Apple could be planning iOS device with 128GB of storage - Page 2

 

This is pretty hilarious (and by that I mean faulty) reasoning. 

 

People make unsupported, emotionally based statements about the reasoning behind this move, which cannot be proven.  Then someone notes the obvious which is that it looks like cynicism.  Your response is ... that it's not cynicism, but instead just "the truth," yet you also provide no actual evidence of this at all (and you say it in a cynical way too!)  

 

Hmmmm... what are we to conclude from this?  

 

Ever see a trend line on where the market is going? Your desired use case is just an irrelevant blip on the direction the market is actually going. As much as I respect Linux from a technical merit standpoint, to even imply that it's going to gain traction as an end user OS (yes, it has been adopted on a mass scale as an embedded solution) is ludicrous.

 

Always go back to Jobs' analogy about trucks and cars. Trucks aren't going away, but they won't be the focus in a post PC world.

My prediction:

 

1. Apple discontinues the iPad 2 and moves the iPad 4 16GB to that price point.

2. Apple keeps the following models and price points for the iPad 4: 16 @ $399, 32 @ $499, 64 @ $599, and 128 @ $699.

 

Now the timing of such changes...that's a whole different thing.

I think this makes sense on the iPad, where space is never enough to store movies (my 64Gb iPad does not have enough space for everything I want to store in it), but a 16Gb iPhone covers all my needs.

 

Haven't they shown they don't want internal storage in that realm?

 

There's the problem. Are there even any pro-Apple people left over there? 

They have probably the best-written rule about trolling, but their enforcement thereof is 0%.

 

Because that's terrible? I'd rather have fast, built-in storage than "expandable" crap, having to carry around a little pill case of expensive cards the size of my pinky fingernail, trying to remember which one held what data.

 

I doubt it. 

It's not just about denser NAND (because that exists) the problem is the performance and longevity of denser NAND. This is the reason NAND hasn't following Moore's Law.

But are telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I don't think so. First of all your comparison to a company creating an average APR and profit margin by spacing products accordingly has no barring in this conversation. Second, it's cynical and foolish to think the only reason they would make a 128GB iPad was to increase the APR, not because it's a device they think will sell to those that need/want it and is now feasible with the next iPad revision

For your statement to be true you have to tell use why they didn't do this earlier and why the iPad has been priced so cheaply to begin with when they can't keep it on the shelves. Your statement is predicated on an unspoken belief that Apple woke up one day and said "What if had a more expensive iPad" as if that never occurred to them which makes your comments cynical and not at al truthful. Finally, you have to argue why you think a 128GB iPad would go up price and not be the new high end model.

 

 

Of course 16 GB is "enough" for an entry level device.  If Apple offered a 128 GB iPod Touch, it most certainly wouldn't be the entry level iPod!  

 

Given how slow it is to sync music to an iPod Touch, it would be nice to fit a whole iTunes library on one.  That's why I own an iPod Classic, so I can cram as much music as possible on it and don't have to sync as often.  It's also nice to always have what I want to hear with me.  I listen to a lot of Jazz encoded in Apple Lossless, so 120 GB fills up pretty quick.   

 

 

If an 128 GB iOS device is offered it won't be priced above the 64 GB version it'll be priced the same. I seems that the iPhone 5s/6 iPad 5 (maybe the next-gen Mini) will be offered in 32/64/128 GB versions instead of the current capacities of 16/32/64 GB's. Nearly everybody saw this coming, right?

I agree it's about time. Tired of haved to down-sample my music library to 128k bps.

Is that the (mini) equivalent of guaranteeing it will happen?

 

At what point have they ever dropped their previous model in favor of a "low end" of the same? They'll keep the iPad 2 around. 

 

See, unlike my beliefs, yours are based on zero events in the past. It's not impossible that Apple would just up and do something they've never done, but you have to consider what it implies from all sides. 

 

They'll have to deal with the people that just bought an iPad 2; it's now discontinued and they can get two models up for the same price. They'll have to deal with people that just bought a 16GB iPad 4; they'll get $100 back. They'll have a smaller margin on their lowest-end iPad; they'll have to deal with that. 

 

What's wrong with just adding the 128 on top like they did the 16GB first-gen iPhone?

The iPad (4) and mini use Hynix H2JTDG8UD2MBR 16 GB NAND Flash. Anyone know what the process node (nanometer) is for those chips? It's looking like 20 and 25nm are starting to ramp up that Apple may be able to double capacity for the same price point this year.

That would be 6 more SKUs: 2 colours (white and black) x 2 types (WiFi and Cellular) x 2 cellular types (GSM and CDMA). More importantly it means 4 different capacity sizes for the same generation device which Apple has little to no history of.

I'm sure the fact that 16GB are the best sellers has a lot to do with the price bump to get more.

 

I'm fine with 16Gb on my phone but then I don't load it up with music.

My 32 GB ipad is full.  I agree with your comments on microSD but I would like a full size SD on the ipad. 

Joining the "increased margin" bandwagon here.  A 128GB iPhone or iPad or iPod touch would no doubt be a high-margin product for Apple.  Obvious.

 

But maybe Apple is thinking about offsetting the (rumored) low-cost iPhone with the (rumored) high-margin 128GB iPhone.  Sales of the low-end model would likely be massive.  That's the whole point of a low-end iPhone: volume sales.  But Apple has seen that high-end models sell very well too.  I seem to recall that 64 GB iPhones sell almost as well as the 16GB models, despite the $200 higher price.

Saying that one uses "logic" and "reason" if they agree with a statement is forum rhetoric to imply that anyone who disagrees with that statement is an irrational fanboy. It's an indirect ad hominem attack.

Another vote for the full sized iPad being the most useful beneficiary of that sort of bump. That size for an iPhone would be in the iPod Classic territory. It might be offered for the niche I suppose.

Apple is slowly moving to 32, 64 gb next will be 128 gb

16GB not being enough doesn't say anything about 128GB.

All of my books, magazines and PDFs amount to less than 2GB.

Besides, at half a gig a book, that's still 32 books, about four times than what's needed for a semester. Not all books need to be loaded simultaneously.

And with the digital books merging with physical book usage the distribution can be altered significantly. If there is a media-heavy textbook that is deemed too large they could split the book into two parts.

Perhaps an opposite example for the same reasoning was my college calculus book which covered both Calc I and II.

Either way I think both are not common and therefore not a good reason to claim that a 16GB tablet is too small.

That said, I wouldn't mind more space. I fill extra space with stuff that I don't really need, but it won't be books. I can expand the number of items in my random smart playlist. However, I don't play music on my iPad. I have some select videos, I still haven't watched most of them on the device, only there in case I want to watch or show them.

My largest PDF is 300MB, and it's a 1300 page document with lots of high resolution images. I do have a Zinio magazine that's heavily multimedia oriented, 32 pages long, with a video on most pages, and it's about 200MB. I don't think schools are going to run out of space. If you have eight classes and have a bizarre need for huge space, you can average 2GB per class.

Off topic a bit, but something hit me while watching that Revolution episode on TV where an iPhone came to life well over a decade later, and all this talk of huge amounts of Flash reminded me ...

 

The average Flash memory data retention for unpowered phones, cameras, memory chips, flash drives, is supposedly only around five years.  Could be up to ten years, but even that time limit is ticking away, and the time limit greatly decreases with higher surrounding temperatures.  (Mind you, I have checked Flash that I stored ten years ago and it seems okay.  Hard to tell, might be missing a file or two.)

 

I wonder how many people have backed up their old photos and videos somewhere safer?

Huh? People get a new iPad and iPhone within those 5 years. They give them away or sell them to have the latest version. iPhones faster than iPads, but still. And people that do not back up apparently don't care if they lose their photos and videos.

 

Umm... if you noticed, I was supporting YOUR previous contention that Apple uses higher memoried devices to increase their ASP.  You are slapping down your own theories.

 

 

Err... besides the rather rude comment that any opinions you disagree with are somehow the same as lies ("not all all truthful"), today's news pretty much negates everything you just claimed that Apple wouldn't do:

 

"The 128-gigabyte version of the fourth-generation iPad are available starting Tuesday,... They will have a suggested retail price of $799 for the Wi-Fi-only model, while the cellular-capable model will sell for $929.

"Apple's 9.7-inch iPad lineup now extends to four different capacities, starting at 16 gigabytes for the entry-level model."

Edited by KDarling - 1/29/13 at 10:04am

 

Surveys say that half of iPhone users keep their old devices when they upgrade.   

 

A heckuva lot more people also have old camera flashcards, USB keys, and dumb phones with pictures, sitting in drawers somewhere.  

 

The common person sure doesn't know the data won't last forever.   It has nothing to do with "not caring" if they lose their photos and videos.

1) What you wrote was a fallacy. I corrected and explained why in what I believe to be sufficient detail.

2) You seem to still be under the erroneous assumption that next week's 128GB iPad is because they woke one day and said "I have an idea as to adjust the dropping APR from the iPad mini release."

3) I never said that a 128GB iPad wouldn't happen, I asked you to make a valid argument to back up your position. I actually did that yesterday buy researching the changes in NAND and came back with a conclusion that 20/25nm NAND is now available in capacity with sufficient performance and longevity that it's been finding its way into new, lower cost SSDs that are arriving this quarter.

As I understand it many people who keep their iPhone simply dump it down to an iPod touch and hand it over to their kid. So backing up is of no need as the apps can be re-downloaded. Hanging on to your iPad, I don't know. I do it, simply because I'm too lzy to 'drag' it into the kitchen and now have the old model right next to the espresso machine. I watch the pictures shown on http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/ in their app. Unfortunately the app got an update and is total crap now. Luckily the old one still works.



I agree that the common person won't know that their data won't last, but many know the battery won't last and because it's electronics these things go kaput.