'Exciting' Sept. could see Apple intro new iPhone, iPad 'mini'
Apple is gearing up for what is expected to be an "exciting" September, where the company could launch both its next-generation iPhone, as well as smaller iPad, according to people in the Taiwanese supply chain.
Analyst Brian White with Topeka Capital Markets is in Taipei this week, meeting with local contacts in the supply chain, and attending the 2012 Computex Show that is expected to see 120,000 visitors. While speaking with his supply chain sources, he picked up word that Apple is set to have an "exciting" September.
Specifically, he expects Apple's next-generation iPhone is more likely to launch in the month of September, rather than October. Last year, the iPhone 4S debuted in October, which was a few months later than the iPhone launch window that Apple had utilized in prior years.
People in the Taiwanese supply chain also discussed with White the belief that the next iPhone will feature a unibody aluminum casing manufactured by Foxconn. However, White also said his industry contact was "skeptical" about the prospect of Apple using material from Liquidmetal Technologies, an amorphous metal that Apple has exclusive rights to in consumer electronic products.
Last week, a number of parts allegedly from Apple's next iPhone began to surface online, and one of them showed what appeared to be a largely aluminum back with small pieces of glass at the top and bottom of the device. The component also suggested the next iPhone will be slightly taller, to accommodate a larger 4-inch screen, and would also see the headphone jack moved to the bottom of the device.
White also believes that Apple could unveil a new iPad "mini" in September. Numerous recent reports have suggested that Apple has been experimenting with a smaller 7.85-inch iPad that would pack in the same 1,024-by-768-pixel screen resolution as the first-generation iPad and iPad 2, allowing applications to run without modification and for the device to be branded a Retina display.
Topeka Capital Markets has a 12-month price target of $1,111 for AAPL stock. White believes Apple's current valuation does not reflect the growth the company has delivered in recent years, nor future growth prospects.
Analyst Brian White with Topeka Capital Markets is in Taipei this week, meeting with local contacts in the supply chain, and attending the 2012 Computex Show that is expected to see 120,000 visitors. While speaking with his supply chain sources, he picked up word that Apple is set to have an "exciting" September.
Specifically, he expects Apple's next-generation iPhone is more likely to launch in the month of September, rather than October. Last year, the iPhone 4S debuted in October, which was a few months later than the iPhone launch window that Apple had utilized in prior years.
People in the Taiwanese supply chain also discussed with White the belief that the next iPhone will feature a unibody aluminum casing manufactured by Foxconn. However, White also said his industry contact was "skeptical" about the prospect of Apple using material from Liquidmetal Technologies, an amorphous metal that Apple has exclusive rights to in consumer electronic products.
Last week, a number of parts allegedly from Apple's next iPhone began to surface online, and one of them showed what appeared to be a largely aluminum back with small pieces of glass at the top and bottom of the device. The component also suggested the next iPhone will be slightly taller, to accommodate a larger 4-inch screen, and would also see the headphone jack moved to the bottom of the device.
White also believes that Apple could unveil a new iPad "mini" in September. Numerous recent reports have suggested that Apple has been experimenting with a smaller 7.85-inch iPad that would pack in the same 1,024-by-768-pixel screen resolution as the first-generation iPad and iPad 2, allowing applications to run without modification and for the device to be branded a Retina display.
Topeka Capital Markets has a 12-month price target of $1,111 for AAPL stock. White believes Apple's current valuation does not reflect the growth the company has delivered in recent years, nor future growth prospects.
Comments
Thus, there is no halo effect with it regarding a iPad. I think of it as more a cannibalizing product. Price point will be key with it. Would I want one? Sure, but I don't think I could rationalize it at this point. Non iPad owners perhaps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
...
Numerous recent reports have suggested that Apple has been experimenting with a smaller 7.85-inch iPad that would pack in the same 1,024-by-768-pixel screen resolution as the first-generation iPad and iPad 2, allowing applications to run without modification and for the device to be branded a Retina display...
The "Retina" branding surely is stretchy, if 163 ppi can be branded a "Retina display"... I didn't know the original iPhone had a Retina display too... /s
The best aspect of carrying the current iPad form factor and a 4-incher named the iPod Touch is that one could easily imagine a consumer owning a combination of the iPad along with either an iPhone or a Touch. The 7-inch iPad, on the other hand, would more likely be seen by many as an alternative to the current iPad form factor. The net impact would be few additional sales yet millions spent on development. It doesn't add up.
What the iPad needs is lighter, more efficient technology and that will come. The next iPad is probably going to feature a weight reduction thanks to technology on the way that will deliver high resolution with less demand on the battery. Once that happens, the 7-inch form factor will be rendered pointless. Yet there will always be a place for a small device that fits in most pockets as a companion piece to the standard iPad. I carry a Touch around with me at work but could not bring along my iPad. The 7-inch version would still be too large to carry along in my work environment.
A lighter iPad next spring and a Touch with a bit larger screen this fall fits perfectly with what I need. I suspect this is the case for a lot of other consumers as well.
Right, and I contend that people are buying the Fire based more on the Amazon ecosystem more than as a Android Tablet. The Fire is marketed as a media device unlike other Android tablets that focus on specs and being as good or better than the iPad.
The Fire is as much about the Amazon experience as the iPad is about iTunes and the Apple ecosystem. That is what is swaying customers, not whether it is 7 inches or not.
I agree. Similar to my view that the purchase of this years' iPad was not needed; the 1st Gen I have is working perfectly fine, and although photography is my thing, I don't care much for the added pixels. Nice to have, but not really worth the € 899 I paid...
I keep on telling you guys...first shipments out of China are in August....
The rear of that phone is ug-lee!
I have always thought of the iPod Touch as a "mini iPad". Couldn't Apple position it that way? If small size is what the consumer wants, a repositioned iPod Touch might actually be "better".
I believe that iPads should be available in any size (range) that a consumer might desire. Of course, developers/development must be kept in mind so as not to cause a mess. So, 4 inch, 7 inch, 10 inch - why not. Maybe even less portable 13, 15, and larger. We all use screens with sizes through 60 inches, won't they all be "powered" in the future. Why not iPad/Apple?
I look forward to Sept!
Go AAPL! BTW, nice projected valuation, Brian $1,111.
I'm not sure that's the case. For many people, it was simply the price. For less than half of the cost of an iPad, they could have a tablet which would do many of the things they wanted to do. And size had quite a bit to do with that.
I think it's a mistake to ignore the fact that not everyone has the same needs, price point, wishes, etc. When Apple first launched the iPad, it was in a field of its own and the market accepted a single device since there was no real alternative. You either bought an iPad or nothing. Now that there's a wide range of products at a wide spread of price points, people have the ability to choose the one that works best for them. It's not surprising that some people pick the full-featured iPad and others pick a somewhat limited device at half the price.
I don't know too many people who bought into the Fire because of Amazon's ecosystem. Most people who simply wanted an eReader would have bought one of the less expensive devices.
I have always thought of the iPod Touch as a "mini iPad". Couldn't Apple position it that way? If small size is what the consumer wants, a repositioned iPod Touch might actually be "better".
I believe that iPads should be available in any size (range) that a consumer might desire. Of course, developers/development must be kept in mind so as not to cause a mess. So, 4 inch, 7 inch, 10 inch - why not. Maybe even less portable 13, 15, and larger. We all use screens with sizes through 60 inches, won't they all be "powered" in the future. Why not iPad/Apple?
I look forward to Sept!
Go AAPL! BTW, nice projected valuation, Brian $1,111.
Apple could put a smaller battery (only on this dedicated model), since kids don't need more than 7-8 hrs of battery life. They would also not need the most sophisticated cameras
since the current ones would be enough.
They could make a special chip with 64-100 gigs for all that is needed for school work. They could put the price at about $250 or so. That way they could completely blow the Amazon and all the other Tablets about to appear at that price point. And do it solely for 'Education'. Giving them an excuse to go back on S. Jobs words, about not doing a small Tablet.
Certainly many people purchased the Fire because it was a inexpensive tablet but many chose the Amazon Ecosytem because they were perhaps already embedded. While there are other e-readers at a cheaper price, they wanted a tablet. This in spite of the fact that they could have purchased a better equipped iPad for just a $100 more. Not unreachable if you are patient and really wanted it.
The Fire was successfull as much for it's Brand Name as it was for its form factor. There are other similarly priced Android Tablets as the Fire, but the Amazon Brand was the distinguishing difference.
The iPad has many competitors on specs and price points yet it dominates for many reasons, but the main reason is the Apple Brand/Ecosystem. Why would a choice for the Amazon Fire be based on different reason? Does Amazon not maintain customer loyalty? Ask Borders that question.
Despite the ticker price of the iPods cheapest model, the average margins on iPod touches are much higher, indicating that people are attracted by the low price but buy the mid range. On average. ( that , or half of people buy the top level model, and half the bottom)
However the lower level stops all competition.
Imagine, then , a $250 iPad. With 100,000 apps. Destroying the competition , but the entry level will be hobbled by low memory. So next time, you save , and get an iPad 10". This is standard land grab. An iPad mini will scare the opposition.
The allure of the 7" ipad for me is definitely the size, not the price. I'd buy one even if they were the exact same price as the 10: model.