There's no effective difference in portability between 7" and 10" tablets. If it doesn't fit into your jeans front pocket, it's far less likely to be taken out of the house. Portability is not a factor in Apple's decision to build or not build a 7" device.
But there *is* a difference in component cost. 7" screens are generally cheaper than 10" screens that use the same display technology. That's one reason why Amazon can sell the Kindle Fire at just under break-even for $200. But does Apple want to go there? Do they really feel the need to attack the low-end market with a 7" iPad mini?
Or will they do what they did with iPhone? Sell the previous year's model for $100 less. And maybe even sell the 2 year old model for $200 less. All with 9.7" screens. Apple might not make as much money on the 2 year old iPad as on the current model. But put it next to the 7" Kindle Fire at the same price, and it crushes the Fire. Faster, bigger, with a vastly better overall computing experience.
Can Apple really sell last year's iPad 2 for $100 less? And the 2010 iPad 1 for $200 less? I think it's possible. Because keeping the older models in production amortizes their development costs and factory equipment costs over a larger number of years. And Apple constantly works to get better component deals from their suppliers. They can and will because of their huge volume and because their suppliers can also amortize their equipment costs over more production years. All of which would lower Apple's cost per unit for the older model iPad, which would keep their margins up.
Why bother with a whole new iPad mini when the old 9.7" iPad could do the same job better? Just a thought.
With iPad 7" 16GB for $299, you can buy an iPod touch with twice the capacity and a slightly smaller screen. With iPad 7" 16GB for $399, you can get a full size iPad 2 for $100 more. A 7" screen doesn't seem like enough of a benefit to lose half your storage (compared to an iPod Touch) or half your screen (compared to an iPad 2)
A 7" iPad just doesn't make any sense. The only thing to set it apart is the screen size... I don't think there's any significant advantage that makes it better than an iPod Touch AND an iPad. There are clear divisions between iPod Touch and iPad. iPad Jr or iPod touch Max would seem to just cloud Apple's very clear product categories.
Apple has no choice but to give in a produce a 7 inch iPad. Amazon has proven that their Kindle Fire has been a huge hit. Outselling the iPad at Best Buy easily. Apple has to respond but it may be too late and usually they are priced to high.
Back in the olden days before the iPad came out, I was actually railing up and down in the various comment boards about how the rumors of some 10" Apple touch pad were totally bogus. My rational at the time was that it needed to be the size of a folded sheet of print paper (the size of your average book) and that it needed to be "palm-able". You need to be able to hold it in the same way that you would hold an iPhone (only bigger) in one hand, and manipulate with the other. Especially for business use such as inventory management, Fedex/UPS, type, etc. You need to be able to walk around with the thing in your hand hanging down at your side (again, same way as holding your iphone) This concept of holding a 1.5 lb device by it's edge was ludicrous (to me) at the time.
Well, I was sure proved wrong, but we'll se what we see from here.
Some people are simply turned off by the iPad's starting price of $499... so they will be drawn to the Kindle Fire at $199
If Apple had a 7" iPad at $299.... that might cause those people to re-consider Apple.
Plus... Apple has margins to manage. The iPad has $330 worth of parts for the 16GB model (prices from March 2011... they might have dropped a little by now)
The 9.7" screen is the most expensive part of that. Selling the current iPad at $349 or even $399 probably wouldn't give Apple the kind of margins they are used to.
But a 7" screen might cut costs enough to make a $299 7" iPad possible.
Considering the absolute runaway success the iPad has been, why would anyone think that Apple had gotten the price point wrong on the device. Quite the opposite. For all of the clever engineering that has gone into the iPad, the real genius of the device has been delivering what it does at a reasonable price point. If the iPad had been anything close to the price that was rumoured prior to its launch, the iPad probably would have been about as successful as the tablets that came before it, which is to say, the tablet form factor might have been dead after the iPad failed to generate good sales numbers. Instead, Apple found a way to deliver a decent user experience for a reasonable price. The rest is history, so to speak.
Apple has no choice but to give in a produce a 7 inch iPad. Amazon has proven that their Kindle Fire has been a huge hit. Outselling the iPad at Best Buy easily. Apple has to respond but it may be too late and usually they are priced to high.
The more Fires that end up in consumers' hands right now, the better for Apple because the majority of those Fire owners will wish they hadn't gone with the Fire instead of paying more for the iPad.
I suspect that the iPad will emerge from this challenge better positioned on account of I would imagine that a lot of early Fire adopters will be trading in those units for IPad 2s checking in at around $400 when the iPad 3 is introduced.
If not, then look for Apple to respond with a somewhat larger Touch, something like 4.5 inches, before opting to bring out a 7-inch iPad.
The more Fires that end up in consumers' hands right now, the better for Apple because the majority of those Fire owners will wish they hadn't gone with the Fire instead of paying more for the iPad.
I suspect that the iPad will emerge from this challenge better positioned on account of I would imagine that a lot of early Fire adopters will be trading in those units for IPad 2s checking in at around $400 when the iPad 3 is introduced.
If not, then look for Apple to respond with a somewhat larger Touch, something like 4.5 inches, before opting to bring out a 7-inch iPad.
That's what Apple needs to do. Provide iPod touch at its current size and a slightly larger one to combat Kindle type product. The problem is price, since Apple always price their products much higher. Needing to do it and actually doing so is another story. I seriously doubt Apple will do such a thing. A big mistake if they don't. Android is not about to slow down, it's growing faster than anyone imagined.
That's what Apple needs to do. Provide iPod touch at its current size and a slightly larger one to combat Kindle type product. The problem is price, since Apple always price their products much higher. Needing to do it and actually doing so is another story. I seriously doubt Apple will do such a thing. A big mistake if they don't. Android is not about to slow down, it's growing faster than anyone imagined.
Where have you been all day, Slappy?! Apple's Board has been trying to get in touch with you all afternoon. They think your ideas are top notch and make sense and want you to replace Tim Cook.
This could really go either way. On one hand Apple will take the route they have with the iPhone and keep costs down by limiting the number of models and not make a smaller version. People wanting an iPad arnt going to go android because of the screen size.
On the other hand in the last 3 years Apple seem to have gone off track with there products and started reacting to other peoples opinions. Reading Steves biography I completely get now why the iPod not being able to make playlists of the device was better as it simplified it, and why leaving out other functionality from things is better as it Keeps them simple. But for some reason iOS now let's you destroy the design with wallpapers, organise apps into a really rubbish folder implementation, iTunes has gone from the simple design that made every other player look overloaded with features to something that is overloaded with crap like ping. It's like as soon as Steve started going on medical leave people there started reading reviews and adding features that people said were needed. So maybe a smaller iPad is possible.
Another thing to support the case is the way apple runs itself as one big team. The ideas meant to be that by being one team there all focused together. But what can also ultimately happen is the top good people are all actually focused on the new product that's fun and interesting. That will be amazing, but what about the older stuff? Does anyone care about the next version of numbers? It hasn't had a new release in 3 years. Or what about OS X, that hasn't had any really amazing features added in a long time. Is the iMac or MacBook ever going to get a new design? A smaller iPad could come out just on the basis that the people who would stop it are far more interested in revolutionising tv to make the argument.
Does anyone care about the next version of numbers?
I'd like it to get an update that makes it so much better than Excel that only anti-Apple stalwarts or people who need compatibility with their Excel files from 1999 wouldn't use it.
Quote:
It hasn't had a new release in 3 years.
It hasn't even been two years…
Wait, never mind. Time hates me.
Quote:
Or what about OS X, that hasn't had any really amazing features added in a long time.
Quote:
Is the iMac or MacBook ever going to get a new design?
So you're complaining about adding things for the sake of adding them but you're perfectly fine with changing things for the sake of changing them…
That's what Apple needs to do. Provide iPod touch at its current size and a slightly larger one to combat Kindle type product. The problem is price, since Apple always price their products much higher. Needing to do it and actually doing so is another story. I seriously doubt Apple will do such a thing. A big mistake if they don't. Android is not about to slow down, it's growing faster than anyone imagined.
Are you high? I'm serious: Are you high right now?
The Fire poses absolutely no competition. They aren't even the same class of product.
The same with Android. What's the best-selling smartphone? The iPhone. What company makes more profit off of smartphone sales than any other? Apple. In Q3, Apple took *52%* of smartphone profits. One company, selling 2 (now 3) versions of a single phone took more profits on smartphones than ALL THE OTHER COMPANIES COMBINED!
Why in god's name would they give a crap about Android?
Amazon's entire gamble on the Fire is that they will draw in massive profits on the back-end, through content. They HAVE TO, since they are losing $10-$15 on each and every unit.
And as I said, they aren't even in the same class of product. Comparing them is like comparing a chimpanzee and a television set.
Without going all thru this again (for the third time), a Nook Color fits in the back pocket of a pair of 34" waist Levi Jeans fine, some pairs more snugly than others even in the same brand and style. I imagine 36" waist and up have room to spare.
The purse comment is very appropriate as women reportedly prefer the smaller 7" devices over the larger iPad's.
From a complete amusement perspective, I'd like to see the marketing research on the correlation between people who wear Levi jeans and use a Nook color. Buick and Kenmore should capitalize on advertising to that segment.
Apple has no choice but to give in a produce a 7 inch iPad. Amazon has proven that their Kindle Fire has been a huge hit. Outselling the iPad at Best Buy easily. Apple has to respond but it may be too late and usually they are priced to high.
Again, I don't think apple has "no choice." If the Fire is causing a big drop in iPad sales (I don't think it is) I think the problem would be solved by competing with the Fire on price.
I don't think people looking to spend $500 on a tablet are choosing not to buy an iPad because of form factor. The Fire is drawing in people who don't want to spend more than $300 on a tablet.
If apple wants that segment, i think they could just as easily capture it with a 10" tablet as with an 8" one.
Without going all thru this again (for the third time), a Nook Color fits in the back pocket of a pair of 34" waist Levi Jeans fine, some pairs more snugly than others even in the same brand and style. I imagine 36" waist and up have room to spare.
The purse comment is very appropriate as women reportedly prefer the smaller 7" devices over the larger iPad's.
till you pull your pants down, and plop in the toilet
no electronic device in m back pocket
girls number 1 way of losing a phone to water ..... out back pocket into toilet
This is not a news flash. This is an investor drone trying desperately to drum up a soundbite. He says nothing that isn't 6 months old. Jobs would be as likely to swerve the pundits years later. Blair is trying to elevate himself by putting himself and Jobs in the same sentence. He adds zero to the equation.
Comments
I didn't enter the conversation until the claim was made that a 7" display wouldn't fit in a pocket. It does.
It fits in a back pocket... just disregard the portion sticking out the top
But you're right... it fits. Be careful when sitting, though. Damn thing feels like a small piece of plywood on my ass!
But there *is* a difference in component cost. 7" screens are generally cheaper than 10" screens that use the same display technology. That's one reason why Amazon can sell the Kindle Fire at just under break-even for $200. But does Apple want to go there? Do they really feel the need to attack the low-end market with a 7" iPad mini?
Or will they do what they did with iPhone? Sell the previous year's model for $100 less. And maybe even sell the 2 year old model for $200 less. All with 9.7" screens. Apple might not make as much money on the 2 year old iPad as on the current model. But put it next to the 7" Kindle Fire at the same price, and it crushes the Fire. Faster, bigger, with a vastly better overall computing experience.
Can Apple really sell last year's iPad 2 for $100 less? And the 2010 iPad 1 for $200 less? I think it's possible. Because keeping the older models in production amortizes their development costs and factory equipment costs over a larger number of years. And Apple constantly works to get better component deals from their suppliers. They can and will because of their huge volume and because their suppliers can also amortize their equipment costs over more production years. All of which would lower Apple's cost per unit for the older model iPad, which would keep their margins up.
Why bother with a whole new iPad mini when the old 9.7" iPad could do the same job better? Just a thought.
Where would a 7" tablet fit into Apple's product lineup?
32GB iPod Touch $299 (same price as 32GB iPhone 4S [under contract])
64GB iPod Touch $399 (same price as 32GB iPhone 4S [under contract])
16GB iPad 7" -- $299?? $399??
16GB iPad 2 Wifi $499
32GB iPad 2 Wifi $599
With iPad 7" 16GB for $299, you can buy an iPod touch with twice the capacity and a slightly smaller screen. With iPad 7" 16GB for $399, you can get a full size iPad 2 for $100 more. A 7" screen doesn't seem like enough of a benefit to lose half your storage (compared to an iPod Touch) or half your screen (compared to an iPad 2)
A 7" iPad just doesn't make any sense. The only thing to set it apart is the screen size... I don't think there's any significant advantage that makes it better than an iPod Touch AND an iPad. There are clear divisions between iPod Touch and iPad. iPad Jr or iPod touch Max would seem to just cloud Apple's very clear product categories.
When someone is posting obvious lies just to troll for reactions isn't that grounds for banning?
Back in the olden days before the iPad came out, I was actually railing up and down in the various comment boards about how the rumors of some 10" Apple touch pad were totally bogus. My rational at the time was that it needed to be the size of a folded sheet of print paper (the size of your average book) and that it needed to be "palm-able". You need to be able to hold it in the same way that you would hold an iPhone (only bigger) in one hand, and manipulate with the other. Especially for business use such as inventory management, Fedex/UPS, type, etc. You need to be able to walk around with the thing in your hand hanging down at your side (again, same way as holding your iphone) This concept of holding a 1.5 lb device by it's edge was ludicrous (to me) at the time.
Well, I was sure proved wrong, but we'll se what we see from here.
@ Mods,
When someone is posting obvious lies just to troll for reactions isn't that grounds for banning?
Please. I'm just stating whats reported. It's probably happening everywhere.
http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/29/2...ad-at-best-buy
Some people are simply turned off by the iPad's starting price of $499... so they will be drawn to the Kindle Fire at $199
If Apple had a 7" iPad at $299.... that might cause those people to re-consider Apple.
Plus... Apple has margins to manage. The iPad has $330 worth of parts for the 16GB model (prices from March 2011... they might have dropped a little by now)
The 9.7" screen is the most expensive part of that. Selling the current iPad at $349 or even $399 probably wouldn't give Apple the kind of margins they are used to.
But a 7" screen might cut costs enough to make a $299 7" iPad possible.
Considering the absolute runaway success the iPad has been, why would anyone think that Apple had gotten the price point wrong on the device. Quite the opposite. For all of the clever engineering that has gone into the iPad, the real genius of the device has been delivering what it does at a reasonable price point. If the iPad had been anything close to the price that was rumoured prior to its launch, the iPad probably would have been about as successful as the tablets that came before it, which is to say, the tablet form factor might have been dead after the iPad failed to generate good sales numbers. Instead, Apple found a way to deliver a decent user experience for a reasonable price. The rest is history, so to speak.
Seven inch tablets have not sold all that well either
If many, many millions is "not all that well", you are correct.
Apple has no choice but to give in a produce a 7 inch iPad. Amazon has proven that their Kindle Fire has been a huge hit. Outselling the iPad at Best Buy easily. Apple has to respond but it may be too late and usually they are priced to high.
The more Fires that end up in consumers' hands right now, the better for Apple because the majority of those Fire owners will wish they hadn't gone with the Fire instead of paying more for the iPad.
I suspect that the iPad will emerge from this challenge better positioned on account of I would imagine that a lot of early Fire adopters will be trading in those units for IPad 2s checking in at around $400 when the iPad 3 is introduced.
If not, then look for Apple to respond with a somewhat larger Touch, something like 4.5 inches, before opting to bring out a 7-inch iPad.
And Steve settled for the 9.7
I have been using Tablets since 2003, and to me the one thing my iPad1 and iPhone4 are missing is a Wacon active digitizer. (Besides the present mode)
And I just run into a video for the Samsung Galaxy Note which has a Wacon digitizer,
AWESOME.
The more Fires that end up in consumers' hands right now, the better for Apple because the majority of those Fire owners will wish they hadn't gone with the Fire instead of paying more for the iPad.
I suspect that the iPad will emerge from this challenge better positioned on account of I would imagine that a lot of early Fire adopters will be trading in those units for IPad 2s checking in at around $400 when the iPad 3 is introduced.
If not, then look for Apple to respond with a somewhat larger Touch, something like 4.5 inches, before opting to bring out a 7-inch iPad.
That's what Apple needs to do. Provide iPod touch at its current size and a slightly larger one to combat Kindle type product. The problem is price, since Apple always price their products much higher. Needing to do it and actually doing so is another story. I seriously doubt Apple will do such a thing. A big mistake if they don't. Android is not about to slow down, it's growing faster than anyone imagined.
That's what Apple needs to do. Provide iPod touch at its current size and a slightly larger one to combat Kindle type product. The problem is price, since Apple always price their products much higher. Needing to do it and actually doing so is another story. I seriously doubt Apple will do such a thing. A big mistake if they don't. Android is not about to slow down, it's growing faster than anyone imagined.
Where have you been all day, Slappy?! Apple's Board has been trying to get in touch with you all afternoon. They think your ideas are top notch and make sense and want you to replace Tim Cook.
On the other hand in the last 3 years Apple seem to have gone off track with there products and started reacting to other peoples opinions. Reading Steves biography I completely get now why the iPod not being able to make playlists of the device was better as it simplified it, and why leaving out other functionality from things is better as it Keeps them simple. But for some reason iOS now let's you destroy the design with wallpapers, organise apps into a really rubbish folder implementation, iTunes has gone from the simple design that made every other player look overloaded with features to something that is overloaded with crap like ping. It's like as soon as Steve started going on medical leave people there started reading reviews and adding features that people said were needed. So maybe a smaller iPad is possible.
Another thing to support the case is the way apple runs itself as one big team. The ideas meant to be that by being one team there all focused together. But what can also ultimately happen is the top good people are all actually focused on the new product that's fun and interesting. That will be amazing, but what about the older stuff? Does anyone care about the next version of numbers? It hasn't had a new release in 3 years. Or what about OS X, that hasn't had any really amazing features added in a long time. Is the iMac or MacBook ever going to get a new design? A smaller iPad could come out just on the basis that the people who would stop it are far more interested in revolutionising tv to make the argument.
Does anyone care about the next version of numbers?
I'd like it to get an update that makes it so much better than Excel that only anti-Apple stalwarts or people who need compatibility with their Excel files from 1999 wouldn't use it.
It hasn't had a new release in 3 years.
It hasn't even been two years…
Wait, never mind. Time hates me.
Or what about OS X, that hasn't had any really amazing features added in a long time.
Is the iMac or MacBook ever going to get a new design?
So you're complaining about adding things for the sake of adding them but you're perfectly fine with changing things for the sake of changing them…
That's what Apple needs to do. Provide iPod touch at its current size and a slightly larger one to combat Kindle type product. The problem is price, since Apple always price their products much higher. Needing to do it and actually doing so is another story. I seriously doubt Apple will do such a thing. A big mistake if they don't. Android is not about to slow down, it's growing faster than anyone imagined.
Are you high? I'm serious: Are you high right now?
The Fire poses absolutely no competition. They aren't even the same class of product.
The same with Android. What's the best-selling smartphone? The iPhone. What company makes more profit off of smartphone sales than any other? Apple. In Q3, Apple took *52%* of smartphone profits. One company, selling 2 (now 3) versions of a single phone took more profits on smartphones than ALL THE OTHER COMPANIES COMBINED!
Why in god's name would they give a crap about Android?
Amazon's entire gamble on the Fire is that they will draw in massive profits on the back-end, through content. They HAVE TO, since they are losing $10-$15 on each and every unit.
And as I said, they aren't even in the same class of product. Comparing them is like comparing a chimpanzee and a television set.
Without going all thru this again (for the third time), a Nook Color fits in the back pocket of a pair of 34" waist Levi Jeans fine, some pairs more snugly than others even in the same brand and style. I imagine 36" waist and up have room to spare.
The purse comment is very appropriate as women reportedly prefer the smaller 7" devices over the larger iPad's.
From a complete amusement perspective, I'd like to see the marketing research on the correlation between people who wear Levi jeans and use a Nook color. Buick and Kenmore should capitalize on advertising to that segment.
Apple has no choice but to give in a produce a 7 inch iPad. Amazon has proven that their Kindle Fire has been a huge hit. Outselling the iPad at Best Buy easily. Apple has to respond but it may be too late and usually they are priced to high.
Again, I don't think apple has "no choice." If the Fire is causing a big drop in iPad sales (I don't think it is) I think the problem would be solved by competing with the Fire on price.
I don't think people looking to spend $500 on a tablet are choosing not to buy an iPad because of form factor. The Fire is drawing in people who don't want to spend more than $300 on a tablet.
If apple wants that segment, i think they could just as easily capture it with a 10" tablet as with an 8" one.
Without going all thru this again (for the third time), a Nook Color fits in the back pocket of a pair of 34" waist Levi Jeans fine, some pairs more snugly than others even in the same brand and style. I imagine 36" waist and up have room to spare.
The purse comment is very appropriate as women reportedly prefer the smaller 7" devices over the larger iPad's.
till you pull your pants down, and plop in the toilet
no electronic device in m back pocket
girls number 1 way of losing a phone to water ..... out back pocket into toilet