or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumor: Fifth-gen iPad, second-gen iPad mini to debut in March
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Fifth-gen iPad, second-gen iPad mini to debut in March - Page 5

post #161 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

I don't think Apple would have a problem selling Retina iPad Minis for $429.

Plenty of consumers especially Apple's core demographic don't mind spending more for a higher quality experience than the competition.

Will Apple price it that high? Who knows. They may wow us all like they did last year and launch a retina mini in a couple months for $329.

That would be amazing but who would buy an iPod touch or iPad if the Mini has it all plus some for less money?

That's another consideration outside of the margins debate. Cannibalization has been minor so far but that's probably because the iPad is still far better than the Mini and its worth the premium.

But once the mini gets Retina and a new processor the line between the 2 would blur. If the retina Mini is significantly cheaper ($329) than the iPad the majority of people will see no need to spend $170 more when they can get everything for less.

But that train of thought would take us right back to margins. Yes an ever important issue.
I get what you're saying about cannibalization. My guess is like the iPod touch, the mini will never have the exact same internals as the full-size iPad. But Apple can't ignore competitors going cutthroat and selling good tablets cheap. Right now there are tablets cheaper than the mini that have better displays. I've no doubt they'll catch up on weight and battery life. I'm sure Apple would rather have cannibalization than people switching to Google or Amazon. I guess bottom line is I don't buy the argument some are making that because the mini is selling so well at $329 Apple could easily raise the price and continue to sell bucket loads.
post #162 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

That's why I'm 90% sure the Retina Mini is going to cost more than $329. This Spring they'll probably announce the Retina model as a higher end addition to the iPad Mini lineup, meaning the current model that came out a few months ago will continue to sell as is with the Retina being the "flagship" of the iPad Mini lineup.

 

I'm thinking that they'll make the current mini $299 and the new retina mini $399.  Or maybe even $249 and $349 but that seems a lot tighter.  You'll get both a price drop on the entry level device and a price increase on the current version.

 

Apple wants to excel in phones but my feel is that it wants to dominate tablets long term. 

 

If Apple can fend off Android tablets in 2013 it goes a long way in that goal.  A $249 iPad Mini and $349 iPad Mini Retina lineup seems very potent to me whether there is one or two updates in 2013.

post #163 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

I'm thinking that they'll make the current mini $299 and the new retina mini $399.  Or maybe even $249 and $349 but that seems a lot tighter.  You'll get both a price drop on the entry level device and a price increase on the current version.

Apple wants to excel in phones but my feel is that it wants to dominate tablets long term. 

If Apple can fend off Android tablets in 2013 it goes a long way in that goal.  A $249 iPad Mini and $349 iPad Mini Retina lineup seems very potent to me whether there is one or two updates in 2013.
How does this fend off competitors when you have tablets cheaper than $329 that have a better display than the mini? No doubt Google and Amazon are going to get more aggressive in this space, not less. So I don't know how increasing the price fends anyone off. I know everyone's talking about margins but fact is when the iPad went retina the price did not go up. It stayed the same and the previous gen got cheaper. With the 5th gen iPod touch you get more memory (and the same display as the iPhone) for the same price as the 4th gen. I'd rather have compressed margins than no sale at all. Unless you think Apple can charge whatever they want and people will continue to lap them up.
post #164 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

I'm thinking that they'll make the current mini $299 and the new retina mini $399.  Or maybe even $249 and $349 but that seems a lot tighter.  You'll get both a price drop on the entry level device and a price increase on the current version.

Apple wants to excel in phones but my feel is that it wants to dominate tablets long term. 

If Apple can fend off Android tablets in 2013 it goes a long way in that goal.  A $249 iPad Mini and $349 iPad Mini Retina lineup seems very potent to me whether there is one or two updates in 2013.

Why would they do this now and not do it back in October with the holiday season looming and Amazon and Google's budget offerings just arriving? Sure, they want to dominate but they already do so what motivation is there to gain in unit share but lose in profit share? Did Apple make a profitless iPod in order to win the PMP market or did they do it with well made, well marketed, and well organized pricing, features and releases?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #165 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I get what you're saying about cannibalization. My guess is like the iPod touch, the mini will never have the exact same internals as the full-size iPad. But Apple can't ignore competitors going cutthroat and selling good tablets cheap. Right now there are tablets cheaper than the mini that have better displays. I've no doubt they'll catch up on weight and battery life. I'm sure Apple would rather have cannibalization than people switching to Google or Amazon. I guess bottom line is I don't buy the argument some are making that because the mini is selling so well at $329 Apple could easily raise the price and continue to sell bucket loads.


That's true. We'll see what Apple does but they're doing pretty well against the competition of better spec'd cheaper 7 inch tablets.

I'm sure whatever they do this spring or next fall is going to take them even further than the competition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

I'm thinking that they'll make the current mini $299 and the new retina mini $399.  Or maybe even $249 and $349 but that seems a lot tighter.  You'll get both a price drop on the entry level device and a price increase on the current version.

Apple wants to excel in phones but my feel is that it wants to dominate tablets long term. 

If Apple can fend off Android tablets in 2013 it goes a long way in that goal.  A $249 iPad Mini and $349 iPad Mini Retina lineup seems very potent to me whether there is one or two updates in 2013.

That's an interesting idea.

It'd be weird for them to move the price like that but I guess the $329 starting price is stranger.

The current Mini would be killer at $229 or $249. I'm not sure if we'll see that price this year but that'd be game changing.
post #166 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

With the 5th gen iPod touch you get more memory (and the same display as the iPhone) for the same price as the 4th gen.

According to MacTracker the 4th and 5th generation iPod Touch both debuted with 32GB and 64GB storage for $299 and $399, respectively. Note that the 5th gen iPod Touch appears to have the same display as the iPhone 5 but the 4th gen Touch clear did not have the same display as the iPhone 4.

There was also a 2.25 year gap between the 4th and 5th gen which makes me wonder why people think Apple will suddenly take a product they carefully selected to use components from 2011 just to jump it twice in year to match the iPhone's components, then continue a 6 month cycle regardless of any evidence to support such a rapid product evolution.
Quote:
I'd rather have compressed margins than no sale at all. Unless you think Apple can charge whatever they want and people will continue to lap them up.

That's too simple an answer. If you go for a short term sale with a smaller price point you can easily jack up the price later which means you can shoot yourself in the foot trying to make headway into a market. Apple doesn't have this issue in any of it's physical product markets.

Saying "Apple can charge whatever they want and people will continue to lap them up" is a strawman. Apple has never charged whatever. It's well calculated price based on a large number of factors. They've rarely been wrong, unless you want to say that most of their products are priced too low do to the inability to keep up with production demands.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #167 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

The current Mini would be killer at $229 or $249. I'm not sure if we'll see that price this year but that'd be game changing.

I don't comprehend such comments. It sounds like you're stating "lower prices will sell more," but you've put it into a window of between $229 to $249. Wouldn't you think $199 would sell even better? Or how about $149 or $79? I guess what I do understand is why $228 or less is too little and $230 or more is too much? Is this some psychology I'm not aware of or is this an unspoken statement of what you have assume would be a price Apple could still profit from the device because it's more inline with the considerably smaller display size (up to 40%) of the cheaper competitors? If the former, how so? If the latter, by what criteria have you determined this?
Edited by SolipsismX - 1/12/13 at 8:39am

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #168 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I don't comprehend such comments. It sounds like you're stating "lower prices will sell more," but you've put it into a window of between $229 to $249. Wouldn't you think $199 would sell even better? Or how about $149 or $79? I guess what I do understand is why $228 or less is too little and $230 or more is too much? Is this some psychology I'm not aware of or is this an unspoken statement of what you have assume would be a price Apple could still profit from the device because it's more inline with the considerably smaller display size (up to 40%) of the cheaper competitors? If the former, how so? If the latter, by what criteria have you determined this?

First, I've personally seen cases where we sold more of a product after raising the price. I remember one case where we couldn't sell a product at all for $1.00 but sold out within days after raising the price to $12.95.

That said, price is rarely determined purely on the basis of "how many can we sell at each price?". Rather, you calculate the PROFITS at each price point. Obviously, you could sell a lot more iPads at $99, but Apple would lose money left and right. The general rule is to maximize profits or return on investment rather than maximizing sales volume.

That can sometimes be tempered by marketing purposes. For example, you may sell it at a sub-optimum price to gain market share early on in a market's life cycle with the hope of maximizing future profits. Either way, it would be silly to try to simply maximize sales - if that's all you want to do, just give them away.
"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 #169 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

The general rule is to maximize profits or return on investment rather than maximizing sales volume.

Sure, and I'm said as many times but specific price points are based on factors we will never be privy too outside of some spill over in a court case. I'd expect any claim to specific prices that would be better for Apple than the prices Apple chose for themselves to be highly detailed to explain the reasoning as to why they think Apple doesn't understand their own market as well as they do, hence my bewilderment.
Edited by SolipsismX - 1/12/13 at 8:57am

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #170 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I don't comprehend such comments. Lower prices will sell more. That is what it sounds like you're saying but you've put it into a window of $229 to $249. Wouldn't you think $199 would sell even better? Or how about $149 or $79? I guess what I do understand is why $228 or less is too little and $230 or more is too much? Is this some psychology I'm not aware of or is this an unspoken assumption of what you assume would be a price Apple could still profit from the device? If the former, how so? If the latter, by what criteria have you determined this?

Exactly. They're selling out at it's current price, what would lowering the price do except lower margins. I was able to find a iPad mini at a Target just before Christmas after multiple attempts and they had about 15 iPads sitting there every time I went. I went to the same Target the day after Christmas and all the iPads were gone.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #171 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


I don't comprehend such comments. It sounds like you're stating "lower prices will sell more," but you've put it into a window of between $229 to $249. Wouldn't you think $199 would sell even better? Or how about $149 or $79? I guess what I do understand is why $228 or less is too little and $230 or more is too much? Is this some psychology I'm not aware of or is this an unspoken statement of what you have assume would be a price Apple could still profit from the device because it's more inline with the considerably smaller display size (up to 40%) of the cheaper competitors? If the former, how so? If the latter, by what criteria have you determined this?

 

I mention $229 because that would be the price of the current model if Apple continued selling it for $100 less like they did with the iPad 2 and iPhones. $249 is in reference to nht's post.

 

Do I think it would sell more at those prices? Not necessarily. iPod Classic sales didn't sky rocket when the price went from $299 to $249. The price drop didn't make much of a difference for people.

 

I wouldn't consider any product over $200 an impulse buy product. People investing $200 or more in technology are going to buy what best fits them. Price is a consideration but not the biggest consideration.

post #172 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

I mention $229 because that would be the price of the current model if Apple continued selling it for $100 less like they did with the iPad 2 and iPhones. $249 is in reference to nht's post.

Do I think it would sell more at those prices? Not necessarily. iPod Classic sales didn't sky rocket when the price went from $299 to $249. The price drop didn't make much of a difference for people.

I wouldn't consider any product over $200 an impulse buy product. People investing $200 or more in technology are going to buy what best fits them. Price is a consideration but not the biggest consideration.

OK. I understand where you're coming from now. I thought you mean drop the entry level price of the current model, not talking about a generation old model. On that note I wouldn't expect a $100 drop in price for the same storage capacity. If you look at the 4th gen iPod Touch and the 5th gen iPod Touch the price difference is $50. For that reason I wouldn't expect the iPad mini which is in the same price and performance category as the 5th gen Touch to drop by more than $50.

Personally I can't imagine many would choose that 4th gen iPod Touch when the for $50 more you get a ear new ASIC, bigger display, and a much, much better display. Is it a stop gate for holding the $199 price which the 5th gen will serve once the 6th gen is released?

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #173 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

 

 

The Retina Mini probably won't replace the current Mini (especially if it's coming out in 3 months as rumored). It will likely be sold in addition to the non-Retina Mini. So no Apple wouldn't be raising the price. They would be adding a more high end option (see: 5G iPod Touch).

 

 

 

 

Think $329 for the non-Retina and $429 for the Retina, to match the $399 for the non-Retina iPad 2 and $499 for the Retina iPad 4. If Apple has no problem selling Mini's for $329, why lower the price so soon?

 

 

 

 

Well if, as I've assumed, Apple adds a Retina model this spring for a $100 upcharge I don't see the current model's price dropping.

 

If Apple were to continue selling non-Retina Minis after this 1st generation then I could see the price dropping to $229. But what I think is more likely, is once technology catches up, we'll see the price of the Retina Mini dropping to $329.

 

I think I've been misunderstood so I should list my assumptions.

 

1. The iPad mini will be the mainstream form factor going forward

2. Therefore Apple will offer just one full size iPad model (outside refurbs), a current model iPad mini and a previous model of iPad mini.

3. Release cycles move to 6 months.

4. Normal incremental product improvements after 6 months will arrive at the same price point.

5. Large improvements after just 6 months justify new pricing.

 

There is no way we're going to see an iPad mini at $229 or even $249 this year if ever. They aren't making their usual margins now at $329 and they're already using old components.

 

Projected Spring 2013 lineup

 

$499 iPad 5

$399 iPad mini 2 (retina)

$299 iPad mini 1

 

Projected Fall 2013 lineup

 

$499 iPad 6

$399 iPad mini 3

$299 iPad mini 1

 

Projected Spring 2014 lineup

 

$499 iPad 7

$399 iPad mini 4

$299 iPad mini 2 (with reduced storage and the chips fabricated on newer technology to cut costs)

post #174 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

I think I've been misunderstood so I should list my assumptions.

1. The iPad mini will be the mainstream form factor going forward
2. Therefore Apple will offer just one full size iPad model (outside refurbs), a current model iPad mini and a previous model of iPad mini.
3. Release cycles move to 6 months.
4. Normal incremental product improvements after 6 months will arrive at the same price point.
5. Large improvements after just 6 months justify new pricing.

There is no way we're going to see an iPad mini at $229 or even $249 this year if ever. They aren't making their usual margins now at $329 and they're already using old components.

Projected Spring 2013 lineup

$499 iPad 5
$399 iPad mini 2 (retina)
$299 iPad mini 1

Projected Fall 2013 lineup

$499 iPad 6
$399 iPad mini 3
$299 iPad mini 1

Projected Spring 2014 lineup

$499 iPad 7
$399 iPad mini 4
$299 iPad mini 2 (with reduced storage and the chips fabricated on newer technology to cut costs)

I agree that's close to my predictions of the iPad lineup's future.

The Mini will take over for the iPad 2 once it gets retina and the low end (last gen models) will compete with cheaper Android tablets.
post #175 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

According to MacTracker the 4th and 5th generation iPod Touch both debuted with 32GB and 64GB storage for $299 and $399, respectively. Note that the 5th gen iPod Touch appears to have the same display as the iPhone 5 but the 4th gen Touch clear did not have the same display as the iPhone 4.

There was also a 2.25 year gap between the 4th and 5th gen which makes me wonder why people think Apple will suddenly take a product they carefully selected to use components from 2011 just to jump it twice in year to match the iPhone's components, then continue a 6 month cycle regardless of any evidence to support such a rapid product evolution.
That's too simple an answer. If you go for a short term sale with a smaller price point you can easily jack up the price later which means you can shoot yourself in the foot trying to make headway into a market. Apple doesn't have this issue in any of it's physical product markets.

Saying "Apple can charge whatever they want and people will continue to lap them up" is a strawman. Apple has never charged whatever. It's well calculated price based on a large number of factors. They've rarely been wrong, unless you want to say that most of their products are priced too low do to the inability to keep up with production demands.
I'm sure $329 was carefully considered. But I still don't buy that adding a retina screen 6 months later has to increase the price $60. Especially when in general tech is coming down in price not getting more expensive,
post #176 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 

"iPad upgrade silliness?

 

What if the current iPad Mini 16 GB WiFi + cellular is offered for $329 (currently $429) and promoted * as a personal appliance (smart phone and tablet computer) for emerging [technology] countries.

 

* Add internal earphone and BT mic/earphone so it could be used as a phone.

 

 I've read that China Mobile, alone, will have 233 million subscribers available for LTE by the end of 2013.

 

 

 

 

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/01/china-mobile-admits-to-a-confidentiality-agreement-with-apple.html

 

Dick... do you really think that Apple would drop the Mini $100 so soon after its intro? Sure they did it with the original iPhone but there were consequences.

 

If they are going to upgrade the Mini so soon (and the iPad) it better be really good... and not cheaper than the intro price.

 

Short answer... Yes!

 

Somewhat longer answer...  Yes, whenever they can!  *

 

* it doesn't have to be "really good" -- it just has to be better enough for most people!  An upgrade to 802.11ac WiFi, alone, would justify the upgrade.

 

 

We're talking about leading/dominating a market for the next decade -- and the importance of discrete products will be measured, not individually, but to  by how they contribute to that market dominance.

 

 

First, I really don't. know -- we are talking about rumors, here... and the possible reasons/logic behind those rumors -- but here's why I think they should be implemented,

 


Let me try to frame my thoughts with:

Sometime between the years 2007 and 2010 we entered the post pc era -- between the iPhone and the iPad.

Post pc solutions will dominate computer growth for the next 5 years and displace [the bulk of] personal computers as we know them ** -- just as personal computers displaced maimframe and minicomputers -- only  this displacement will be much broader and more rapid than the personal computer.

 

** I do not consider servers and server farms as personal computers.


The killer app for the personal computer was the spreadsheet (first VisiCalc, then...Excel).  The killer app provided new capability and accessibility in an inexpensive package (including $2,200 ** computer) -- that could not be matched by maimframes and minicomputers.  
 

*** $10,000 in today's dollars


The personal computer displacement of maimframes and minicomputers brought computing to a new class of users -- less expert than their predecessors -- but in exponentially greater numbers.

 

For sake of this discussion, let's substitute appliance computers for post pc computers, giving:

 

  •   appliance computers == post pc computers

 

and:

  • appliance computers != laptop computers
  • appliance computers != WinTel


 

The killer app for the appliance computer is... there is no killer app... it is the device itself... or it is the ecosystem and any/all of the hundreds of thousands of apps to suit individual needs.  The appliance computer provides new capabilities and accessibility in an inexpensive package -- less than $400 -- that cannot be matched by their predecessors.

 

The appliance computer displacement of personal computers brings computing to a new class of users -- inexpert users -- and in exponentially greater numbers.

 

 

Here's the way I see it:

  • The appliance computer is accessible and useable by almost anyone... everyone!
  •  
  • Because of its price, people will buy the appliance computer to get the capabilities (apps) they need.
  •  
  • Because of its price, the appliance computer is expendable (disposable) to many people
  •  

 

 

Whew!

 

 

 

Quote:

Dick... do you really think that Apple would drop the Mini $100 so soon after its intro? Sure they did it with the original iPhone but there were consequences.

 

If they are going to upgrade the Mini so soon (and the iPad) it better be really good... and not cheaper than the intro price.

 

Yes... if you look out over the landscape and where the iPad and iPad Mini appliance computers are going in the next 5-10 years!  

 

The rules of the game have changed -- he who anticipates the needs and delivers timely solutions will win the war.

 

Current iPad install base > 100,000,000

|
|
V

 

Current Population Clock

U.S. 315,151,252

World 7,059,225,873

20:50 UTC (EST+5) Jan 12, 2013

 

 

http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

 

Typed on my iPad and iMac -- I lost my voice and Siri won't work for me :)

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #177 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

I think I've been misunderstood so I should list my assumptions.

1. The iPad mini will be the mainstream form factor going forward
2. Therefore Apple will offer just one full size iPad model (outside refurbs), a current model iPad mini and a previous model of iPad mini.
3. Release cycles move to 6 months.
4. Normal incremental product improvements after 6 months will arrive at the same price point.
5. Large improvements after just 6 months justify new pricing.

There is no way we're going to see an iPad mini at $229 or even $249 this year if ever. They aren't making their usual margins now at $329 and they're already using old components.

Projected Spring 2013 lineup

$499 iPad 5
$399 iPad mini 2 (retina)
$299 iPad mini 1

Projected Fall 2013 lineup

$499 iPad 6
$399 iPad mini 3
$299 iPad mini 1

Projected Spring 2014 lineup

$499 iPad 7
$399 iPad mini 4
$299 iPad mini 2 (with reduced storage and the chips fabricated on newer technology to cut costs)
Once a retina mini comes out I'd love to know who would want a non-retina one when you could get a retina iPod touch with more storage for the same price (under your scenario). Seems to me the only reason for increasing the price on a retina mini is knowing it will eat into full size iPad sales. I think a retina mini at $329 would really own the tablet market. At $399 I could see people looking at other options (under the assumption that 7" tablets from Amazon and Google are not going up in price).
post #178 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I'm sure $329 was carefully considered. But I still don't buy that adding a retina screen 6 months later has to increase the price $60. Especially when in general tech is coming down in price not getting more expensive,

  • New ASIC with X suffix for the wider memory bandwidth required for the Retina display, with better CPU and Rogue 6 GPU (if not Rogue 6 then some new battery tech to cut down on mass and volume)
  • A 326 PPI display at 2048x1536 resolution (Imagine the iPhone's 5 display but about 4.5x larger)
  • IGZO tech (is this even on the market for any vendor?)

That is only the short list. We don't know what potentially other changes there could be to shrink components to fit the smaller size or if they are getting the same gross profit from the smaller iPad. What if it's smaller than its larger brother? How do you account for the costs for what I think are the minimum mandatory changes needed to make this feasible from a technical standpoint? Have you see any info on what IGZO will likely cost Apple per display?

If you are using tried and true business models that Apple loves to work in we would expect to see this tech on the higher-end and then trickle down to the areas that are already less profitable. I am, of course, assuming the iPad mini is less profitable per unit than the iPad. Why do you think the 15" MBP got a Retina display before the 13" MBP? The iGPU that runs that display was available when the 15" RMBP launched and it's clearly easier and cheaper to make a smaller display than a larger one... but is still too much compared to the cost to profit ratio of that device until you can bring down costs from a few million 15" sheets being cut first?

As I've stated before I want what everyone else here wants I just see nothing substantial to make it seem like it's a reasonable expectation. That is not to say it can't happen but that's not planning a trip to Yellow Stone National Park this Summer because I'm afraid the super volcano could blow at any time. Doesn't mean it couldn't but the data all say it's not likely.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #179 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I'm sure $329 was carefully considered. But I still don't buy that adding a retina screen 6 months later has to increase the price $60. Especially when in general tech is coming down in price not getting more expensive,

  • New ASIC with X suffix for the wider memory bandwidth required for the Retina display, with better CPU and Rogue 6 GPU (if not Rogue 6 then some new battery tech to cut down on mass and volume)
  • A 326 PPI display at 2048x1536 resolution (Imagine the iPhone's 5 display but about 4.5x larger)
  • IGZO tech (is this even on the market for any vendor?)

That is only the short list. We don't know what potentially other changes there could be to shrink components to fit the smaller size or if they are getting the same gross profit from the smaller iPad. What if it's smaller than its larger brother? How do you account for the costs for what I think are the minimum mandatory changes needed to make this feasible from a technical standpoint? Have you see any info on what IGZO will likely cost Apple per display?

If you are using tried and true business models that Apple loves to work in we would expect to see this tech on the higher-end and then trickle down to the areas that are already less profitable. I am, of course, assuming the iPad mini is less profitable per unit than the iPad. Why do you think the 15" MBP got a Retina display before the 13" MBP? The iGPU that runs that display was available when the 15" RMBP launched and it's clearly easier and cheaper to make a smaller display than a larger one... but is still too much compared to the cost to profit ratio of that device until you can bring down costs from a few million 15" sheets being cut first?

As I've stated before I want what everyone else here wants I just see nothing substantial to make it seem like it's a reasonable expectation. That is not to say it can't happen but that's not planning a trip to Yellow Stone National Park this Summer because I'm afraid the super volcano could blow at any time. Doesn't mean it couldn't but the data all say it's not likely.

I agree… To a degree!

However I think we must concentrate on why they should release upgrades -- rather than features, specs and profit margins...

The future of computing is Apple's for the taking... IMO, they should grab every opportunity -- and never look back!... Timing!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #180 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

  • New ASIC with X suffix for the wider memory bandwidth required for the Retina display, with better CPU and Rogue 6 GPU (if not Rogue 6 then some new battery tech to cut down on mass and volume)
  • A 326 PPI display at 2048x1536 resolution (Imagine the iPhone's 5 display but about 4.5x larger)
  • IGZO tech (is this even on the market for any vendor?)

That is only the short list. We don't know what potentially other changes there could be to shrink components to fit the smaller size or if they are getting the same gross profit from the smaller iPad. What if it's smaller than its larger brother? How do you account for the costs for what I think are the minimum mandatory changes needed to make this feasible from a technical standpoint? Have you see any info on what IGZO will likely cost Apple per display?

If you are using tried and true business models that Apple loves to work in we would expect to see this tech on the higher-end and then trickle down to the areas that are already less profitable. I am, of course, assuming the iPad mini is less profitable per unit than the iPad. Why do you think the 15" MBP got a Retina display before the 13" MBP? The iGPU that runs that display was available when the 15" RMBP launched and it's clearly easier and cheaper to make a smaller display than a larger one... but is still too much compared to the cost to profit ratio of that device until you can bring down costs from a few million 15" sheets being cut first?

As I've stated before I want what everyone else here wants I just see nothing substantial to make it seem like it's a reasonable expectation. That is not to say it can't happen but that's not planning a trip to Yellow Stone National Park this Summer because I'm afraid the super volcano could blow at any time. Doesn't mean it couldn't but the data all say it's not likely.
Well then since the mini at $329 is selling so well I don't think they should release a retina mini until costs come down to where they can do it for the same price. Everything you just listed makes me skeptical they would be able to pull off a March launch regardless of price anyway. Plus why replace a product that is clearly selling well with a more expensive one so quickly?
post #181 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I agree… To a degree!

However I think we must concentrate on why they should release upgrades -- rather than features, specs and profit margins...

The future of computing is Apple's for the taking... IMO, they should grab every opportunity -- and never look back!... Timing!
Then Apple needs to get busy on software and services because that's where the improvement is needed. In the past year we've seen their hardware chops more so than software.
post #182 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

  • New ASIC with X suffix for the wider memory bandwidth required for the Retina display, with better CPU and Rogue 6 GPU (if not Rogue 6 then some new battery tech to cut down on mass and volume)
  • A 326 PPI display at 2048x1536 resolution (Imagine the iPhone's 5 display but about 4.5x larger)
  • IGZO tech (is this even on the market for any vendor?)

That is only the short list. We don't know what potentially other changes there could be to shrink components to fit the smaller size or if they are getting the same gross profit from the smaller iPad. What if it's smaller than its larger brother? How do you account for the costs for what I think are the minimum mandatory changes needed to make this feasible from a technical standpoint? Have you see any info on what IGZO will likely cost Apple per display?

If you are using tried and true business models that Apple loves to work in we would expect to see this tech on the higher-end and then trickle down to the areas that are already less profitable. I am, of course, assuming the iPad mini is less profitable per unit than the iPad. Why do you think the 15" MBP got a Retina display before the 13" MBP? The iGPU that runs that display was available when the 15" RMBP launched and it's clearly easier and cheaper to make a smaller display than a larger one... but is still too much compared to the cost to profit ratio of that device until you can bring down costs from a few million 15" sheets being cut first?

As I've stated before I want what everyone else here wants I just see nothing substantial to make it seem like it's a reasonable expectation. That is not to say it can't happen but that's not planning a trip to Yellow Stone National Park this Summer because I'm afraid the super volcano could blow at any time. Doesn't mean it couldn't but the data all say it's not likely.
Well then since the mini at $329 is selling so well I don't think they should release a retina mini until costs come down to where they can do it for the same price. Everything you just listed makes me skeptical they would be able to pull off a March launch regardless of price anyway. Plus why replace a product that is clearly selling well with a more expensive one so quickly?

IDK about Retina -- but there other things they could upgrade: APU, RAM, Storage, WiFi...

A price reduction on the current models along with the upgrades would keep sales momentum going and unsettle any competition.

MS must be prevented from getting any toehold in the appliance computer market!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #183 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I agree… To a degree!

However I think we must concentrate on why they should release upgrades -- rather than features, specs and profit margins...

The future of computing is Apple's for the taking... IMO, they should grab every opportunity -- and never look back!... Timing!
Then Apple needs to get busy on software and services because that's where the improvement is needed. In the past year we've seen their hardware chops more so than software.

Yes... YES... YES!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #184 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

IDK about Retina -- but there other things they could upgrade: APU, RAM, Storage, WiFi...

A price reduction on the current models along with the upgrades would keep sales momentum going and unsettle any competition.

MS must be prevented from getting any toehold in the appliance computer market!
Well they need something to fill the spring quarter. But updating a very successful product less than 6 months after you released it seems like madness to me. Unless they were so close to pulling off a retina mini but couldn't wait because they needed something out there for the holiday quarter?
post #185 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Then Apple needs to get busy on software and services because that's where the improvement is needed. In the past year we've seen their hardware chops more so than software.

I've said it before but software is Apple's biggest opportunity.

They need to overhaul iOS with version 7.
post #186 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Unless they were so close to pulling off a retina mini but couldn't wait because they needed something out there for the holiday quarter?

I would hope that wasn't the case but you never know.
post #187 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

IDK about Retina -- but there other things they could upgrade: APU, RAM, Storage, WiFi...

A price reduction on the current models along with the upgrades would keep sales momentum going and unsettle any competition.

MS must be prevented from getting any toehold in the appliance computer market!
Well they need something to fill the spring quarter. But updating a very successful product less than 6 months after you released it seems like madness to me. Unless they were so close to pulling off a retina mini but couldn't wait because they needed something out there for the holiday quarter?

Have you used a Mini? I have 73-year-old eyes, and IMO the Mini display resolution is a non-issue...

What is important is that the iPad Mini delivers the iPad experience in a small, affordable package.

There are many other capabilities they could upgrade!

The key, IMO, is to maintain a continuous growth of tablet sales throughout the year -- regardless [in spite] of what the competition does...

Keep the spotlight on the iPad solutions!
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #188 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Then Apple needs to get busy on software and services because that's where the improvement is needed. In the past year we've seen their hardware chops more so than software.

I've said it before but software is Apple's biggest opportunity.

They need to overhaul iOS with version 7.

Yeah... IOS has virtually everything that OS X has... It's just that much of it is hidden or "off limits" to developers.

IOS can do (does) everything that Unix, Linux and Android can do. The iOS apps are superior performers because they do not use a runtime interpreter, Davlik, that Android apps use.

What Apple needs to do is open the kimono to developers so they can exploit iOS features/devices while maintaining usability and security.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #189 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Yeah... IOS has virtually everything that OS X has... It's just that much of it is hidden or "off limits" to developers.

IOS can do (does) everything that Unix, Linux and Android can do. The iOS apps are superior performers because they do not use a runtime interpreter, Davlik, that Android apps use.

What Apple needs to do is open the kimono to developers so they can exploit iOS features/devices while maintaining usability and security.

There's also some UI improvements that are far overdue as well.

I feel that everything since iOS 4 has been tacking on top of the old UI new features that are not intuitive to use.

I'm hoping Ive will fix that since he's over the UI now. I want a more intuitive natural and easy to use iOS.
post #190 of 256
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post
They need to overhaul iOS with version 7.

 

For what reason, and to what end?

post #191 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

For what reason, and to what end?
There's plenty they could do. We've had years of iOS being just an app launcher. I wouldn't mind having a home screen that was something other than 5 rows of icons/folders. Here's just a few things I'd like:

-multiple user accounts, especially for families that are sharing an iPad.
-ability to change default apps
-merging newstand with iBooks
-app previews so you don't have to download a free app only to realize you want the features of the paid app (which is another app to download)
-quick access to certain settings like wifi, Bluetooth, brightness, etc.
-better use of lock screen (too much wasted space right now)
-redesigned stock apps
-photo filters and better file management in photos app
-and please, please can we get a consistent UI design, and one that banishes kitsch forever
post #192 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

There's also some UI improvements that are far overdue as well.

I feel that everything since iOS 4 has been tacking on top of the old UI new features that are not intuitive to use.

I'm hoping Ive will fix that since he's over the UI now. I want a more intuitive natural and easy to use iOS.
Passbook is a perfect example of this. Not intuitive at all. I read somewhere that after keynotes when Apple execs were schmoozing with the press/invited guests Ive would talk shit about iOS. Can't say for sure if its true or not but I wouldn't be surprised if he's wanted to get his hands on software UI for a while but as long as Steve was around that was never happening.
post #193 of 256
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
-multiple user accounts, especially for families that are sharing an iPad.
 

 

Buy one for every member of your family. That's the idea there.

 

-ability to change default apps

 

I disagree, but… *shrug*


-merging newstand with iBooks

 

Agreed wholeheartedly. Makes no sense that Newsstand is in the OS by default and iBooks isn't.

 

-app previews so you don't have to download a free app only to realize you want the features of the paid app 

 

This isn't going to change. The easiest thing for developers to do is make one app with paid features, unlockable therein. I don't see "app previews".

 

-quick access to certain settings like wifi, Bluetooth, brightness, etc.
 

Double-tap Home (/swipe up) and it's right there in Settings.


-better use of lock screen (too much wasted space right now)
-redesigned stock apps

 

Oh? For example?


-photo filters and better file management in photos app

 

iPhoto.

 

-and please, please can we get a consistent UI design, and one that banishes kitsch forever

 

No. You're gonna want to learn why skeuomorphism isn't (and shouldn't) going away.

post #194 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

There's plenty they could do. We've had years of iOS being just an app launcher. I wouldn't mind having a home screen that was something other than 5 rows of icons/folders. Here's just a few things I'd like:

-multiple user accounts, especially for families that are sharing an iPad.
-ability to change default apps
-merging newstand with iBooks
-app previews so you don't have to download a free app only to realize you want the features of the paid app (which is another app to download)
-quick access to certain settings like wifi, Bluetooth, brightness, etc.
-better use of lock screen (too much wasted space right now)
-redesigned stock apps
-photo filters and better file management in photos app
-and please, please can we get a consistent UI design, and one that banishes kitsch forever

Those aren't the major upgrades I was thinking, but I do agree Passbook was terribly hard to figure out and use even for me at first.

What's needed is more simplicity all around.

The best example is if you want to turn on private browsing for safari, you have to leave the safari app, go to the settings app, go down the list, find the safari settings section, then turn on private browsing.

Why can't we change app settings while we're in the app just like on OS X? Yes a settings app is needed but only for system settings not for individual app settings.

Those are some of the major UI overhauls I think necessary. Things like photo editing are just more tack on features to make people feel their getting something new with each release.

Oh and the lock screen is fine. It's well used especially if you have a lot of notifications.
post #195 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Buy one for every member of your family. That's the idea there.
Okay I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. You haven't given a reason why it doesn't make sense other than Apple just wants people to spend more money on iPads.

Quote:
I disagree, but… *shrug*
Okay this one might be more for the techie crowd but I guarantee you if people could change the default maps app to Google's they would. I hate the fact that Safari automatically redirects you to mobile and tablet versions of websites so I know I'd use something other than Safari my default browser.

Quote:
This isn't going to change. The easiest thing for developers to do is make one app with paid features, unlockable therein. I don't see "app previews".
I guess I'd be okay with that. I just hate going to the app store and seeing two apps one free and one paid. Just give me one app and if there are upgradable features let me pay for them in-app.

Quote:
Double-tap Home (/swipe up) and it's right there in Settings.
Personally I think having toggles in NC would be better.

Quote:
Oh? For example?
something like this would be cool:


Quote:
iPhoto.
I'm referring to the stock app.

Quote:
No. You're gonna want to learn why skeuomorphism isn't (and shouldn't) going away.
Apple doesn't have to go all flat (ala Windows) to get rid of the abominations like Game Center, find my friends, notes, podcast app, etc. They've taken this unnecessary ornamentation way to far. I think the podcast app was the tipping point. Go to the App Store, the rating on that app is 1.5 stars.
post #196 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook View Post

Those aren't the major upgrades I was thinking, but I do agree Passbook was terribly hard to figure out and use even for me at first.

What's needed is more simplicity all around.

The best example is if you want to turn on private browsing for safari, you have to leave the safari app, go to the settings app, go down the list, find the safari settings section, then turn on private browsing.

Why can't we change app settings while we're in the app just like on OS X? Yes a settings app is needed but only for system settings not for individual app settings.

Those are some of the major UI overhauls I think necessary. Things like photo editing are just more tack on features to make people feel their getting something new with each release.

Oh and the lock screen is fine. It's well used especially if you have a lot of notifications.
im optimistic we might get some of these things because the two biggest obstacles (Jobs & Forstall) are gone. I'm hoping Federighi and Ive will bring a fresh perspective and some new ideas.
post #197 of 256

There's only one reason why this rumor exists. 

 

Stock manipulation and hit whoring.

 

And Apple Insider could do the community a service and stop publishing rumors.

 

Period

post #198 of 256
Most of the people here are techies, and very comfortable with dicking around * with the minutiae of computers, settings, UIs, widgets, etc. -- and have strong feelings about the iPad changes needed to enable us to do our "proper" computer work.

*There, I've said it

It is worth reminding ourselves that 95% of the population just want to get it done... and don't care how!
Quote:
What you're seeing in the industry's reaction to the iPad is nothing less than future shock.

For years we've all held to the belief that computing had to be made simpler for the 'average person'. I find it difficult to come to any conclusion other than that we have totally failed in this effort.

Secretly, I suspect, we technologists quite liked the idea that Normals would be dependent on us for our technological shamanism. Those incantations that only we can perform to heal their computers, those oracular proclamations that we make over the future and the blessings we bestow on purchasing choices.

Ask yourself this: in what other walk of life do grown adults depend on other people to help them buy something? Women often turn to men to help them purchase a car but that's because of the obnoxious misogyny of car dealers, not because ladies worry that the car they buy won't work on their local roads. (Sorry computer/car analogy. My bad.)

I'm often saddened by the infantilising effect of high technology on adults. From being in control of their world, they're thrust back to a childish, mediaeval world in which gremlins appear to torment them and disappear at will and against which magic, spells, and the local witch doctor are their only refuges.

With the iPhone OS as incarnated in the iPad, Apple proposes to do something about this, and I mean really do something about it instead of just talking about doing something about it, and the world is going mental.

Not the entire world, though. The people whose backs have been broken under the weight of technological complexity and failure immediately understand what's happening here. Those of us who patiently, day after day, explain to a child or colleague that the reason there's no Print item in the File menu is because, although the Pages document is filling the screen, Finder is actually the frontmost application and it doesn't have any windows open, understand what's happening here.

The visigoths are at the gate of the city. They're demanding access to software. they're demanding to be in control of their own experience of information. They may not like our high art and culture, they may be really into OpenGL boob-jiggling apps and they may not always share our sense of aesthetics, but they are the people we have claimed to serve for 30 years whilst screwing them over in innumerable ways. There are also many, many more of them than us.

- Fraser Speirs

http://speirs.org/blog/2010/1/29/future-shock.html
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #199 of 256
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Okay I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. You haven't given a reason why it doesn't make sense other than Apple just wants people to spend more money on iPads.

 

That's the idea. They're designed that way.


Okay this one might be more for the techie crowd but I guarantee you if people could change the default maps app to Google's they would.

 

No, they wouldn't.


I hate the fact that Safari automatically redirects you to mobile and tablet versions of websites so I know I'd use something other than Safari my default browser.

 

This has nothing to do with Apple at all. This has everything to do with website creators being fools.


something like this would be cool:

 

Can this not be done right now? I just did this… 

 

I'm referring to the stock app.

 

iPhoto (they want you to pay for it; I thought you'd pick that up).


They've taken this unnecessary ornamentation way to far.

 

Well, that's your opinion. That's also the rating for Apple's chargers on their website, but would any one of you honestly tell someone to buy anything but a genuine Apple charger? No. It's that low because morons mistreat their possessions.

 

You can't go by "user reviews". Particularly on the App Store where they can be faked so easily.


Originally Posted by MarkyMarc43 View Post
There's only one reason why this rumor exists. Stock manipulation and hit whoring.

 

Naw, the stock is always a genuine reflection of how people feel about Apple's worth¡ (you're new; that denotes sarcasm; just taking one extra step)

post #200 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Haven't we been over this? The A6 is not suitable for the resolution of the retina iPad. You need the A6X. I had explained this previously in detail and then listed paragraph after paragraph of AnandTech stating the same thing.

 

First, I disagree.  The benchmarks show that the 543MP3 is fast enough if the memory design is altered to be more like the A6X.  

 

Second, the A6+ I listed has a 32nm A6+ with a SGX 554MP2 which is faster than the current 543MP3 in the A6 or the 543MP4 in the A5X.

 

We go round and round but frankly you never accepted what is plain truth...the GPU in the A6 or half the GPU in the A6X is fast enough with a lot less silicon than is required in the A6X.  The restructuring of the memory pipeline is already done for the A6X and packaging it with either half the cores (554MP2) or the existing GPU (543MP3) will work.

 

There was NOT paragraph after paragraph...there was one comment followed by a bunch of benchmarks and comments that showed the 543MP3 in the A6 was within a few percentage points of performance with the 543MP4 in the A5X.  The one objection of memory bandwidth is a solved problem.  

 

Moving the half the cores greatly reduces the footprint and power consumption and the iPad mini currently has a lot of headroom in terms of battery life.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Rumor: Fifth-gen iPad, second-gen iPad mini to debut in March