People are making fallacious connections in order to prove a point but I will say this.
An iPad with 3G and 16GB of NAND storage is $629
a comparably spec'd iPhone unlocked would be $649
To the layman they'd see the 9.7" screen of the iPad and assume the cost is higher but
in reality there's additional design expense to find parts that can be expertly put into a
small device like iPhone or iPod Touch.
So we cannot extrapolate the data and assume that the same design consideration would affect a significantly larger iPad 7.85.
Plus even today's iPod Touch is based on a 45nm A4 processor and NAND storage based on larger geometry. If the rumors were indeed correct that a Q3 launch is the timeframe for a smaller iPad that could mean that the deals for parts was done late last year and into the new year and designers would have the ability to use smaller geometry parts (28/32nm) to aid not only in reducing power consumption but also cost.
Do I think that a 7.85 iPad mini is coming this year? I'm 50/50. But I certainly see the reasons why from a strategic and component level. It can be done. The only question is "will it be done?"
To the layman they'd see the 9.7" screen of the iPad and assume the cost is higher but
in reality there's additional design expense to find parts that can be expertly put into a
small device like iPhone or iPod Touch.
It's hard to use the iPad and iPhone for comparison. As previously mentioned the subsidy model hides the carrier's cost of the iPhone and makes it more appealing to customers. That's clear from the profit Apple gets from their handset arm. I think the iPad could beat out the iPhone in revenue and profit in a couple years as it steals from the PC business but I don't see the profit margins for the iPad to be as high without the subsidy model.
Quote:
Do I think that a 7.85 iPad mini is coming this year? I'm 50/50. But I certainly see the reasons why from a strategic and component level. It can be done. The only question is "will it be done?"
What about a larger iPod instead of a smaller iPad. To me this makes a lot more sense.
edit:
Quote:
he Galaxy tab 7.7 will set you back a minimum $499, and that’s with a 2-year contract. If you say to hell with carriers, the price of the puny tablet swells to an eye-watering, deal-breaking $699.
And Sony, already bleeding money, is similarly stupid. Its Tablet P, a 5.5-inch tablet with a Nintendo DS-like ability to fold in half, will price itself off the market with a 399-dollar contract tag, and that price skyrockets to $549 without a contract.
The difference here is that these are "real' tablets and not tablet-like devices. I think the Kindle Fire has given people a false idea of what a fair and reasonable price is. Being a loss-leader and having a display isn't enough to make it a competitor. Even the 3.5" iPod Touch with an inferior display starts at $199 for the 8GB model.
It makes as much sense as Ferrari manufacturing an econobox car.
Apple makes F1-class products. Always has, always will. Apple doesn't even know how to make a great $500 computer. That would be like Ferrari making a truck.
It will never happen.
Exactly. That's like Audi or Mercedes making a compact car to compete with the cheapest Kia or Saturn. For some firms that do want to play in the low end market do so through different subsidiary companies with distinct brands. For example, Toyota & Lexus, Honda & Acura, Audi & Volkswagen, etc. Entirely different entities owned by a parent company.
Consumer's perceive Apple products of having the highest of quality. That's why Apple can command such premium prices. User satisfaction is pretty low for cheap notebooks. But hey, they put up with it because they only paid $400. They understand the tradeoff. A $1000 machine has to provide a user experience that is superior in order to for consumers to purchase it. Apple is unmatched there. A cheap product would dent Apple's brand equity and damage sales on the high end.
Just one example. Years ago, I went to Apple store to buy more RAM for Mac Pro and they didn't have in stock nor could they order any because my machine was a almost a couple years old. So they recommended I go to Crucial. Their prices were about half Apple's. However, I had problems with RAM boards cutting off due to overheating. I found out that Apples RAM is highly customized and uses heat sinks made of brass allowing it to emit much less heat compared to the cheaper generic RAM found in all other computers. This allows Apple to use smaller fans and more appealing casings. Fans in other desktops sound like there is Cessna trapped inside compared to barely audible fans in Macs.
Can someone please explain to me how Jobs could say with a straight face that to type on a 7" screen you'd need to sand your fingers, when Apple has people typing on the same style virtual keyboard on a 3.5" screen
I think this would be a good move for Apple if done well. They don't compete with the bottom feeders, but they don't only aim for the very top. That's why they had a $999 Macbook in white for years after they went to the aluminum models. That's why they make the iPod shuffle. That's why they kept the 3GS around as a free phone.
A smaller iPad with a price point above the Kindle type junk, but below the full size iPad would be in the same category as the above.
This won't be a smaller iPad... it will be a LARGER iPod Touch. The touch is a great gaming machine right now, this will make it even better. They can spread out the Touch's pixels and just hit the ground running using all the current iPod Touch games in the store.
This is the "product transition" Apple was talking about.
I agree, it could be a larger iPod Touch. But a new name is needed, such as iTouch.
Comparing to the 7" BB Playbook, I feel the 7" size is very handy for book reading, very light web browsing and Email.
The 10" iPad is the sweet spot for Web browsing and other things the Netbooks and MacBook Air do well at.
Can someone please explain to me how Jobs could say with a straight face that to type on a 7" screen you'd need to sand your fingers, when Apple has people typing on the same style virtual keyboard on a 3.5" screen
Jobs never said that a touchscreen that is under 9.7" inches can'e be useful. Obviously they are with the iPhone and iPod Touch predating the iPad by almost 3 years. His point was regarding a tablet that is small, not a phone or a PMP.
Why the hell is everyone saying how a smaller iPad would create fragmentation? Do the Macbooks and Pros not have different screen sizes? Why doesn't that create fragmentation? Or does that only count with the iPad and iPhone? Why didn't Apple have problems with the iPod line? There were like 5 or 6 different iPod models at one point.
I personally wouldn't get the 7.85 inch model if it came out because either one I get I won't be able to fit it into my pocket; so I rather just get the bigger screen.
The only problem I can think of right now is that if they made this smaller size iPad, maybe they would lose a lot of would-be normal iPad buyers to the smaller one just because of the lower price. At the same time though, they could quite possibly make way more profit either way if the decrease in regular sales is offset by the amount of smaller ones selling great. Apple has a lot of great accountants who had to have looked into this a LONG time ago and figured this all out.
Why the hell is everyone saying how a smaller iPad would create fragmentation? Do the MacBooks and Pros not have different screen sizes? Why doesn't that create fragmentation?
You're joking, right?
Quote:
Why didn't Apple have problems with the iPod line? There were like 5 or 6 different iPod models at one point.
So developers developed software for those iPods? And they were guaranteed resolutions and screen sizes on which their stuff would be used and viewed?
Sure, because no one ever played games on a GameBoy. And certainly no one plays games on a DS.
"Nintendo now projects an annual loss of 20 billion yen and a full-year profit from operations of 1 billion yen, down 99.4 percent from the year-ago period. The company also sees full fiscal year revenue of 790 billion yen, down 22 percent. For the six months ended Sept. 30, Nintendo reported a 41 percent decline in revenue to 215.7 billion yen and a loss of 70.3 billion yen, a multiple of the year-ago loss of 2.0 billion".
"Nintendo now projects an annual loss of 20 billion yen and a full-year profit from operations of 1 billion yen, down 99.4 percent from the year-ago period. The company also sees full fiscal year revenue of 790 billion yen, down 22 percent. For the six months ended Sept. 30, Nintendo reported a 41 percent decline in revenue to 215.7 billion yen and a loss of 70.3 billion yen, a multiple of the year-ago loss of 2.0 billion".
They sure are making a killing those DS guys.
What's your point? The 3DS is selling like hotcakes. the PSVita, with a screen larger than the 3DS' (and enough to suit your tastes, I'd imagine) is floundering.
Maybe content is more important than size. That, at least, would explain why the 3.5" iPhone from two and a half years ago is outselling every single Android phone on the market, despite them having 5" or larger screens.
What's your point? The 3DS is selling like hotcakes. the PSVita, with a screen larger than the 3DS' (and enough to suit your tastes, I'd imagine) is floundering.
Maybe content is more important than size. That, at least, would explain why the 3.5" iPhone from two and a half years ago is outselling every single Android phone on the market, despite them having 5" or larger screens.
My point is that the times they are a changing my friend. The 3.5" PSP was a flop but the 5" PS Vita is getting very good reviews. Not sure you can call something that only launched last week everywhere outside Japan a flop. Yes I do like the Vita, it sits very nicely in the hand and the screen is amazing. The games are way too expensive but I think they will realise that and drop the prices in time. I'm planning to get one in the next few weeks.
Even Nintendo admit that things are changing and are planning to launch a 6” tablet like games console sometime this year as sales of the DS continue to implode.
I find the iPod Touch too small for game play. It's not just the screen it's the fact that you can't hold it very well. Finger and thumb and that's it. I accept that maybe I'm not the demographic Apple is aiming at given that I'm not a child. But you only have to look at the iPad to see how people love to play games on a bigger screen.
I still believe Apple will release a tweener device around 6 or 7 inches to target the portable gaming and eBook market both of which have exploded in the past year. However I think they will go as follows:
4" screen = iPod & iPhone (no more iPod Touch just iPod now as the iPod Classic is deleted)
7" screen = new device with new name - maybe the iPlay
10" screen = iPad.
Edit: Oh yeah forgot about the Kindle Fire. How many millions did they sell? Not bad given that it's only available in the US. Why are people buying them - my guess is to play games on. Most of my friends have the basic Kindle and they all love it for reading eBooks. Clearly there is a demand for a 6 or 7" device.
Even Nintendo admit that things are changing and are planning to launch a 6? tablet like games console sometime this year as sales of the DS continue to implode.
That's not a handheld in any way, shape, or form. DS sales are imploding because the 3DS exists. Its sales are rising.
Comments
An iPad with 3G and 16GB of NAND storage is $629
a comparably spec'd iPhone unlocked would be $649
To the layman they'd see the 9.7" screen of the iPad and assume the cost is higher but
in reality there's additional design expense to find parts that can be expertly put into a
small device like iPhone or iPod Touch.
So we cannot extrapolate the data and assume that the same design consideration would affect a significantly larger iPad 7.85.
Plus even today's iPod Touch is based on a 45nm A4 processor and NAND storage based on larger geometry. If the rumors were indeed correct that a Q3 launch is the timeframe for a smaller iPad that could mean that the deals for parts was done late last year and into the new year and designers would have the ability to use smaller geometry parts (28/32nm) to aid not only in reducing power consumption but also cost.
Do I think that a 7.85 iPad mini is coming this year? I'm 50/50. But I certainly see the reasons why from a strategic and component level. It can be done. The only question is "will it be done?"
An iPad with 3G and 16GB of NAND storage is $629
a comparably spec'd iPhone unlocked would be $649
To the layman they'd see the 9.7" screen of the iPad and assume the cost is higher but
in reality there's additional design expense to find parts that can be expertly put into a
small device like iPhone or iPod Touch.
It's hard to use the iPad and iPhone for comparison. As previously mentioned the subsidy model hides the carrier's cost of the iPhone and makes it more appealing to customers. That's clear from the profit Apple gets from their handset arm. I think the iPad could beat out the iPhone in revenue and profit in a couple years as it steals from the PC business but I don't see the profit margins for the iPad to be as high without the subsidy model.
Do I think that a 7.85 iPad mini is coming this year? I'm 50/50. But I certainly see the reasons why from a strategic and component level. It can be done. The only question is "will it be done?"
What about a larger iPod instead of a smaller iPad. To me this makes a lot more sense.
edit:
he Galaxy tab 7.7 will set you back a minimum $499, and that’s with a 2-year contract. If you say to hell with carriers, the price of the puny tablet swells to an eye-watering, deal-breaking $699.
And Sony, already bleeding money, is similarly stupid. Its Tablet P, a 5.5-inch tablet with a Nintendo DS-like ability to fold in half, will price itself off the market with a 399-dollar contract tag, and that price skyrockets to $549 without a contract.
- http://www.thetechblock.com/articles...s-and-pricing/
The difference here is that these are "real' tablets and not tablet-like devices. I think the Kindle Fire has given people a false idea of what a fair and reasonable price is. Being a loss-leader and having a display isn't enough to make it a competitor. Even the 3.5" iPod Touch with an inferior display starts at $199 for the 8GB model.Surely Apple wouldn't make a screen that size when it knows its competitors failed doing the same thing as consumers wanted bigger?
Competitors have failed at making tablets for 3 decades.
It makes as much sense as Ferrari manufacturing an econobox car.
Apple makes F1-class products. Always has, always will. Apple doesn't even know how to make a great $500 computer. That would be like Ferrari making a truck.
It will never happen.
Exactly. That's like Audi or Mercedes making a compact car to compete with the cheapest Kia or Saturn. For some firms that do want to play in the low end market do so through different subsidiary companies with distinct brands. For example, Toyota & Lexus, Honda & Acura, Audi & Volkswagen, etc. Entirely different entities owned by a parent company.
Consumer's perceive Apple products of having the highest of quality. That's why Apple can command such premium prices. User satisfaction is pretty low for cheap notebooks. But hey, they put up with it because they only paid $400. They understand the tradeoff. A $1000 machine has to provide a user experience that is superior in order to for consumers to purchase it. Apple is unmatched there. A cheap product would dent Apple's brand equity and damage sales on the high end.
Just one example. Years ago, I went to Apple store to buy more RAM for Mac Pro and they didn't have in stock nor could they order any because my machine was a almost a couple years old. So they recommended I go to Crucial. Their prices were about half Apple's. However, I had problems with RAM boards cutting off due to overheating. I found out that Apples RAM is highly customized and uses heat sinks made of brass allowing it to emit much less heat compared to the cheaper generic RAM found in all other computers. This allows Apple to use smaller fans and more appealing casings. Fans in other desktops sound like there is Cessna trapped inside compared to barely audible fans in Macs.
I think this would be a good move for Apple if done well. They don't compete with the bottom feeders, but they don't only aim for the very top. That's why they had a $999 Macbook in white for years after they went to the aluminum models. That's why they make the iPod shuffle. That's why they kept the 3GS around as a free phone.
A smaller iPad with a price point above the Kindle type junk, but below the full size iPad would be in the same category as the above.
This won't be a smaller iPad... it will be a LARGER iPod Touch. The touch is a great gaming machine right now, this will make it even better. They can spread out the Touch's pixels and just hit the ground running using all the current iPod Touch games in the store.
This is the "product transition" Apple was talking about.
I agree, it could be a larger iPod Touch. But a new name is needed, such as iTouch.
Comparing to the 7" BB Playbook, I feel the 7" size is very handy for book reading, very light web browsing and Email.
The 10" iPad is the sweet spot for Web browsing and other things the Netbooks and MacBook Air do well at.
Can someone please explain to me how Jobs could say with a straight face that to type on a 7" screen you'd need to sand your fingers, when Apple has people typing on the same style virtual keyboard on a 3.5" screen
Jobs never said that a touchscreen that is under 9.7" inches can'e be useful. Obviously they are with the iPhone and iPod Touch predating the iPad by almost 3 years. His point was regarding a tablet that is small, not a phone or a PMP.
What about a larger iPod instead of a smaller iPad. To me this makes a lot more sense.
What is the difference between a large iPod and a small iPad?
What is the difference between a large iPod and a small iPad?
Since you think an iPad is just a large iPod Touch I guess there wouldn't be any difference from your perspective.
Since you think an iPad is just a large iPod Touch I guess there wouldn't be any difference from your perspective.
That is why I asked. I like to learn.
So what is the difference between a large iPod and a small iPad?
I personally wouldn't get the 7.85 inch model if it came out because either one I get I won't be able to fit it into my pocket; so I rather just get the bigger screen.
The only problem I can think of right now is that if they made this smaller size iPad, maybe they would lose a lot of would-be normal iPad buyers to the smaller one just because of the lower price. At the same time though, they could quite possibly make way more profit either way if the decrease in regular sales is offset by the amount of smaller ones selling great. Apple has a lot of great accountants who had to have looked into this a LONG time ago and figured this all out.
Why the hell is everyone saying how a smaller iPad would create fragmentation? Do the MacBooks and Pros not have different screen sizes? Why doesn't that create fragmentation?
You're joking, right?
Why didn't Apple have problems with the iPod line? There were like 5 or 6 different iPod models at one point.
So developers developed software for those iPods? And they were guaranteed resolutions and screen sizes on which their stuff would be used and viewed?
Sure, because no one ever played games on a GameBoy. And certainly no one plays games on a DS.
"Nintendo now projects an annual loss of 20 billion yen and a full-year profit from operations of 1 billion yen, down 99.4 percent from the year-ago period. The company also sees full fiscal year revenue of 790 billion yen, down 22 percent. For the six months ended Sept. 30, Nintendo reported a 41 percent decline in revenue to 215.7 billion yen and a loss of 70.3 billion yen, a multiple of the year-ago loss of 2.0 billion".
They sure are making a killing those DS guys.
"Nintendo now projects an annual loss of 20 billion yen and a full-year profit from operations of 1 billion yen, down 99.4 percent from the year-ago period. The company also sees full fiscal year revenue of 790 billion yen, down 22 percent. For the six months ended Sept. 30, Nintendo reported a 41 percent decline in revenue to 215.7 billion yen and a loss of 70.3 billion yen, a multiple of the year-ago loss of 2.0 billion".
They sure are making a killing those DS guys.
What's your point? The 3DS is selling like hotcakes. the PSVita, with a screen larger than the 3DS' (and enough to suit your tastes, I'd imagine) is floundering.
Maybe content is more important than size. That, at least, would explain why the 3.5" iPhone from two and a half years ago is outselling every single Android phone on the market, despite them having 5" or larger screens.
What's your point? The 3DS is selling like hotcakes. the PSVita, with a screen larger than the 3DS' (and enough to suit your tastes, I'd imagine) is floundering.
Maybe content is more important than size. That, at least, would explain why the 3.5" iPhone from two and a half years ago is outselling every single Android phone on the market, despite them having 5" or larger screens.
My point is that the times they are a changing my friend. The 3.5" PSP was a flop but the 5" PS Vita is getting very good reviews. Not sure you can call something that only launched last week everywhere outside Japan a flop. Yes I do like the Vita, it sits very nicely in the hand and the screen is amazing. The games are way too expensive but I think they will realise that and drop the prices in time. I'm planning to get one in the next few weeks.
Even Nintendo admit that things are changing and are planning to launch a 6” tablet like games console sometime this year as sales of the DS continue to implode.
I find the iPod Touch too small for game play. It's not just the screen it's the fact that you can't hold it very well. Finger and thumb and that's it. I accept that maybe I'm not the demographic Apple is aiming at given that I'm not a child. But you only have to look at the iPad to see how people love to play games on a bigger screen.
I still believe Apple will release a tweener device around 6 or 7 inches to target the portable gaming and eBook market both of which have exploded in the past year. However I think they will go as follows:
4" screen = iPod & iPhone (no more iPod Touch just iPod now as the iPod Classic is deleted)
7" screen = new device with new name - maybe the iPlay
10" screen = iPad.
Edit: Oh yeah forgot about the Kindle Fire. How many millions did they sell? Not bad given that it's only available in the US. Why are people buying them - my guess is to play games on. Most of my friends have the basic Kindle and they all love it for reading eBooks. Clearly there is a demand for a 6 or 7" device.
Even Nintendo admit that things are changing and are planning to launch a 6? tablet like games console sometime this year as sales of the DS continue to implode.
That's not a handheld in any way, shape, or form. DS sales are imploding because the 3DS exists. Its sales are rising.