Samsung Securities says 7" 'iPad mini' coming in Q3 2012, Apple investigating flexible panels

1910121415

Comments

  • Reply 221 of 293
    reganregan Posts: 474member
    If they consider the 7" tablet an ipod...they can call it a Maxi-pod. :-)
  • Reply 222 of 293
    Now this is weird,samsung tie up with apple will build up its own competition in smartphone market.IF samsung is coming with flexible amoled screen why doesnt it makes it patented rather than sharing its technology to apple.

    Alex

    www.mobitily.com
  • Reply 223 of 293
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SuperTomcat View Post






    Not content with making their phones so big they're impossible to use, Android manufacturers have taken to making their phones impossible to HOLD at all.
  • Reply 224 of 293
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dazabrit View Post


    I think you're absolutely right in the fact that a 7 inch iPad still doesn't quite fit in the lineup. It's not quite portable enough for a broader market. Women would probably carry them in handbags much like books/Kindles but a 5 - 6" iPod would be a much better prospect around $299.



    3.5" iPhone

    5.5" iPod

    9.7" iPad



    I'd actually prefer Apple to even kill the iPod touch and just have the iPhone and 9.7" iPad. That way their more focused on the iPhone and iPad and can work on getting the prices as cheap as possible. I see the iPad replacing the iPod touch my many teenagers (as the price comes down) and the iPhone continuing to be the best phone you can get.
  • Reply 225 of 293
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,379member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Let's see. The article says that the plant is running at capacity and Samsung is willing to invest another billion dollars in expanding it.



    Just what part of that leads you to think that it's a disaster?



    I don't. That was another posters claim.



    The fact that Samsung was looking to raise $1B for a needed expansion followed by a back and forth among forum members on why was discussed here in depth several weeks ago. Is that clearer?
  • Reply 226 of 293
    f1ferrarif1ferrari Posts: 262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sennen View Post


    Well said. I think they'd keep a lower priced model based on the iPad 2 in the product line before they go to 7". I may well be proven wrong, of course.



    For what it's worth, but I tend to agree with this. Apple and FoxConn have the production lines for the iPad 2 really cranking now, why shift into a product that has largely failed in the marketplace? Especially one that Steve said wouldn't work to begin with? Apple has sold nearly 50 million of the 9.7" form, who has sold numbers close to that in the 7" size? Like the iPhone, I think keeping a cheaper iPad 2 in the lineup before doing a 7" model makes sense from a cost/benefit point of view.



    Another advantage of keeping a cheaper iPad 2 around is that sales to schools (especially with the textbook initiative) could keep the existing production lines going. One option would be to do just as they did with the white MacBook: make it an education only version.
  • Reply 227 of 293
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Buckeyestar View Post


    Actually that's an argument against the iPad entirely.



    No it's not. The iPad was never designed to fit in your pocket because the iPhone was that product. The iPad is a different product. For most regular Joes the iPad is a computer replacement, the iPhone is a phone. People don't want and have no need to carry their computer (their iPad) around town. Sure there may be some lone rangers in this forum who want the iPad to be smaller so they can carry it around, but you're geeks and you don't even understand the iPad as a product, apparently. And for those of you who want the iPad to be 7" so you can fit it in your pockets: in general people don't have 7" pockets; if you want to carry a device in your pocket the iPhone is it.



    The iPhone is the Tricorder and the iPad is the PADD.
  • Reply 228 of 293
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Anyway, a comment on the one reason why a 7" iPad/iPod is almost certainly being developed by Apple: Samsung said it, and of all the little rumor sources ranging from Digitimes to the Wall Street Journal, Samsung is the one in the unique position to know what Apple is buying. If they say Apple is making a 7-8" slate, I believe them.



    Their track record isn't very good as I recall.



    Quote:

    On why Apple would consider one: If you look at the most popular free and paid app trends in the AppStore they predominantly swing to games. Buyers might convince themselves they're buying a tablet for productivity, but app downloads are evidence it's more for entertainment in reality. A 7" tablet makes a much easier to hold and use device for gaming, and that's what Apple sees a smaller tablet being used for IMO.



    That's another reason why I think a larger iPod makes more sense than a smaller iPad. Carmissimo mirrors may own thoughts which is why I've been writing 5-8" iPod Touch instead of just 7" iPod Touch in my statement. This to me would be a much better fit for games. Plus, as I've shown scaling up from 3.5" would be easier and more natural than scaling down from 9.7".



    In any case there is still no evidence that such a device exists yet we have components out the Ying Yang (a subsidiary of Foxconn) showing the iPad 3. It's possible this could be completely hidden from even if to be released next week, as some sources say, after all the new MBAs and Mac mini weren't known before their unveiling.
  • Reply 229 of 293
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snova View Post


    Agreed, this is why I bought a Kindle. $79.. Great battery life, great screen for reading in the day time. Get one. Dedicated buttons from turning pages.. great book reader! Buy one.

    Crappy tablet however.



    Tried one, the blackout page turning drives me to madness.

    I prefer reading on a tablet/phone.



    Quote:

    my iPhone fits in my shirt, pants or shorts pocket , don't need inside jacket pocket. Work much better especially, when its inappropriate to haul around a jacket (i.e. summer time).



    I use my iPhone for reading as well, it`s a bit small but enjoyable enough.



    Quote:

    I highly doubt it.. you don't want to be a customer.



    I own thousands of dollars worth of Apple products.

    I like being an Apple customer

    I could reasonably be referred to as "Fanboy:



    Quote:

    If you really wanted an iPad, you would have bought one already.You don't want to buy one, you just want to complain.



    I`ve bought two actually, a first gen and an iPad 2.

    I bought the first one when they came out because ..well, like I said, I`m a fanboy.

    I gave it to my wife and it`s the device that finally drug her into the digital world as she was never a computer person.I bought her the upgrade to iPad 2 when it came out and now she uses the 1 as an accounting/POS system for her business.

    It`s a great product, it just doesn`t fit my personal needs due to form factor.



    Quote:

    All it proves is there is a market for cheapskates. Just like the Netbook market.

    The fire is worse book reader (bad battery and bad screen compared to eInk) than the $79 Kindle and a worse tablet then an iPad. If someone gave me a Fire for x-mas, I would return it and buy one normal Kindle and spend the other $120 on something else.



    Why does a 7" tablet have to be cheap?

    Of course price was a reason for the Fires sales but that doesn`t mean there aren`t people with means who want a quality tablet at a 7-8" form factor.

    The Fires sales prove there is an interest in the size.

    I also prefer tablet reading to e-ink as I`ve said the black out page turn is far too distracting.

    I`ve played with the Fires on display and like the machine.





    Quote:

    the same could have been said about Netbooks.



    Not really, netbooks were for cheapskates as the only reason to purchase one was price.

    There isn`t a netbook in existence that performs decently.

    Apple avoided this problem by making the netbook obsolete with the iPad so arguably it could be said that Apple did enter the netbook market and entirely took it over with the iPad.



    I don`t see why it`s so difficult to admit there is a market sector that would take a serious interest in a smaller iPad.



    If it`s the Steve Jobs finger filing quote you must admit his statement reeks of hypocrisy considering he`s the man that produced the iPhone UI.
  • Reply 230 of 293
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    There track record isn't very good as I recall.



    It's not that their track record isn't very good, it's that they're running on a track halfway across the country.







    And they think the word 'track' means 'climb into a janitor's closet and make out with a mop'.
  • Reply 231 of 293
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post


    Along with pre-empting competition, your last paragraph is the best rational (I've heard) for offering a smaller iPad device -- i believe that the iPod is what it is and should not be expanded into a larger model.



    What is the difference between a smaller iPad and a larger iPod?
  • Reply 232 of 293
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    What is the difference between a smaller iPad and a larger iPod?



    lol.. Zither is reaching Spam Sandwich status in my book. You guys bring a pinch of perceptive to these forums.
  • Reply 233 of 293
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    I'd actually prefer Apple to even kill the iPod touch and just have the iPhone and 9.7" iPad. That way their more focused on the iPhone and iPad and can work on getting the prices as cheap as possible. I see the iPad replacing the iPod touch my many teenagers (as the price comes down) and the iPhone continuing to be the best phone you can get.



    The average retail price for the Pod line is $164, or $35 less than the lowest-priced iPod Touch, but higher than the highest-priced iPod Nano at $149. To me this sounds like the low-end iPod Touch is likely the most popular at $199 unless one can make a strong argument for the iPod Shuffle.



    Apple sold 15.4 million iPods last quarter. They reported that over half were Touches. If we make that exactly half we 7.6 million Touches. That comes out to (7.6 million x $199 = $1.5 billion) at the very, very low end for a device that gets most of its R&D taken care of from the iPhone juggernaut.



    It's not their most profitable product line there is a lot of money at play. What I think it needs is some new blood. Perhaps if Apple focused on a gaming device. Now I know that people say it's not a real gaming machine because it doesn't have a D-pad and come with flame decals or whatever but that seems opposite of what the App Store suggests. Most people just want to be entertained.
    3.5" 3:2 = 5.65"sq (2.91" x 1.94")

    5.5" 3:2 = 13.96"sq (4.58" x 3.05")

    7.0" 3:2 = 22.62"sq (5.81" x 3.88")

    7.0" 4:3 = 23.54"sq (5.59" x 4.21")
    Going with the same aspect ratio of the iPod Touch over the iPad also allows the device to be thinner on the short side which can make it more pocketable. Perhaps not at 7" but at 5.5" the 3" wide display might be possible. It's certainly within reach of the handheld gaming sizes.
  • Reply 234 of 293
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    That's a neat mockup but I wonder about its practicality from a design, construction and usability standpoint.



    If Samsung cared about practicality, they wouldn't be making 4.5 inch nerdgasm phones with a short battery life in the first place
  • Reply 235 of 293
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snova View Post


    you can't please all the people all the time.. and you know what? that is ok. The best customers are the reasonable ones that want to be your customers. There are plenty out there. For those that don't, they will always standing on their soapbox and demanding a 7" root-able iPad with removable battery, OLED flexible screen, SD card slot, USB ports, slide out keyboard, 4G LTE, which allows you to run Microsoft Office and play Flash for less than the cost of the HW while calling you a money greedy evil monopolistic corporation.



    Those people probably want a 7 inch tablet that uses floppy disks! Losers!
  • Reply 236 of 293
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


    If Samsung cared about practicality, they wouldn't be making 4.5 inch nerdgasm phones with a short battery life in the first place



    I think Samsung cares, I just think they don't know before they release a product. "See what sticks" is their motto.



    Overall I think the Note is interesting. The digitizer should be something Apple considers. Of course, this is more difficult for Apple than Samsung because Apple will need to put in all their devices instead of just having it as a testbed release. It would likely only have styli as 3rd-party options, not something that gets "proctolated" into the device.
  • Reply 237 of 293
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Not content with making their phones so big they're impossible to use, Android manufacturers have taken to making their phones impossible to HOLD at all.



    Android phone manufacturers don't have a clue. That is why Android phones are selling so poorly.
  • Reply 238 of 293
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    That's what happens when you look at one data point in isolation.

    Now, look at this chart:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IP...er_quarter.svg



    It's pretty clear that iPod sales peaked in the Christmas, 2008 quarter - just as iPhone sales were starting to take off. What seems to have happened is that many people have chosen to use an iPhone instead of an iPod and other phone. The decline in iPod sales was not caused by the variety of iPod products, but rather by the iPhone introduction.



    Sometimes you have to cannibilize your own sales..



    Im sorry.. but you are wrong. An 8GB $600 iPhone in 2007 did not dramaticallly affect the growth of the iPod line. Look at BOTHS chart a bit closer. The slow down had already occurred before the iPhone was introduced. I was not talking about peaking.. I was talking about "growth rate". When the slope of growth has an inflection point.. not a slope of 0. If you look at the huge growth numbers of the iPhone you will see it you will have a difficult time to correlate those numbers to the iPod chart. The numbers simply don't add it. I invite you to try. 2x growth in the millions every year for the iPhone.. show me the 2x decline in iPods correlating to the iPhone.. no.. its a nice smooth graph for the iPod.. the rapid growth declined long before iPhone intro.



    and to make it clear.. I never said creation of niche variations does not slow growth. You completely messed up my statement. I said that you do niche variations once you see a slow down in growth to get the numbers back up.
  • Reply 239 of 293
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post




    And they think the word 'track' means 'climb into a janitor's closet and make out with a mop'.



    That is because they are SOOOOOOOO stupid!



  • Reply 240 of 293
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snova View Post


    agreed.



    I agree partially. You are completely right about the Classic iPod vs Flash based iPod (music player).

    That was two completely different demographics.



    The classic was designed for "all of the music in your pocket" using a spinning HDD, the other was "a lot of music in your pocket" using flash. However, as soon as they started going after all these different colors and sizes of the flash based iPod, they stopped focusing on creating revolutionary products and switched to evolutionary product to fill different niche. About that time, iPod growth slowed down. Mini, Nano, I lost track.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ip...er_quarter.svg



    and now sales have finally been shrinking for the past few years and will continue along this trend until they shut it down.



    The same will happen to the iPhone and iPad if they do not keep innovating and keep doing things to stay revolutionary. When they stop being revolutionary then you will see 7" iPads of all different colors and special edition iPhones form U2. At that point they better have another revolutionary product in the market (i.e. AppleTV, whatever) or it will be time for me to start thinking about selling the stock. I hope that day never comes. This is why I don't want them to even consider resorting to selling a 7" iPad just yet. When you do that, it means they are out of ideas for innovation in the mainstream and will start to spread themselves into every niche to keep their numbers up.



    It tends to happen to a lot of companies.. they go from selling a huge revolutionary product like a Model T (any color you want as long as it is Black) to producing the same evolutionary cars under different brands (Ford, Lincoln, Mercury) in every color of the rainbow, differentating each make with different headlights, tail lights, interior trim, and special editions until they are on their backs. Remember the K-Car? It was revolutionary and saved Chrysler, and its evolution without further innovation also just about killed Chrysler too. I think their low point has got to be the Chrysler TC by Maserati. OMG. Talk about niche to the extreme. This was a company completely on its back and out of ideas.



    Not to jump in on someone else's debate, but ... most of what you say here strikes me as illusory. I don't think you have much backup for any of this beyond your personal opinion.



    iPod sales didn't start to decline when the flash models and variations in design style were introduced over the classic. Your own chart shows that they started to decline much later in 2007.



    You seem to be equating sales, to simple popularity of the basic design type and don't factor in other obvious reasons for the iPods decline like the fact that sales only really slowed when the iPhone and other iOS devices came out, which each had an iPod "inside."



    You make seemingly artificial divisions between versions of iPods and ascribe their popularity to different demographic groups (which you don't define), based on nothing more than an unexplored hunch that this "type" of person likes that "type" (version) of iPod.
Sign In or Register to comment.