If it uses iPhone apps instead of iPad apps then I think that's a dumb move... and Apple doesn't usually make dumb moves.
More like it is a dumb move for developers to be lazy and not make versions of their apps for both sizes. It is a dumb move for them not to make them universal apps etc.
the only dumb move that Apple has made is giving them decision control rather than telling them that they must make versions for both devices, must make them universal, must keep them up to date with the latest OS, must stop with this releasing 5 different apps that are really just level packs of the same thing rather than use IAP, must make games totally playable without actually spending cash to 'enhance' them etc. Letting developers have any power, really dumb move
[" url="/t/151086/apple-telling-suppliers-to-prep-for-mass-production-of-smaller-ipad-wsj/80#post_2140284"]It's going to be a mini-iPad, so people are going to install iPad apps, not iPhone apps.
So?
Lots of apps are the same on the iPhone and iPad and they work just fine. Others are nearly the same with only minor tweaking by the developer.
The point is that the icons and other items on an iPhone are tiny - and lots of people run apps on iPhones, so there's no inherent reason why apps couldn't easily be run on a device 4 times the area.
Apple will release a smaller iPad, that's a certainty, but the company is too savvy to position it in the same space as the iPad. I don't think it'll just be a 'smaller iPad'. It'll have it's own identity and target market.
Remember the iPad wasn't announced as a tablet. It was announced as a netbook replacement, and did it's job perfectly by pretty much taking over that segment and destroying the netbook.
So I think a smaller iPad will probably be positioned in a different space, namely the e-reader market. Think about it, while current iPad's e-reader features are advertised, they're not really given priority.
Now imagine a smaller iPad that's ultra light, ultra thin, super durable, and that possesses one new KILLER FEATURE, which I think will be e-reader specific. Like a color touchscreen that's readable in daylight. All of a sudden you have an e-reader that can surpass the Kindle on every level (better readability, better build quality, huge app selection, iTunes music/movie library). It'll also be a more focused device than the Nexus 7, which is a good thing.
So I predict Apple will announce "The world's best e-reader with the world's largest app store" come this fall.
And it's only $100 more than the 3.5" iPod Touch which has a lot more compromises in terms of HW.
Also note the $399 iPad 2 comes with 16GB whereas the Kindle Fire and Nexus 7 are only 8GB. For the an extra $50 you do get 16GB.
Now consider the current 7" tablets mentioned aren't profitable. Google has even stated that the Nexus 7 has no profit margin and yet it's only $50 less than the lowest reasonably priced 16GB 8" iPad. Apple is very efficient but there are limits to what they can do and I don't see an 8GB or 16GB 8" iPad at $199 and $249, respectively, as being feasible without a strong interest in reducing their profit margin significantly which I don't think will happen.
Now consider how a 8" tablet would affect Apple's tablet profits. Even if the margins are identical one for less money means less profit per unit. Since it's not likely people would buy an 8" and 10" tablet from Apple that means they need to have a good reason to make both. A couple reasons that come to mind are: they think they will sell so many that it will counteract any 10" iPad sales or they are afraid of the 7" tablet margin undermining their 10" iPad sales.
I think what is missed here is this. If there is a range of iPad minis, then only the lowest ranged version needs be break even, if it even is. The rest can have margins. This is in effect what Apple does anyway with higher end stuff, except it has margins through th efield.
Bring people into the shop with a loss leader designed to stop Android encroaching on the low end, and then
Lots of apps are the same on the iPhone and iPad and they work just fine. Others are nearly the same with only minor tweaking by the developer.
The point is that the icons and other items on an iPhone are tiny - and lots of people run apps on iPhones, so there's no inherent reason why apps couldn't easily be run on a device 4 times the area.
Of course apps can be run on a 7.85" device, both iPhone and iPad apps. As I pointed out in a different thread yesterday, there might be a few iPad apps that will seem cluttered on a smaller device than the original 9.7" that they were designed for. But it's totally doable, and those people with the smaller tablet, will just have to live with it.
When Google announced Nexus 7 and found out how short of a time period Asus was given to design and release, I thought Google took very seriously Gruber and other rumors of impending iPad mini back in April. Given that Apple most likely would not release iPad mini in June, the next most likely time is when the next iPhone is released in Sept/Oct and before holiday shopping starts. Since Apple will announce a week or two early, that really left very small window for Google to work with.
Why did Google do 7 inch instead of 10? I think 10 inch is the upper limit for useable tablet, and iPad is already there. At the bottom is iPod Touch. Google won't do a tablet the size of a smart phone, so that left 7 inch as the most logical choice. This is where Kindle Fire and Nook is at, so they know there is a market for it.
It will be interesting to see if Google can get a decent martket share before iPad mini comes out.
There is a big market for iPad mini. If released before holiday season, it will become the gift of choice and will catch on like Kindle Fire.
What apple tends to do is take an existing older product and lower its price.
But remember that Apple dropped the numbering of the iPad models. The day the iPad (3) was released I had posted that this was a strong indicator that Apple didn't plan to set the roadmap for the iPad like they've been doing with the iPhone. That being to keep producing the older model as the "cheap" version. If there is no numbering of the iPad models, this would be very confusing to consumers. So it suggested that the cheaper version of the iPad was going to be something different, and therefore numbers weren't needed to differentiate between them.
I suspect the continued sales of the iPad 2 was merely a stopgap until this smaller iPad was ready. Once it comes out the iPad 2 will be discontinued. Not only keeping the number of different models constant, but also opening up the iPad 2's price point for use by this new, smaller version. Otherwise there would be too much crowding at the low-end of the spectrum.
Apple also apparently has about 90% of the market that is actually being used. That tells me straight away what size people actually want.
Yes, because the one and only criteria for why people choose the tablet they buy is size. It has nothing to do with the operating system, the software and accessory ecosystem, all the apps and media they already have in iTunes because of the iPods and iPhones they've owned over the years.
</sarcasm> :-)
This whole "there will never be a smaller iPad" argument reminds me of the "there will never be a Verizon iPhone" arguments people make not so long ago. And it's a lot of the same people who make both arguments (not saying you are one of them). For some reason some folks thinks Apple's current lineup is perfect and that they shouldn't continue to go after no markets their current lineup doesn't address. Not sure why anyone would ever think that was a good business strategy. Not that they should branch out in 100 different directions, but they can't sit still either.
[" url="/t/151086/apple-telling-suppliers-to-prep-for-mass-production-of-smaller-ipad-wsj/120#post_2140427"]That may be true, but 100% of the Android market is still not a lot.
Not a lot? In terms of sales numbers, most people put it at 30-35% - which means that Android sales are roughly 1/2 of iPad sales. If Apple captures a significant portion of that, it could easily add double digit percentages to iPad sales.
And, it's quite likely that an iPad Mini would grow the market for 7" devices, as well, so the numbers could be even higher.
Look what has happened with Galaxy phones...they're immensely popular.
Sooner or later, a 7" tablet is going to catch on...like, maybe a Nexus 7, and it'll be immensely popular. Apple would be foolish to not be looking at this. So far, 7" Android tablets have been underpowered, poorly designed or strangled by book-reading skins that make them undesirable.
I agree with one of the early posters that a 5" or 6" iPod might be preferable to a mini iPad. I really like my 5" Galaxy Player. Something like it with Apple's style would be cool.
This whole "there will never be a smaller iPad" argument reminds me of the "there will never be a Verizon iPhone" arguments people make not so long ago.
No one intelligent would have ever said that. A Verizon iPhone was inevitable. People saying there will never be a smaller iPad are like those of us who knew there would never be a smaller iPhone.
And Apple certainly proved us wrong, because as we all know, a 3.5" screen is far too big!
Apple's initial target was 1% of the cell phone market.
Exactly, so they are more than covered with their current marketshare, no need to worry about competitors and their pieces of the pie. Precisely what TS suggested.
Don't kid yourself. Jobs knew they'd get much more than that.
Probably, but they're quite happy with 5-7% of the cell phone market. What makes you so certain that 15% more of the tablet market wouldn't be of interest?
Probably, but they're quite happy with 5-7% of the cell phone market. What makes you so certain that 15% more of the tablet market wouldn't be of interest?
The other 70% (shipped) that they already have locked down with one model. Apple only has 70% of the PMP market, and that's with four.
You may be right. Hell, there may not be a forthcoming smaller iPad at all and they simply generated this rumor specifically to hinder the Nexus 7 launch.
Likewise it tells the world not to buy the iPad 3 because there is a bigger iPod touch coming.
Do you think Apple wants to spite its face by cutting off its nose.
Apple have more vested interest to keep making great products than us gossiping except those who own Apple share.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
If it uses iPhone apps instead of iPad apps then I think that's a dumb move... and Apple doesn't usually make dumb moves.
More like it is a dumb move for developers to be lazy and not make versions of their apps for both sizes. It is a dumb move for them not to make them universal apps etc.
the only dumb move that Apple has made is giving them decision control rather than telling them that they must make versions for both devices, must make them universal, must keep them up to date with the latest OS, must stop with this releasing 5 different apps that are really just level packs of the same thing rather than use IAP, must make games totally playable without actually spending cash to 'enhance' them etc. Letting developers have any power, really dumb move
So?
Lots of apps are the same on the iPhone and iPad and they work just fine. Others are nearly the same with only minor tweaking by the developer.
The point is that the icons and other items on an iPhone are tiny - and lots of people run apps on iPhones, so there's no inherent reason why apps couldn't easily be run on a device 4 times the area.
Apple will release a smaller iPad, that's a certainty, but the company is too savvy to position it in the same space as the iPad. I don't think it'll just be a 'smaller iPad'. It'll have it's own identity and target market.
Remember the iPad wasn't announced as a tablet. It was announced as a netbook replacement, and did it's job perfectly by pretty much taking over that segment and destroying the netbook.
So I think a smaller iPad will probably be positioned in a different space, namely the e-reader market. Think about it, while current iPad's e-reader features are advertised, they're not really given priority.
Now imagine a smaller iPad that's ultra light, ultra thin, super durable, and that possesses one new KILLER FEATURE, which I think will be e-reader specific. Like a color touchscreen that's readable in daylight. All of a sudden you have an e-reader that can surpass the Kindle on every level (better readability, better build quality, huge app selection, iTunes music/movie library). It'll also be a more focused device than the Nexus 7, which is a good thing.
So I predict Apple will announce "The world's best e-reader with the world's largest app store" come this fall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
And it's only $100 more than the 3.5" iPod Touch which has a lot more compromises in terms of HW.
Also note the $399 iPad 2 comes with 16GB whereas the Kindle Fire and Nexus 7 are only 8GB. For the an extra $50 you do get 16GB.
Now consider the current 7" tablets mentioned aren't profitable. Google has even stated that the Nexus 7 has no profit margin and yet it's only $50 less than the lowest reasonably priced 16GB 8" iPad. Apple is very efficient but there are limits to what they can do and I don't see an 8GB or 16GB 8" iPad at $199 and $249, respectively, as being feasible without a strong interest in reducing their profit margin significantly which I don't think will happen.
Now consider how a 8" tablet would affect Apple's tablet profits. Even if the margins are identical one for less money means less profit per unit. Since it's not likely people would buy an 8" and 10" tablet from Apple that means they need to have a good reason to make both. A couple reasons that come to mind are: they think they will sell so many that it will counteract any 10" iPad sales or they are afraid of the 7" tablet margin undermining their 10" iPad sales.
I think what is missed here is this. If there is a range of iPad minis, then only the lowest ranged version needs be break even, if it even is. The rest can have margins. This is in effect what Apple does anyway with higher end stuff, except it has margins through th efield.
Bring people into the shop with a loss leader designed to stop Android encroaching on the low end, and then
1) Add 50-100 dollars per 8g up to 32g
1) add another $100 for the GPS chip.
The overall margins on the line remain healthy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So?
Lots of apps are the same on the iPhone and iPad and they work just fine. Others are nearly the same with only minor tweaking by the developer.
The point is that the icons and other items on an iPhone are tiny - and lots of people run apps on iPhones, so there's no inherent reason why apps couldn't easily be run on a device 4 times the area.
Of course apps can be run on a 7.85" device, both iPhone and iPad apps. As I pointed out in a different thread yesterday, there might be a few iPad apps that will seem cluttered on a smaller device than the original 9.7" that they were designed for. But it's totally doable, and those people with the smaller tablet, will just have to live with it.
Why did Google do 7 inch instead of 10? I think 10 inch is the upper limit for useable tablet, and iPad is already there. At the bottom is iPod Touch. Google won't do a tablet the size of a smart phone, so that left 7 inch as the most logical choice. This is where Kindle Fire and Nook is at, so they know there is a market for it.
It will be interesting to see if Google can get a decent martket share before iPad mini comes out.
There is a big market for iPad mini. If released before holiday season, it will become the gift of choice and will catch on like Kindle Fire.
My stars… Do any of you know sales numbers?
This is the best one. You can't possibly say this.
The most recent numbers I've seen say that the Kindle Fire alone has more than 50% of the Android tablet market:
http://www.dailymobile.net/2012/04/28/does-size-matter-kindle-fire-captures-more-than-50-of-android-tablet-market/
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The most recent numbers I've seen say that the Kindle Fire alone has more than 50% of the Android tablet market:
http://www.dailymobile.net/2012/04/28/does-size-matter-kindle-fire-captures-more-than-50-of-android-tablet-market/
That may be true, but 100% of the Android market is still not a lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dm3
What apple tends to do is take an existing older product and lower its price.
But remember that Apple dropped the numbering of the iPad models. The day the iPad (3) was released I had posted that this was a strong indicator that Apple didn't plan to set the roadmap for the iPad like they've been doing with the iPhone. That being to keep producing the older model as the "cheap" version. If there is no numbering of the iPad models, this would be very confusing to consumers. So it suggested that the cheaper version of the iPad was going to be something different, and therefore numbers weren't needed to differentiate between them.
I suspect the continued sales of the iPad 2 was merely a stopgap until this smaller iPad was ready. Once it comes out the iPad 2 will be discontinued. Not only keeping the number of different models constant, but also opening up the iPad 2's price point for use by this new, smaller version. Otherwise there would be too much crowding at the low-end of the spectrum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Apple also apparently has about 90% of the market that is actually being used. That tells me straight away what size people actually want.
Yes, because the one and only criteria for why people choose the tablet they buy is size. It has nothing to do with the operating system, the software and accessory ecosystem, all the apps and media they already have in iTunes because of the iPods and iPhones they've owned over the years.
</sarcasm> :-)
This whole "there will never be a smaller iPad" argument reminds me of the "there will never be a Verizon iPhone" arguments people make not so long ago. And it's a lot of the same people who make both arguments (not saying you are one of them). For some reason some folks thinks Apple's current lineup is perfect and that they shouldn't continue to go after no markets their current lineup doesn't address. Not sure why anyone would ever think that was a good business strategy. Not that they should branch out in 100 different directions, but they can't sit still either.
Not a lot? In terms of sales numbers, most people put it at 30-35% - which means that Android sales are roughly 1/2 of iPad sales. If Apple captures a significant portion of that, it could easily add double digit percentages to iPad sales.
And, it's quite likely that an iPad Mini would grow the market for 7" devices, as well, so the numbers could be even higher.
Look what has happened with Galaxy phones...they're immensely popular.
Sooner or later, a 7" tablet is going to catch on...like, maybe a Nexus 7, and it'll be immensely popular. Apple would be foolish to not be looking at this. So far, 7" Android tablets have been underpowered, poorly designed or strangled by book-reading skins that make them undesirable.
I agree with one of the early posters that a 5" or 6" iPod might be preferable to a mini iPad. I really like my 5" Galaxy Player. Something like it with Apple's style would be cool.
So that's presently 15% of the actual market. Doesn't sound like something Apple would shoot for.
No one intelligent would have ever said that. A Verizon iPhone was inevitable. People saying there will never be a smaller iPad are like those of us who knew there would never be a smaller iPhone.
And Apple certainly proved us wrong, because as we all know, a 3.5" screen is far too big!
Apple's initial target was 1% of the cell phone market.
Don't kid yourself. Jobs knew they'd get much more than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Apple's initial target was 1% of the cell phone market.
Exactly, so they are more than covered with their current marketshare, no need to worry about competitors and their pieces of the pie. Precisely what TS suggested.
Probably, but they're quite happy with 5-7% of the cell phone market. What makes you so certain that 15% more of the tablet market wouldn't be of interest?
The other 70% (shipped) that they already have locked down with one model. Apple only has 70% of the PMP market, and that's with four.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuddyRevell
You may be right. Hell, there may not be a forthcoming smaller iPad at all and they simply generated this rumor specifically to hinder the Nexus 7 launch.
Likewise it tells the world not to buy the iPad 3 because there is a bigger iPod touch coming.
Do you think Apple wants to spite its face by cutting off its nose.
Apple have more vested interest to keep making great products than us gossiping except those who own Apple share.