ said no because it wasn't time and couldn't make a great product so small then

At $329, this is not particularly attractive. Google and Amazon must be pretty psyched that when Apple had a chance to crush them, it blinked. Well, actually, it got a little too greedy.

They will satisfy the crowd willing to pay $329 pretty quickly, after which the price will probably drop to (a still unsatisfactory) $299. The "right" price is $249. However, the iPod touch starts at $299, so they kind of boxed themselves in with a high floor price, unless they want to admit that smaller devices can/should cost more than their larger counterparts.

I was really looking forward to this device. Now I am looking at maybe picking up a Kindle Fire, just to see what it's like. At $200, that borders on an impulse buy. The fact that I feel this way suggests Apple miscalculated.

Apple has never been one to follow others in a race to the bottom in terms of pricing. With the small tablet market, it is an even more accelerated race to the bottom because they are literally selling them at subsidized prices in hopes that customers will spend enough with the device later to make up the slim margins (or loss) that they made on each sale. But it will definitely be a challenge for Apple to pull this one off with the level of success that they have become accustomed to. Public perception is now that subsidized prices are 'normal' prices and anything higher is out of line or Apple being greedy. 

Not the same because it's different manufacturers.

I never said that. Sales do slow down before the refresh date but then picks up exponentially.

 

 

I like the comment on the Surface RT.

 

 

 

Yes and yes.  I feel that Schiller dropped the ball this time.

 

I wished that they could have been more "disruptive" and focus on the long-term instead of just this quarter.

Who decides what the right price is? We won't know until we get some sales data on this product. If sales are soft and there aren't known supply constraints that will tell us the price was to high. If not than it wasn't. But I think Apple would've done a better job as pitching this as filling a hole in their line up (between the iPod touch and 9.7" iPad) vs competition for the cheaper 7" tablets. Obviously Apple isn't really looking to compete with them but rather catering to people who want a smaller form factor iPad or a cheaper one that has basically the same experience as the larger iPad.

 

 

And my bank account. 

This is one of those things we'l have to wait and see to find out. Despite there being cheaper Android tablets (even less than $100) since the iPad launched we still see the iPad starting at $499 dominating. They even updated their flagship product after half a year.

My guess is that Apple worked all this out a long time ago. Adding to their solid history of understanding markets, consumers, and being very disruptive in markets I have to think they have a lot of more relevant data than we do so I wouldn't count them out.

At $329 I think we'll see a much faster adoption in education and business where $499 was simply too much or too big. Sure, there are some that will still say that 7.9 4:3 is still too big and too much at that price but what does that matter? Apple isn't trying to get every possible customer or they would have made a sub-$100 tablet. They are just trying to get every customer that can make them money... and I think this will do it.

 

How do you know they missed?

 

There is now a purse sized iOS device with LTE and a month to month no contract plan probably around $30 for 3GB.  Using the conservative rule of thumb of 1 mins = 0.5MB then the $30 plan gives you 500 mins of talk time and 2GB of data.

 

As near as I can tell 80% of my wife's pants have no pockets and she never uses them in the other 20% anyway.  The current iPad doesn't fit her purse but the iPad Mini does.  

 

It's a lot bigger than her 4S but it's also a lot more useful.  It beats carrying both a kindle and a iPhone.  

 

I can always get her a pre-pay phone as a backup and toss it in to the glove compartment.

 

Now a LTE iPod Touch would have been a lot more disruptive but I bet the carriers would scream bloody murder.

I don't know that they missed. That's what IMO means. 

 

Yah sure...but I think that Apple has been trying to do an end run around the telcos...who aren't stupid and realize that...

 

I have one and been waiting for the iPad Mini.  I have a couple cheap tablets (TouchPad fire sale, Kindle) and we use the our iPad almost exclusively.  

 

That's even considering I have Amazon Prime and some free Amazon Video content.

Really?

 

A laughable assertion?  So you have a crystal ball and know of a parallel universe where they priced the iPad mini at $299?  Then you compared how many they sold with their profit margins at $299 vs what they sold in this universe at $329 and did the math to see which one was the better pricing strategy?

 

Ya- you're right- how could anyone not know?

Sorry if I missed it in this (long) thread, but is the iPad Mini camera the exact same resolution as the one in the full size iPad?

 

iPad mini page:

 

 

iPad page: 

 

 

Actually, I'm not sure which image was which. 

You can all argue whether Apple priced this to perfection or not vis-a-vis the competition. But Apple's strategy has always been to look inward. In that respect, the price of the iPad Mini makes perfect sense as it sits between the iPod Touch and iPad. Even though the $299 iPod Touch has 32 GB. I'd think it's natural for Apple to set escalating entry price points for iPod Touch, iPad Mini and iPad.

 

Mmm...looking inward I see that the 13" MBA and 13" MBP are the same.  I don't there would have been any confusion or negative effect of making both the iPod touch $299 and the iPad Mini $299.  Especially since Apple views the entry price point of the iPod Touch line to be $199.  

 

If the Touch and iPad lines overlapped at the end of one and start of the other that also would make perfect sense.

Only if you were silly enough to sell on the dip.

Funny how they touted resolution over screen area for so long, then turned around just for their Nexus 7 comparison and touted the Minis screen area. They're having it both ways, and most people will take what they said in stride.

Well, let's be honest.  Resolution is only a small part of the equation.  Usable resolution is really what is important.  I think that was what the Microsoft guy was trying to say about the Surface.  It doesn't matter how high the resolution if the OS only allows a certain view on the screen.  Look at the 1080 resolution screens they are putting out for Android phones.  You can still only view so much on a < 5" screen.  The Nokia Lumia 820/920.  The screens may have different resolutions, but the same info is still shown on it.  One may be "sharper" but it's the same screen info.  I'm not bothered by the mini not having retina, I'm just happy it's small enough to fit one hand.

I predict this is going to be HUGE! From a first glance, it looks like nothing more than a smaller iPad with no new tecnologies, but the new technologies are contained within the design. From the display to its design to its manufacturing process. It's small size and light weight with the power of the iPad 2 but with updated features and lower price could - over time - make this product more popular than the iPad itself!

Like what was reported here, expect a fifth generation iPad early next year that will borrow iPad Mini's design innovations for a lighter, thinner new model. This, along with the A6X, will certainly help sales of the iPad keep pace, but there is an unforeseen consequence: consumers will demand a new iPad Mini model with an A6. Apple will be forced to meet that demand. Before long, the iPad Mini will outsell the iPad.

I'm also noticing some changes in the way Apple does business:

1. They've scrapped the one-year interval between generation models. This could be because of the up-coming competition expected with Microsoft Surface. This fourth generation iPad basically shows a rush to market by taking the then-current model and swapping out the processor and its FaceTime cameras, as well as adding the Lightning port, and - walla - it's a fourth gen iPad. No major design tweaks necessary.

2. I'm somewhat disturbed that the new iPod Touch does not have an ambient light sensor. We've been told that they had to get rid of it in order to make it as thin as it is. This is a design compromise. Does this mean that if they get a future iPhone (or iPad) to be as thin, they'll skimp the sensor for these as well? I certainly hope not and hope that the skimping of the sensor in the latest generation of the iPod Touch is an exception, not a trend.

3. In the past year, Apple's innovations with the iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch, iPod Nano, and Apple TV have been design and CPU innovations. I have not seen any new "smart" technologies, like the gyroscope, accelerometer, e-compass, ambient light sensor, proximity sensor, noise cancellation microphone, etc. These technologies are what started a revolution. I hope Apple recognizes this and is continuing to investigate new smart technologies for future products!

No kidding! I was hoping for $29.95!

A few things:

1. It doesn't look like the price point hurt too much considering they sold out of launch day units in a matter of hours. 
2. Black sales are slower than the white sales.  I have to wonder if this is a realization that the anodized aluminum is very prone to scratching, which could hurt resale value. I assume the ease of scratching the slate is also why the aluminum hinge on the smart cover is now covered in material.

1. I ordered the 16GB version.  I'd rather have more storage but I'm tired of paying $100 for 16GB more storage when you can buy a 16GB flash card for $10 online.  1000% mark up is hard to swallow. Personally, I think the pricing should be as follows: 16GB = $329  32GB = $379  64GB = $479. Of course, the larger margins on the higher capacity models most likely allow for a lower starting price.

Too bad Apple fucked this up, I was going to wait in line to buy one until I learned that it did not have a Retina display.  

 

I would use it primarily for reading, so without a Retina display it's no better than my Nook Color for reading text (actually worse:  iPad is 163 ppi, nook color is 169 ppi).  Sure, it's better at everything else, but that's why I have a MacBook Pro!  Sharp text is what I'm after, and it's plenty easy to load my rooted Nook Color with epub books and pdf files.  95% of the time I'm only using the touch screen to turn pages, so I don't even notice the nasty android OS.  

 

Funny thing, I was ready to pay $400 for a Retina iPad Mini.  It's not a matter of price but of package.  I simply feel that for my needs, an 8" Retina iPad would be absolute perfection.  Without a Retina display, the iPad mini has nothing to differentiate it from other tablets/readers as far as hardware goes, and in fact it's 163 ppi is inferior to many similar tablets.

 

If Steve Jobs were alive, this would NEVER have happened.  He would thrown a 3 hour tantrum upon learning that it had a low-res display.  It's a STUPID decision obviously made by some MBA jackass who made the design goal a price point instead of a well-balanced product.  If Apple keeps this up, they will slowly decline into a maker of shiny baubles with no redeeming technical features.  

 

Have you ever read text on a Retina display?  It's amazing, even an iPhone works quite well as an ebook reader because of the exquisite sharpness of the text.  Of course photos also benefit from the Retina display's high resolution.  

 

Make no mistake, the Retina display is a great differentiating feature of the iPad.  The iPad mini will sell well, and it's relatively low price will be the reason for many consumers, but without a Retina display it's just not an amazing product next to competing tablets.  The mini cashes in on the iPad's reputation without buttressing that reputation.  Worst of all, compared to similarly sized tablets costing less money, choosing an iPad mini requires a big sacrifice in display quality for the iOS experience.  A Google Nexus features a 216 ppi resolution (closing in on Retina iPad's 264 ppi) for only $250.  It's a superior choice for those who actually read books on their tablets.  

 

Hey, if you like to read and want sharp text, why not get a Retina iPad?  Good question.  I plan to now that I know Apple fucked up the mini, but for many consumers the Retina iPad is just too big to use as a reader.  Holding up the large iPad for reading gets tiresome for many people, and the mini was supposed to be for them.  Understand Mr. Schiller?  Size is the issue, not price!  Even so, I suspect that for the same $329, Apple could have put a Retina display in the iPad mini and utterly dominated the small-tablet market, thereby reaping whirlwind profits.  

More comments about what Steve would have never done.

Tell us how you can put a 2048x1536 display into that device and make cheaper than the 10" model, as light and as thin?

 

Which is why they actually design and build great products and you don't. They know understand the issues.

 

A retinal screen would have increased cost. There is no debate here. As sure as the Retina looks better, it costs more. We can debate the actual premium, but there is no debate it would cost more to build.

Then you would need an A6 processor at minimum to drive it. Again this would cost more.

Then you need a more powerful battery to power the A6.  Again this would cost more.

 

Then because of the bigger battery it would be heavier, and it would run hotter because of the A6.

 

Thicker, heavier, hotter, more expensive is not a winning formula.  You might have been willing to pay $400 for that, but most wouldn't.

 

Retina is better, but a great number of people don't care. There was a report in the Summer that iPad 2 was 41% of iPad sales.  This is with 132dpi screen that needs retina much more than Mini does, this with only 16GB models, this is with practically no advertising.

Thank the lord they put a 5MP camera in there. Pheww.... In 6 months with a refresh they will include a better interior, it just sucks Apple went BACKWARDS rather than forwards and all of you suckers who bought on early obviously have too much disposable income.

Before I receive jabs, I own a Macbook and Iphone 5, I love Apple just hate how they took a step back with this new product.

I love the new iMacs sheik design. Perhaps when my current computer dies I will transition to a new one. No reason to replace something that isn't broken right?

 

 

NO. ONE. CARES.

 

Come on, really?

That's all you had to offer to my post?

Yes. Your argument should be able to stand on its own without this nonsense. Your ownership (or lack thereof) of Apple products is meaningless. It doesn't protect you from rebuttal, it doesn't validate your position. 

 

This is a tactic that many trolls use, as they believe the opposite of the above. By positioning themselves as owners of the company's products, they think they can whine about them as much as they wish, and they also do it to make third parties reading their posts believe that they're actual Apple users actually disgruntled by whatever.

 

They're not.

What makes me nervous about buying the mini is what happened to those people that bought the iPad 3 in March, less than a year later and they've upgraded it. With so many people disappointed in the specs and price of this unit (wishing it had a better processor, retina display, and memory wasn't $100 more for 16gb), there will be a lot of very unhappy people who buy these now, for Christmas, if Apple updates the mini within the year with all or any of the features people wish it had now.

 

Since Apple already has similar products with these upgraded features it only stands to reason that Apple has plans to release an upgraded version sometime in the future given how much better the product could have been today. You have to ask yourself; "should I buy now or wait a while to get the features I really want?"

 

I sold my iPad 3 a couple of months ago because it was too big and was looking forward to the mini. I have bad eyes and can notice a huge difference between my iPhone 3g and iPhone 5 display (much less the iPad 3's display) so I understand why people are disappointed in the screen resolution. I've been using my sisters Kindle Fire HD as an e-reader until the mini came out but now I hesitate because of how basic it is. Hell, Apple could have made an iPad mini and an iPad mini HD and captured more market share. But, they'd have to price them accordingly.

 

My sister wants her Kindle fire back so I'm stuck with a decision to make. Any other time and I'd not hesitate but now that decision isn't as clear. I may just buy a Kindle and wait till Apple updates the mini like you know they will.

 

The Kindles aren't retina either. Why don't you wait until the Mini is in store and check it out in person, rather than being obsessed with the spec sheet. Maybe bring your sisters Fire along for comparison.

 

As far as waiting. Any consumer electronics you buy is always going to be surpassed within a year.

 

The Mini is extremely unlikely to get an upgrade for at least a year. It wouldn't surprise me if took 2 years before they released the Retina model (along with a Higher price).

 

Lineup might look like this in 2014:

 

iPad Mini: $299

iPad Mini Retina: $399

iPad Retina: $499

I will definitely check out the mini once it's in store although given the specs I doubt I'll buy one. My iPhone 5 is noticeably faster than my iPad 3 was. I would imagine it's faster than the iPad 2 as well as the mini so it's not just the retina display that's disappointing. Yes, I am obsessing over the spec sheet but given what I'm currently used to, the mini isn't up to par.

 

It seems to me that Apple created the mini for people that wanted a smaller more affordable tablet without considering that the people who already own apple products would want something with better specifications and more power. Why they didn't leverage some of their better technologies for an upgraded option is confusing and disappointing. I would have happily paid more for a better more powerful product given that option, because the full size iPad is just too big for my needs and the "right size" iPad Mini isn't up to the specifications I desire. When you look at the component breakdown and estimated cost of these units http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/10/20/ipad-mini-build-cost-estimated-to-start-at-200-may-retail-for-299 (assuming this is even somewhat accurate), Apple has a lot of leeway for upgraded options. Hell, they're making a killing alone on flash memory!

 

They leveraged anything they could for cost reductions, which are more important at this stage. A5 is smaller, and has been coming out of the Fab for a long time, so it would be much cheaper and in plentiful supply. This keeps costs down and supply up. Next year Mini will almost certainly get an A6 upgrade (after A7 is out) when it is less expensive to include and supply is plentiful. 

 

Those cost estimates might be interesting for comparison purposes, but they are useless for margin purposes. They calculate 40-50% margins on entry level full size iPads. Yet court documents show Apples margin was 23% on entry level iPads. That is a massive error making these educated guesses useless for figuring out what room Apple has for better parts.  Apple almost certainly doubly squeezed on the Mini, both in Margins and ASP, and there are already tons of complaints about how overpriced it is. Putting in more expensive components will either further erode margin, or increase price (and complaints about price).

 

If you want bleeding edge you aren't going to see it in a Mini. Those parts will be destined for higher margin, higher ASP iPhones and Retina iPads, at least until the Mini splits into two models, regular Mini and Retina Mini. But I don't see that happening until 2014.

 

Your plan B is to buy a B&W kindle reader? Have you tried one? If you think a slow Mini will put you off, how will you react to slow e-ink?

 

I understand the math but that doesn't mean I have to like it. Like I said, I was disappointed with the Mini offering and did state that I would have paid more for the higher tech.

 

My plan B is to compare my options side by side when I can get a look at them and make my decision at that time what I'm going to do. I have a Mac Mini attached to a 50" plasma TV right now that I can emulate my Kindle app and read on my TV as well as a PC hooked to a 32" LCD in my bedroom that I can do the same so it's not imperative that I have a tablet (although it's desirable).

 

I do travel and like to read when I'm away from home and doing this on my iPhone 5 is a bandaid until I purchase a tablet. Do I need an Apple product to do this? No. But if the resolution of a competing product is comparable at a considerable cost savings (1/3 of the price for the B&W Kindle) then I would lean more towards spending less until Apple upgrades the line. Problem is, how long do I have to wait, do I even want to wait, and I hate spending money on lower quality, much less give money to Google or Samsung (which you do with Apple products now anyway).

 

For some people it's a no brainer, it's an easy decision one way or the other. I bought the iPhone 3, 4, and 5 only to have the 3G, 4S, and probably 5? come out shortly after. Many people are like me and are tired of that life cycle and will stop buying Apple products without having a diverse offering like they do for their desk top models. It's a "hurry to market" mentality that I as an investor in Apple stock am afraid of.

 

Probably the best color tablet reader on the market if you are not wedded to the Kindle ecosystem 7" 243 ppi screen.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/30/nook-hd-review/