one big improvement would be to get rid of the dongles. I hope that Apple finally see's the light & includes a Mini HDMI slot, Micro SD Slot & some kick ass speakers. Anything less & they'll be short changing their customers. If Ipad 3 doesn't include at least an SD slot of some sort I'm going to android.
~Food For thought~
Because the iPad competitors that offer those things are beating Apple's pants off in sales? Apple is using their iCloud to replace most 'portable' storage media and Airplay eliminates the need for a specialized HDMI connection cables. Think 'simple and elegant'. 'Simple and elegant' is all your media available on the iCloud and having to click the fewest places on the screen to play a video from an iPad to a tv through an Apple TV unit.
Worrying about special HDMI cables for connection or seperate SD cards for storage doesn't fit into Apple's typical model.
I'm considering getting a Kindle Fire namely because of the price and the amount of content that Amazon provides. I don't have an iPad. I hear the Silk browser is pretty lame though.
I'm considering getting a Kindle Fire namely because of the price and the amount of content that Amazon provides. I don't have an iPad. I hear the Silk browser is pretty lame though.
Silk is pretty good. Certainly not the weaker point of the Fire or the worst mobile
Browser on the market. Just make sure to disable the accelerated browsing.
If you are adding 4x the pixels and will need more power to push those pixels you'll need ore mAh to maintain the same battery duration. I don't think 14k mAh makes much sense and there are weight and size issues if you use the same tech, or cost issues if you use a new, denser tech.
I don't see the iPad 3 having 4x the pixels. It will have a higher res screen but not 4x the pixel that's just insane. I don't think mobile GPUs can push that much pixels and even if they did, think of the battery life!
You're dreaming. Apple is not going to sell the iPad 2 at $199 to compete with the Kindle Fire. They're so far apart that it wouldn't make any sense. A high end 10" tablet for the same price as a cut-rate 7" tablet with limited capabilities? Not a chance.
That would be like Ferrari selling their previous model at $20 K to compete with Chevy.
And yet it has worked for 3 of their other major product lines.
Your analogy is moronic ... I might give you the analogy, it like Lexus re-branding one of their cars and selling it as a Toyota ... to compare the Ipad2 to a Ferrari spare me
Sure. Let's add a USB port, too. And a couple of other memory card slots since not all cameras use SD. And a slide-out keyboard. And, while we're at it, some people still use parallel and serial ports, so make sure they're included. Oh, can't forget SCSI, too.
When we're through, the people demanding an SD slot and HDMI will be the first in line to complain about the weight (I'm still amazed that people were complaining about the weight of the original iPad).
You forgot the ever-popular Centronics Printer Adapter and S100 bus.
They're not gonna build an entirely different logic board just for the 128GB model.
I want to see 128GB as early as the next guy, but if they can't do it the same way as the other models, they shouldn't (and quite probably won't) do it.
Samples of the 20NM wouldn't be until January, so if they do it in a single stick of 128, it will likely still be 25nm. If this next iPad doesn't make the cut to jump to 128GB, The next certainly will. It all depends on how early in the next half of the year the IMFT teamup gets those out and how late Apple waits for the iPad 3. Wouldn't be the first time Apple has gotten early dibs on Intel's product tho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
Here's my guess:
iPad 2 16 GB WiFi $299
iPad 3 32 GB WiFi $459
iPad 3 64 GB WiFi $559
iPad 3 128 GB WiFi $659
Add 3G to any iPad 3 + $100
I don't see the iPad 2 taking that big a price dip and while I don't see Apple changing the basic price structure too much (altho 3G for $100 makes a lot more sense and is cleaner math all around), I wouldn't expect an across the board $40 drop in base prices if they are also doing the high res Retina display that has been discussed.
Wouldn't be the first time Apple has gotten early dibs on Intel's product tho.
And because of that, Ivy Bridge's April release (GASP! IPAD MONTH, TABOO; CAN'T BE THEN) leads me to believe we might see new laptops/Mac Mini in March.
I don't agree with any of those price. Why would they have to drop the iPad by $200? They don't even do that for the iPhone 4. It's only $100 less than before but also comes with half the NAND, which is typically $100 less model-to-model. And why the $40 drop in price for the iPad 3 which I assume you expect to have the Retina Display no one will be able to touch? And dropped the 3G/GPS card by $29? For what reason and why not $99? That high-end price for the iPad is far too low based on what we're seeing in demand.
They seem to sell plenty of 64GB iPad 3Gs at $829 so unless they will an excessive number of components to off load or feel the competition is closing in ? which I don't this happening on either count ? the prices will stay where they are or potentially go a little higher for the HiDPI display has smaller yeilds or more expensive.
And because of that, Ivy Bridge's April release (GASP! IPAD MONTH, TABOO; CAN'T BE THEN) leads me to believe we might see new laptops/Mac Mini in March.
Yeah I thought that was great news about the 128GB, thanks for making me google that earlier heh. Yeah, I'm really hopeful we get both the new MBP and Air lines at the same time, b/c my wife is thinking she may go Air after all, but she won't want t wait a couple more months while I'm sitting there w/the laptop I wanted
Oh and don't forget a new Apple TV w/a faster processor and 1080p support, at least if they get 1080p licensed by the studios. The current ATV is great tho, I've been very happy w/mine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I don't agree with any of those price. Why would they have to drop the iPad by $200?
Yeah, absolute bottom I would see them dropping the iPad2 down to would be $350, but that would also mean cutting the storage to 8GB, which seems like that would get filled very fast between media and apps. If they drop a model that low, that will tell us how badly they want the Fire off of the market, but I honestly think $400 for the existing iPadw will be what we see. Even if they leave starting storage at 16GB on both the iPad2 and 3, I think between better cameras, faster processor and graphics and much higher dpi screen, there will be more than enough justification for people to drop the $500 on a 3 over buying the 2 for $400.
My girls will be inheriting our iPad 1 when we get a pair of 3's, just like they'll get my Mini when I get a laptop post-Ivy Bridge.
I don't agree with any of those price. Why would they have to drop the iPad by $200? They don't even do that for the iPhone 4. It's only $100 less than before but also comes with half the NAND, which is typically $100 less model-to-model. And why the $40 drop in price for the iPad 3 which I assume you expect to have the Retina Display no one will be able to touch? And dropped the 3G/GPS card by $29? For what reason and why not $99? That high-end price for the iPad is far too low based on what we're seeing in demand.
They seem to sell plenty of 64GB iPad 3Gs at $829 so unless they will an excessive number of components to off load or feel the competition is closing in — which I don't this happening on either count — the prices will stay where they are or potentially go a little higher for the HiDPI display has smaller yeilds or more expensive.
They don't "have to" do anything -- but there are opportunities...
Apple can set the rules of the game and still make great profits.
I think 2 things will be in play
1) economies of scale
2) ability to define the market segments -- both high and low end
The iPad 2 16 GB at $299 essentially defines the low end at:
$200 8 GB no frills Fire
$250 8 GB no frills Nook
$300 16 GB frills (cameras, real multitouch, large display, etc.) iPad
The iPad 3 defines the high end price point at $459 - $759.
The entry-level iPad 2 will be great for schools, AppleTV interaction, PersonalTV, Specialty uses in businesses interfacing customers (restaurants, POST, etc.)
I think that buys Apple another 1-2 years of market lead/domination.
This is especially important to preempt any Windows 8 ARM tablets in 2012 and Windows x86 tablets in 2013.
Edit: Another consideration... This will be Tim Cook's first "flagship" offering, and I suspect it will be a very, very good one!
$300 16 GB frills (cameras, real multitouch, large display, etc.) iPad
So $50 for double the storage -AND- double the display size? You are trying to make the iPad a competitor to half-size loss-leaders. Note those eReaders with LCDs are missing a lot of HW the iPad has.; HW that adds up in price. There is no reason they shouldn't be making a profit on their tablets and coming in with a $300 iPad simply isn't going to cut it. The numbers simply don't add up.
Quote:
The iPad 3 defines the high end price point at $459 - $759!
That's too low. Economics of scale can lower cost but there is no need to lower your price if you are still moving every item you can make as fast as you can make them.
Plus, I don't see where you've accounted for the possibility of the iPad 3 being more costly due to the HiDPI display.
edit: I think if we see a 5-7" device that will compete with the low-end it will be $299 to start and will be an iPod Touch.
May Apple should offer an iPad with GSM phone functionality. I would buy it. Kinda tired managing two devices around. Not suggesting putting iPad to your hear. There's bluetooth or speakerphone.
Have another look at the current iPad models and accessories !
Plus, I don't see where you've accounted for the possibility of the iPad 3 being more costly due to the HiDPI display.
Using the iPhone 4 as an example, Apple didn't increase its cost even though it had a substantially higher resolution (and undoubtedly more costly) display over the 3Gs iPhone.
I really think the prices won't change from the iPad 2 to the iPad 3, and the 2 will be phased out just like the first one was. The iPhone is pretty much the only device where Apple leaves the previous model in production as the new one is rolled out. That has more to do with market desire than Apple's wishes. As long as the iPhone 3Gs and 4 are in the top seller lists mobile phones, Apple will keep cranking them out.
Using the iPhone 4 as an example, Apple didn't increase its cost even though it had a substantially higher resolution (and undoubtedly more costly) display over the 3Gs iPhone.
I really think the prices won't change from the iPad 2 to the iPad 3, and the 2 will be phased out just like the first one was. The iPhone is pretty much the only device where Apple leaves the previous model in production as the new one is rolled out. That has more to do with market desire than Apple's wishes. As long as the iPhone 3Gs and 4 are in the top seller lists mobile phones, Apple will keep cranking them out.
The only similarity they have is a desire to move double the resolution, but everything else about it is very different and considerably more difficult to achieve.
Let's remember the iPhone display is 1/8th the area of the iPad display. That means the iPad is 8x the size as the iPhone. This means a lot more can go wrong when making a single display. General rule, the larger the display the higher the chance of issue. You don't see HDTVs coming out with any smartphone PPI levels. There is a reason for that. It's harder to make larger displays when you pack in more pixels.
Then let's talk about performance. We know the iPhone 4's display would work because we knoew the iPad's display would work as they both used the same GPU and had about the same number of pixels. 652,800 for the iPhone compared to 786,432 for the iPad. That's doable. And the jump up from the iPhone 1 was only 153,600 pixels, but we've already shown the iPad could handle more than 4x just fine with currently shipping HW.
What we still don't know is how it will work with the 3,145,728 pixels on the only known HW we have, the iPhone 4S GPU. Can they had some cores to it to make it work? Does IMGTech have a special GPU just for Apple? We don't know. But we know that a jump to 3.2 million pixels isn't the same as jump to 650k pixels and that Apple won't release this unless all parts make for a good user experience.
So $50 for double the storage -AND- double the display size? You are trying to make the iPad a competitor to half-size loss-leaders. Note those eReaders with LCDs are missing a lot of HW the iPad has.; HW that adds up in price. There is no reason they shouldn't be making a profit on their tablets and coming in with a $300 iPad simply isn't going to cut it. The numbers simply don't add up.
That's too low. Economics of scale can lower cost but there is no need to lower your price if you are still moving every item you can make as fast as you can make them.
Plus, I don't see where you've accounted for the possibility of the iPad 3 being more costly due to the HiDPI display.
edit: I think if we see a 5-7" device that will compete with the low-end it will be $299 to start and will be an iPod Touch.
Everything you say makes sense...
I don't think 7" devices are a long-term solution... 10" may be too small!
As to the cost/price opportunity... Think where Apple wants to be in 2014-15 rather that 2012-13.
What we still don't know is how it will work with the 3,145,728 pixels on the only known HW we have, the iPhone 4S GPU. Can they had some cores to it to make it work? Does IMGTech have a special GPU just for Apple? We don't know. But we know that a jump to 3.2 million pixels isn't the same as jump to 650k pixels and that Apple won't release this unless all parts make for a good user experience.
I don't disagree that it will take considerable more power (both in battery storage and CPU) to drive a higher resolution future iPad design, I just don't see Apple pricing the new model higher than a model it is replacing, nor do I see them keeping the existing model around as a 'cheaper' alternative. Neither of those options are 'par for the course' for Apple.
Of course, that's only my opinion and I could be completely wrong. Seeing as how I bought my wife a 64GB iPad 2 for Christmas, it'll probably be marked down to $300 in February.
It'll be years before we start seeing products come from Apple that Jobs wasn't directly part of. I can't even fathom how many years until we start seeing products that don't have Jobs visions built into them. Perhaps never.
Hopefully never, indeed. I just finished the biography, and the product Steve is most proud of is the company itself. Because he left his vision, the products are 'simply' what came forth of that vision.
Of course we'll see products in the future that he (helped to) design, but more importantly is that Apple Inc. will create products that he didn't (help to) design.
Comments
one big improvement would be to get rid of the dongles. I hope that Apple finally see's the light & includes a Mini HDMI slot, Micro SD Slot & some kick ass speakers. Anything less & they'll be short changing their customers. If Ipad 3 doesn't include at least an SD slot of some sort I'm going to android.
~Food For thought~
Because the iPad competitors that offer those things are beating Apple's pants off in sales? Apple is using their iCloud to replace most 'portable' storage media and Airplay eliminates the need for a specialized HDMI connection cables. Think 'simple and elegant'. 'Simple and elegant' is all your media available on the iCloud and having to click the fewest places on the screen to play a video from an iPad to a tv through an Apple TV unit.
Worrying about special HDMI cables for connection or seperate SD cards for storage doesn't fit into Apple's typical model.
I'm considering getting a Kindle Fire namely because of the price and the amount of content that Amazon provides. I don't have an iPad. I hear the Silk browser is pretty lame though.
Silk is pretty good. Certainly not the weaker point of the Fire or the worst mobile
Browser on the market. Just make sure to disable the accelerated browsing.
Let's not forget the other rumour...
If you are adding 4x the pixels and will need more power to push those pixels you'll need ore mAh to maintain the same battery duration. I don't think 14k mAh makes much sense and there are weight and size issues if you use the same tech, or cost issues if you use a new, denser tech.
I don't see the iPad 3 having 4x the pixels. It will have a higher res screen but not 4x the pixel that's just insane. I don't think mobile GPUs can push that much pixels and even if they did, think of the battery life!
What I want to see in iPad 3 is 32GB standard.
You're dreaming. Apple is not going to sell the iPad 2 at $199 to compete with the Kindle Fire. They're so far apart that it wouldn't make any sense. A high end 10" tablet for the same price as a cut-rate 7" tablet with limited capabilities? Not a chance.
That would be like Ferrari selling their previous model at $20 K to compete with Chevy.
And yet it has worked for 3 of their other major product lines.
Your analogy is moronic ... I might give you the analogy, it like Lexus re-branding one of their cars and selling it as a Toyota ... to compare the Ipad2 to a Ferrari spare me
Sure. Let's add a USB port, too. And a couple of other memory card slots since not all cameras use SD. And a slide-out keyboard. And, while we're at it, some people still use parallel and serial ports, so make sure they're included. Oh, can't forget SCSI, too.
When we're through, the people demanding an SD slot and HDMI will be the first in line to complain about the weight (I'm still amazed that people were complaining about the weight of the original iPad).
You forgot the ever-popular Centronics Printer Adapter and S100 bus.
iPad 2 16GB: $399
iPad 3 16GB: $499
iPad 3 32GB: $599
iPad 3 64GB: $699
There's your low and high end.
Here's my guess:
iPad 2 16 GB WiFi $299
iPad 3 32 GB WiFi $459
iPad 3 64 GB WiFi $559
iPad 3 128 GB WiFi $659
Add 3G to any iPad 3 + $100
You forgot the ever-popular Centronics Printer Adapter and S100 bus.
Don't forget the PS/2 port!
They're not gonna build an entirely different logic board just for the 128GB model.
I want to see 128GB as early as the next guy, but if they can't do it the same way as the other models, they shouldn't (and quite probably won't) do it.
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/m...evice-2011126/
Samples of the 20NM wouldn't be until January, so if they do it in a single stick of 128, it will likely still be 25nm. If this next iPad doesn't make the cut to jump to 128GB, The next certainly will. It all depends on how early in the next half of the year the IMFT teamup gets those out and how late Apple waits for the iPad 3. Wouldn't be the first time Apple has gotten early dibs on Intel's product tho.
Here's my guess:
iPad 2 16 GB WiFi $299
iPad 3 32 GB WiFi $459
iPad 3 64 GB WiFi $559
iPad 3 128 GB WiFi $659
Add 3G to any iPad 3 + $100
I don't see the iPad 2 taking that big a price dip and while I don't see Apple changing the basic price structure too much (altho 3G for $100 makes a lot more sense and is cleaner math all around), I wouldn't expect an across the board $40 drop in base prices if they are also doing the high res Retina display that has been discussed.
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/m...evice-2011126/
YAY.
Wouldn't be the first time Apple has gotten early dibs on Intel's product tho.
And because of that, Ivy Bridge's April release (GASP! IPAD MONTH, TABOO; CAN'T BE THEN) leads me to believe we might see new laptops/Mac Mini in March.
Here's my guess:
iPad 2 16 GB WiFi $299
iPad 3 32 GB WiFi $459
iPad 3 64 GB WiFi $559
iPad 3 128 GB WiFi $659
Add 3G to any iPad 3 + $100
I don't agree with any of those price. Why would they have to drop the iPad by $200? They don't even do that for the iPhone 4. It's only $100 less than before but also comes with half the NAND, which is typically $100 less model-to-model. And why the $40 drop in price for the iPad 3 which I assume you expect to have the Retina Display no one will be able to touch? And dropped the 3G/GPS card by $29? For what reason and why not $99? That high-end price for the iPad is far too low based on what we're seeing in demand.
They seem to sell plenty of 64GB iPad 3Gs at $829 so unless they will an excessive number of components to off load or feel the competition is closing in ? which I don't this happening on either count ? the prices will stay where they are or potentially go a little higher for the HiDPI display has smaller yeilds or more expensive.
YAY.
And because of that, Ivy Bridge's April release (GASP! IPAD MONTH, TABOO; CAN'T BE THEN) leads me to believe we might see new laptops/Mac Mini in March.
Yeah I thought that was great news about the 128GB, thanks for making me google that earlier heh. Yeah, I'm really hopeful we get both the new MBP and Air lines at the same time, b/c my wife is thinking she may go Air after all, but she won't want t wait a couple more months while I'm sitting there w/the laptop I wanted
Oh and don't forget a new Apple TV w/a faster processor and 1080p support, at least if they get 1080p licensed by the studios. The current ATV is great tho, I've been very happy w/mine.
I don't agree with any of those price. Why would they have to drop the iPad by $200?
Yeah, absolute bottom I would see them dropping the iPad2 down to would be $350, but that would also mean cutting the storage to 8GB, which seems like that would get filled very fast between media and apps. If they drop a model that low, that will tell us how badly they want the Fire off of the market, but I honestly think $400 for the existing iPadw will be what we see. Even if they leave starting storage at 16GB on both the iPad2 and 3, I think between better cameras, faster processor and graphics and much higher dpi screen, there will be more than enough justification for people to drop the $500 on a 3 over buying the 2 for $400.
My girls will be inheriting our iPad 1 when we get a pair of 3's, just like they'll get my Mini when I get a laptop post-Ivy Bridge.
I don't agree with any of those price. Why would they have to drop the iPad by $200? They don't even do that for the iPhone 4. It's only $100 less than before but also comes with half the NAND, which is typically $100 less model-to-model. And why the $40 drop in price for the iPad 3 which I assume you expect to have the Retina Display no one will be able to touch? And dropped the 3G/GPS card by $29? For what reason and why not $99? That high-end price for the iPad is far too low based on what we're seeing in demand.
They seem to sell plenty of 64GB iPad 3Gs at $829 so unless they will an excessive number of components to off load or feel the competition is closing in — which I don't this happening on either count — the prices will stay where they are or potentially go a little higher for the HiDPI display has smaller yeilds or more expensive.
They don't "have to" do anything -- but there are opportunities...
Apple can set the rules of the game and still make great profits.
I think 2 things will be in play
1) economies of scale
2) ability to define the market segments -- both high and low end
The iPad 2 16 GB at $299 essentially defines the low end at:
$200 8 GB no frills Fire
$250 8 GB no frills Nook
$300 16 GB frills (cameras, real multitouch, large display, etc.) iPad
The iPad 3 defines the high end price point at $459 - $759.
The entry-level iPad 2 will be great for schools, AppleTV interaction, PersonalTV, Specialty uses in businesses interfacing customers (restaurants, POST, etc.)
I think that buys Apple another 1-2 years of market lead/domination.
This is especially important to preempt any Windows 8 ARM tablets in 2012 and Windows x86 tablets in 2013.
Edit: Another consideration... This will be Tim Cook's first "flagship" offering, and I suspect it will be a very, very good one!
$200 8 GB no frills Fire
$250 8 GB no frills Nook
$300 16 GB frills (cameras, real multitouch, large display, etc.) iPad
So $50 for double the storage -AND- double the display size? You are trying to make the iPad a competitor to half-size loss-leaders. Note those eReaders with LCDs are missing a lot of HW the iPad has.; HW that adds up in price. There is no reason they shouldn't be making a profit on their tablets and coming in with a $300 iPad simply isn't going to cut it. The numbers simply don't add up.
The iPad 3 defines the high end price point at $459 - $759!
That's too low. Economics of scale can lower cost but there is no need to lower your price if you are still moving every item you can make as fast as you can make them.
Plus, I don't see where you've accounted for the possibility of the iPad 3 being more costly due to the HiDPI display.
edit: I think if we see a 5-7" device that will compete with the low-end it will be $299 to start and will be an iPod Touch.
May Apple should offer an iPad with GSM phone functionality. I would buy it. Kinda tired managing two devices around. Not suggesting putting iPad to your hear. There's bluetooth or speakerphone.
Have another look at the current iPad models and accessories !
Plus, I don't see where you've accounted for the possibility of the iPad 3 being more costly due to the HiDPI display.
Using the iPhone 4 as an example, Apple didn't increase its cost even though it had a substantially higher resolution (and undoubtedly more costly) display over the 3Gs iPhone.
I really think the prices won't change from the iPad 2 to the iPad 3, and the 2 will be phased out just like the first one was. The iPhone is pretty much the only device where Apple leaves the previous model in production as the new one is rolled out. That has more to do with market desire than Apple's wishes. As long as the iPhone 3Gs and 4 are in the top seller lists mobile phones, Apple will keep cranking them out.
Using the iPhone 4 as an example, Apple didn't increase its cost even though it had a substantially higher resolution (and undoubtedly more costly) display over the 3Gs iPhone.
I really think the prices won't change from the iPad 2 to the iPad 3, and the 2 will be phased out just like the first one was. The iPhone is pretty much the only device where Apple leaves the previous model in production as the new one is rolled out. That has more to do with market desire than Apple's wishes. As long as the iPhone 3Gs and 4 are in the top seller lists mobile phones, Apple will keep cranking them out.
The only similarity they have is a desire to move double the resolution, but everything else about it is very different and considerably more difficult to achieve.
Let's remember the iPhone display is 1/8th the area of the iPad display. That means the iPad is 8x the size as the iPhone. This means a lot more can go wrong when making a single display. General rule, the larger the display the higher the chance of issue. You don't see HDTVs coming out with any smartphone PPI levels. There is a reason for that. It's harder to make larger displays when you pack in more pixels.
Then let's talk about performance. We know the iPhone 4's display would work because we knoew the iPad's display would work as they both used the same GPU and had about the same number of pixels. 652,800 for the iPhone compared to 786,432 for the iPad. That's doable. And the jump up from the iPhone 1 was only 153,600 pixels, but we've already shown the iPad could handle more than 4x just fine with currently shipping HW.
What we still don't know is how it will work with the 3,145,728 pixels on the only known HW we have, the iPhone 4S GPU. Can they had some cores to it to make it work? Does IMGTech have a special GPU just for Apple? We don't know. But we know that a jump to 3.2 million pixels isn't the same as jump to 650k pixels and that Apple won't release this unless all parts make for a good user experience.
So $50 for double the storage -AND- double the display size? You are trying to make the iPad a competitor to half-size loss-leaders. Note those eReaders with LCDs are missing a lot of HW the iPad has.; HW that adds up in price. There is no reason they shouldn't be making a profit on their tablets and coming in with a $300 iPad simply isn't going to cut it. The numbers simply don't add up.
That's too low. Economics of scale can lower cost but there is no need to lower your price if you are still moving every item you can make as fast as you can make them.
Plus, I don't see where you've accounted for the possibility of the iPad 3 being more costly due to the HiDPI display.
edit: I think if we see a 5-7" device that will compete with the low-end it will be $299 to start and will be an iPod Touch.
Everything you say makes sense...
I don't think 7" devices are a long-term solution... 10" may be too small!
As to the cost/price opportunity... Think where Apple wants to be in 2014-15 rather that 2012-13.
What we still don't know is how it will work with the 3,145,728 pixels on the only known HW we have, the iPhone 4S GPU. Can they had some cores to it to make it work? Does IMGTech have a special GPU just for Apple? We don't know. But we know that a jump to 3.2 million pixels isn't the same as jump to 650k pixels and that Apple won't release this unless all parts make for a good user experience.
I don't disagree that it will take considerable more power (both in battery storage and CPU) to drive a higher resolution future iPad design, I just don't see Apple pricing the new model higher than a model it is replacing, nor do I see them keeping the existing model around as a 'cheaper' alternative. Neither of those options are 'par for the course' for Apple.
Of course, that's only my opinion and I could be completely wrong. Seeing as how I bought my wife a 64GB iPad 2 for Christmas, it'll probably be marked down to $300 in February.
It'll be years before we start seeing products come from Apple that Jobs wasn't directly part of. I can't even fathom how many years until we start seeing products that don't have Jobs visions built into them. Perhaps never.
Hopefully never, indeed. I just finished the biography, and the product Steve is most proud of is the company itself. Because he left his vision, the products are 'simply' what came forth of that vision.
Of course we'll see products in the future that he (helped to) design, but more importantly is that Apple Inc. will create products that he didn't (help to) design.