States quite clearly that after their first article is released, they have infinite, permanent tenure and free reign to have whatever they say published at any time.
iPad apps are totally out of the scope because you can extend a iPhone/iPod app but you can not shrink an iPad app. So, this is basically, just big iPod Touch. Nothing added, just bigger and bulkier and lower density screen. The iPod Touch DX for people who can't read on small screen.
So this iPad mini will only target cheap old people. That's what I call niche market.
Niche market? Non-sense! All old people are cheap!
Yes... a new iPad with reduced capabilities, subpar screen, minimal storage, no camera, screen resolution (app) fragmentation, reduced profitability in order to compete on price... You may all diss this report but to me it all sounds like classic Apple.... errr... not.
Popular misconception to the contrary, Apple is a very pragmatic company, and Steve Jobs was a very pragmatic leader (god how that past tense pains me... so unfair). The mistake people have made is to confuse focus/clarity/decisiveness with idealism.
Look at what happened with the iPhone. Apple started selling it unsubsidized for a high upfront price. That plan did not work. Apple changed tactics and succumbed to the subsidy model for the iPhone. Nobody ever talks about this, but it happened. Apple's history -- and Jobs' history -- is full of examples of pragmatic decisions like that.
While I'm skeptical that the Amazon Fire will do very well, some very smart people disagree (Gruber, for example). If Amazon shows that a subsidized hardware model works well in the tablet market, then Apple will adopt that model, and using iCloud is the most obvious way to do it.
I have to agree with all of this. Rolling out a limited type of iPad2 along with the iPad3 allows them to follow up a known working plan with another known working plan. Just like the iPhone they roll out the same form factor, lesser CPU, lesser storage (drop it to 8 gigs) and sell it for less. It attracts people who are on the fence with a lower price, and has a good chance of getting them to buy the top tier product next time around, but it also attracts people who already own one and see value in a second device. They would easily have both the first and second best selling tablets, just as they do with phones.
Right now we have 4 people in my household who need computing power. There is no way we will buy everyone a laptop, way too expensive. Getting three cheap netbooks is tempting, but only my son wants to use linux, so that is out. On the other hand with iCloud rolling out, having a single desktop (or laptop and external drive and monitor) and a few iPads is nearly ideal. The iPad replaces 90% of my computing needs, and about the same for the wife and kids. The desktop essentially becomes a local server, the cloud handles most of the real work, the desktop/server is there for the other 10% and everyone is happy.
What stops this? The $500 price tag. If I could get a 3G model for me and a $250 wifi only 8 gig for each kid for about what i could get a new macbook for.... Suddenly that price is more than right.
Do these analysts stop and think about what they are saying before they say it. Apple has rarely been a responder to competitors in this way. If they are placing a cheaper device it is something they've been working on for some time and not in a knee-jerk reaction to the Kindle Fire.
I still don't expect a Fire like device. The iPad is dominant with its current form factor and features. Steady upgrades should do it well.
Since the first iPad announcement, I have hoped that Apple would find a way to get the costs down to where the iPad could fill the promise of OLPC (One Tablet/Laptop Per Child). If Apple can do this it could change the world for millions of in developing countries.
Not only the use of the devices themselves -- but the infrastructure that would bloom in those countries to support those users and devices...
hey idiot, I don't want a price reduction, It makes me feel good knowing i spent $600 on my iPad2. People around me look and figure there's a great guy who can afford to buy premium products. And the hot chicks hit on me more. Makes me look bad if its priced at a measily $200!
hey idiot, I don't want a price reduction, It makes me feel good knowing i spent $600 on my iPad2. People around me look and figure there's a great guy who can afford to buy premium products. And the hot chicks hit on me more. Makes me look bad if its priced at a measily $200!
All iPad 3 models come with new processors, wi-fi and 3G. in 32, 64, and 128GB memory configurations, in white and black.
iPad 2S models have 16GB memory, wi-fi only, and no rear camera. Also use iPad2 processor. $299. Perfect for the education market.
What would be so awful about this?
Honestly I don't even think they would need to make any changes from the current iPad 2. Just carry over the same principle from this round of iPhone updates. Sell the current iPad 2 16GB Wi-Fi version for somewhere in the $300-$350 price range. Introduce the iPad 3 at current price points in both Wi-Fi and 3G variants. If LTE chips are getting better powerwise, maybe the next iPad will be the first one w/LTE access.
Selling the iPad2 at a lower price after the "iPad3" comes to market makes the most sense. Apple could discount the devices by $100-150. By next year component prices like the cost of the touch screen, Flash, etc will have dropped at least by a 1/3 on the average. This way, the inventory and manufacturing stays simple. The iPad3 could have a retina display, quad core ARM, etc to justify the usual pricing.
Apple does no see to like making Jr versions! Anybody here who has been around and remembers the IBM PC Jr with the chicklet keyboard?
I have a PC/jr Chicklet kb -- it uses IR (I sold the computer to a friend who didn't need the kb).
I'll be the heretic. Without giving any credence to "analysts" or any speculation about this being a response to the Fire, I can see a market for a 7" iDevice.
But Steve's comments noted here already are well taken. Meaning the iOS that runs such a device would need some specific things in it to keep the need for sandpaper to a minimum.
The iPad is a hard cover books sized device. The iPod touch a pocket sized one. I saw someone with a 7" tablet and thought it kind of nifty. No idea what it was or what it was doing, but the size seemed somehow...right. And as we all know-size matters.
And my prediction on these eBook thingies is this: it is simply a matter of time before they are free. Yes, free. You've got a device that takes a credit card and at the touch of a button charges a customer anywhere they are. Think about that. Would you want *everyone* to have that? Give them away with 10 book purchases or something.
I can see Mr. Cook showing off His Stuff with a plan like this.
agree with several others that a larger - say 5.5" - iPod touch is certainly a logical possibility. running iPhone apps of course, not iPad apps, which avoids the "sandpaper finger" problem Jobs cited to forever dis 7" tablets.
as several have noted, the iPod touch has always been Apple's mini-tablet. the iPod name was just a marketing ploy to get it launched successfully when "tablets" still could not be readily marketed. and it has gone on to assume a majority of the iPod market.
at a $299 starting price, a "Big Touch" would compete well in the lower-end tablet market. especially given it would be far, far more powerful and capable than the Kindle Fire and its stripped-down cheap looking ilk from other OEM's.
but just as important, it would also compete head-to-head with the new generation of game players from Sony and Nintendo with screens about that size too. it could allow Apple to permanently eclipse both once and for all in that substantial market.
and with a maximum 160G SSD it could also finally replace the iPod Classic.
so what is dubious about this "analyst" report is not the idea of a third tablet model/size from Apple, but the timing. normally Apple would launch something like this in the Fall - i wondered if it might be coming last week, but no - for the Holiday season. the next launch window will come with the iPad 3 in the Spring, so perhaps Apple could unveil a "Big Touch" then. but it would be off-cycle.
what is definitely not going to happen is a "cheapo" 10" iPad. Apple does not join any commodity price race to the bottom.
Article Translation: Brian White doesn't know shit. But that won't stop him from trying to harm Apple by setting up false expectations. And AppleInsider is going to help him.
Seriously? I don't think you're going to find anyone with a reasonable amount of intelligence that's going to believe this rumor. Apple's spent the last 2 years proving that "mini" tablets are a non-starter. If Apple makes a tablet smaller than the current one, I will eat my shorts. Not gonna happen.
If any of this become remotely true, what will happen is when the iPad 3 debuts, the iPad 2 will remain on the market "as is" (16GB only) but at a lower price point, and by lower I suspect only $100 lower.
Comments
This "analyst" should be fired.
You need to read more analysts' contracts.
States quite clearly that after their first article is released, they have infinite, permanent tenure and free reign to have whatever they say published at any time.
I can actually see a $299 iPad 2 with 8GB of memory and no cammeras, or at least only with a front facing cammera, existing alongside the iPad 3.
Yep, that would be a fire extinguisher.
All iPad 3 models come with new processors, wi-fi and 3G. in 32, 64, and 128GB memory configurations, in white and black.
iPad 2S models have 16GB memory, wi-fi only, and no rear camera. Also use iPad2 processor. $299. Perfect for the education market.
What would be so awful about this?
Looks like the analysts found another hare up their ass
Well, there's a good point about it not being complete BS: http://www.thoughts-on-tech.com/mobi...-in-early-2012
iPad apps are totally out of the scope because you can extend a iPhone/iPod app but you can not shrink an iPad app. So, this is basically, just big iPod Touch. Nothing added, just bigger and bulkier and lower density screen. The iPod Touch DX for people who can't read on small screen.
So this iPad mini will only target cheap old people. That's what I call niche market.
Niche market? Non-sense! All old people are cheap!
...oh wait, I see what you... never mind then.
Never say never.
Popular misconception to the contrary, Apple is a very pragmatic company, and Steve Jobs was a very pragmatic leader (god how that past tense pains me... so unfair). The mistake people have made is to confuse focus/clarity/decisiveness with idealism.
Look at what happened with the iPhone. Apple started selling it unsubsidized for a high upfront price. That plan did not work. Apple changed tactics and succumbed to the subsidy model for the iPhone. Nobody ever talks about this, but it happened. Apple's history -- and Jobs' history -- is full of examples of pragmatic decisions like that.
While I'm skeptical that the Amazon Fire will do very well, some very smart people disagree (Gruber, for example). If Amazon shows that a subsidized hardware model works well in the tablet market, then Apple will adopt that model, and using iCloud is the most obvious way to do it.
I have to agree with all of this. Rolling out a limited type of iPad2 along with the iPad3 allows them to follow up a known working plan with another known working plan. Just like the iPhone they roll out the same form factor, lesser CPU, lesser storage (drop it to 8 gigs) and sell it for less. It attracts people who are on the fence with a lower price, and has a good chance of getting them to buy the top tier product next time around, but it also attracts people who already own one and see value in a second device. They would easily have both the first and second best selling tablets, just as they do with phones.
Right now we have 4 people in my household who need computing power. There is no way we will buy everyone a laptop, way too expensive. Getting three cheap netbooks is tempting, but only my son wants to use linux, so that is out. On the other hand with iCloud rolling out, having a single desktop (or laptop and external drive and monitor) and a few iPads is nearly ideal. The iPad replaces 90% of my computing needs, and about the same for the wife and kids. The desktop essentially becomes a local server, the cloud handles most of the real work, the desktop/server is there for the other 10% and everyone is happy.
What stops this? The $500 price tag. If I could get a 3G model for me and a $250 wifi only 8 gig for each kid for about what i could get a new macbook for.... Suddenly that price is more than right.
Do these analysts stop and think about what they are saying before they say it. Apple has rarely been a responder to competitors in this way. If they are placing a cheaper device it is something they've been working on for some time and not in a knee-jerk reaction to the Kindle Fire.
I still don't expect a Fire like device. The iPad is dominant with its current form factor and features. Steady upgrades should do it well.
Since the first iPad announcement, I have hoped that Apple would find a way to get the costs down to where the iPad could fill the promise of OLPC (One Tablet/Laptop Per Child). If Apple can do this it could change the world for millions of in developing countries.
Not only the use of the devices themselves -- but the infrastructure that would bloom in those countries to support those users and devices...
hey idiot, I don't want a price reduction, It makes me feel good knowing i spent $600 on my iPad2. People around me look and figure there's a great guy who can afford to buy premium products. And the hot chicks hit on me more. Makes me look bad if its priced at a measily $200!
Just buy a new one, no big deal, ok?
Yep, that would be a fire extinguisher.
All iPad 3 models come with new processors, wi-fi and 3G. in 32, 64, and 128GB memory configurations, in white and black.
iPad 2S models have 16GB memory, wi-fi only, and no rear camera. Also use iPad2 processor. $299. Perfect for the education market.
What would be so awful about this?
Honestly I don't even think they would need to make any changes from the current iPad 2. Just carry over the same principle from this round of iPhone updates. Sell the current iPad 2 16GB Wi-Fi version for somewhere in the $300-$350 price range. Introduce the iPad 3 at current price points in both Wi-Fi and 3G variants. If LTE chips are getting better powerwise, maybe the next iPad will be the first one w/LTE access.
Selling the iPad2 at a lower price after the "iPad3" comes to market makes the most sense. Apple could discount the devices by $100-150. By next year component prices like the cost of the touch screen, Flash, etc will have dropped at least by a 1/3 on the average. This way, the inventory and manufacturing stays simple. The iPad3 could have a retina display, quad core ARM, etc to justify the usual pricing.
Apple does no see to like making Jr versions! Anybody here who has been around and remembers the IBM PC Jr with the chicklet keyboard?
I have a PC/jr Chicklet kb -- it uses IR (I sold the computer to a friend who didn't need the kb).
But Steve's comments noted here already are well taken. Meaning the iOS that runs such a device would need some specific things in it to keep the need for sandpaper to a minimum.
The iPad is a hard cover books sized device. The iPod touch a pocket sized one. I saw someone with a 7" tablet and thought it kind of nifty. No idea what it was or what it was doing, but the size seemed somehow...right. And as we all know-size matters.
And my prediction on these eBook thingies is this: it is simply a matter of time before they are free. Yes, free. You've got a device that takes a credit card and at the touch of a button charges a customer anywhere they are. Think about that. Would you want *everyone* to have that? Give them away with 10 book purchases or something.
I can see Mr. Cook showing off His Stuff with a plan like this.
as several have noted, the iPod touch has always been Apple's mini-tablet. the iPod name was just a marketing ploy to get it launched successfully when "tablets" still could not be readily marketed. and it has gone on to assume a majority of the iPod market.
at a $299 starting price, a "Big Touch" would compete well in the lower-end tablet market. especially given it would be far, far more powerful and capable than the Kindle Fire and its stripped-down cheap looking ilk from other OEM's.
but just as important, it would also compete head-to-head with the new generation of game players from Sony and Nintendo with screens about that size too. it could allow Apple to permanently eclipse both once and for all in that substantial market.
and with a maximum 160G SSD it could also finally replace the iPod Classic.
so what is dubious about this "analyst" report is not the idea of a third tablet model/size from Apple, but the timing. normally Apple would launch something like this in the Fall - i wondered if it might be coming last week, but no - for the Holiday season. the next launch window will come with the iPad 3 in the Spring, so perhaps Apple could unveil a "Big Touch" then. but it would be off-cycle.
what is definitely not going to happen is a "cheapo" 10" iPad. Apple does not join any commodity price race to the bottom.
Nope. It's so un-Apple to compete like this. Apple always takes the high ground.
Agreed. Let the $199 tablet market have their Maylongs and ICAN tablets.
If any of this become remotely true, what will happen is when the iPad 3 debuts, the iPad 2 will remain on the market "as is" (16GB only) but at a lower price point, and by lower I suspect only $100 lower.