That's begging the question.
Who says Apple would do it because it was what the people wanted? Maybe they simply see the value of having two sizes instead of one. Maybe they planned from the start to eventually introduce a smaller tablet, but the technology to do it well wasn't there yet.
Please provide the evidence that he "vehemently denied" even considering a smaller tablet. One Apple employee already stated that Jobs was NOT strongly opposed and did not reject it out of hand. His famous sandpaper argument was clearly marketing hype.
Furthermore, in case you hadn't noticed, Jobs isn't there any more.
To answer your first question, I don't see any reason to think that they wouldn't consider a smaller tablet even if there were none on the market. Consider the MacBook Air. When it was launched, there was absolutely nothing on the market like it - and they released two sizes.
There's still nothing on the market like the 27" iMac - and they sell a smaller size, as well.
Whether someone else was there first, it's absolutely logical to consider whether there's a market for something in between the 10" iPad and the 3.5" iPhone (or even a 4-4.5" phone if that's what they're working on). It certainly isn't a revelation that had to come from a competitor.
So answer me this, would Apple be making a 7-8" tablet if none existed from other manufacturers? I've posted comments of SJ where he vehemently denied considered making a smaller tablet. Until proven otherwise I'll believe the comments I've found.
Why not? They made a 10" tablet when none existed from other manufacturers.
So you choose a marketing presentation at the time they were launching a 10" tablet as your evidence? What would you expect him to say when launching a 10"? That the 7" tablets on the market are all great products?
Furthermore, Jobs had a history of bad-mouthing something right up to the point where Apple released it.
When the moderator gives props to trolls, I know this thread has gone way off the reservation and considerably north of crazy town.
Well, you have a moderator who absolutely refuses to believe that anyone else but him is entitled to an opinion. He doesn't think there's a place for a smaller iPad and no matter how many people say otherwise, he insists that he's right and they're wrong. Not surprising that he'd back a troll who also refuses to accept the idea of Apple doing something that he doesn't like.
When the moderator gives props to trolls, I know this thread has gone way off the reservation and considerably north of crazy town.
How does that saying go… "Listen to the words of the madman without treating them as such. While the words themselves may not be mad, that does not, then, make the man sane."
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Who exactly is they?
Apple's current executive team.
Originally Posted by jragosta
Well, you have a moderator who absolutely refuses to believe that anyone else but him is entitled to an opinion. He doesn't think there's a place for a smaller iPad and no matter how many people say otherwise, he insists that he's right and they're wrong. Not surprising that he'd back a troll who also refuses to accept the idea of Apple doing something that he doesn't like.
It's a shame this is full of so many outright lies; it's probably a good position otherwise.
So you choose a marketing presentation at the time they were launching a 10" tablet as your evidence? What would you expect him to say when launching a 10"? That the 7" tablets on the market are all great products?
Furthermore, Jobs had a history of bad-mouthing something right up to the point where Apple released it.
Why not look at what he said in private? http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/03/steve_jobs_was_very_receptive_to_7_inch_ipad_idea_court_documents_show.html
Jobs was apparently very receptive to the idea of a 7" tablet. So regardless of what he said when trying to convince people to buy his 10" tablet, he really didn't have a problem with a smaller one.
And, again, in case you hadn't noticed, Jobs is not running Apple any more.
Where in that article does it have a quote from SJ in private?
Why isn't that the iPad 2 and iPad 3 next year? If they keep to their current hardware tiering, the iPad 2 will be the same price as a 7" one would be.
10" makes very difficult having a good profit after 399$, the 7" allows for low price and good profit.
Where in that article does it have a quote from SJ in private?
Also note that Jobs isn't CC'd on the e-mail itself, which seems odd.
Originally Posted by ShAdOwXPR
10" makes very difficult having a good profit after 399$, the 7" allows for low price and good profit.
When it's two years past its prime, it doesn't need to have the same profit per device (though there is profit on every device) as during its primary run. The iPhone 3GS is free on contract. Apple still makes money on every one sold.
That's the way I see it with the iPad 2. The iPad Retina gets replaced with the iPad 4 and the iPad 2 stays around to provide in inexpensive education model. That will only work for one more year though as the software will begin to outpace the iPad 2 capabilities. I wonder if they could then begin a cycle where they actually swap out the screen of the out going iPad each year to a non retina to keep the price down. At least until Retina production efficiencies reach a cost per unit level that could accommodate having Retina even in a lower priced year old edu model.
When iPad 4 comes out iPad 3 will take the place of ipad 2. Apple does not want to maintain older hardware only the 3GS iPhone has survive this long so it can compete with the free android phones in the market.
When iPad 4 comes out iPad 3 will take the place of ipad 2. Apple does not want to maintain older hardware only the 3GS iPhone has survive this long so it can compete with the free android phones in the market.
Take the place of, sure. But don't be so quick to dismiss the iPad 2 from the market. I made the same mistake with the 3GS at the 4S' launch. It's quite possible they'll bump the iPad 2 down even further, to reiterate, to $299. iPad 3'll be $399.
Well, you have a moderator who absolutely refuses to believe that anyone else but him is entitled to an opinion. He doesn't think there's a place for a smaller iPad and no matter how many people say otherwise, he insists that he's right and they're wrong. Not surprising that he'd back a troll who also refuses to accept the idea of Apple doing something that he doesn't like.
If you're referring to me I never said it wasn't a good idea just that I don't see Apple doing it.
And I can guarantee that Eddy Cue knew Jobs' attitudes somewhere between 20 million and 100 million times better than you do.
Agreed, minus hyperbole. And I can guarantee you that when a megalomaniacal, precision-driven, nit-picking, approve-everything CEO isn't CC'd on an e-mail, there's probably a reason.
Comments
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/113922/steve-jobs-squashes-rumors-of-smaller-7-inch-ipad
Originally Posted by dasanman69
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/113922/steve-jobs-squashes-rumors-of-smaller-7-inch-ipad
Exactly. But we have to remember that he's dead. If they want to do something they couldn't (and all that that implies) before, they can now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
The world needs a new iMac before it needs a miniPad.
When the moderator gives props to trolls, I know this thread has gone way off the reservation and considerably north of crazy town.
Who exactly is they?
Why not? They made a 10" tablet when none existed from other manufacturers.
So you choose a marketing presentation at the time they were launching a 10" tablet as your evidence? What would you expect him to say when launching a 10"? That the 7" tablets on the market are all great products?
Furthermore, Jobs had a history of bad-mouthing something right up to the point where Apple released it.
Why not look at what he said in private?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/08/03/steve_jobs_was_very_receptive_to_7_inch_ipad_idea_court_documents_show.html
Jobs was apparently very receptive to the idea of a 7" tablet. So regardless of what he said when trying to convince people to buy his 10" tablet, he really didn't have a problem with a smaller one.
And, again, in case you hadn't noticed, Jobs is not running Apple any more.
Well, you have a moderator who absolutely refuses to believe that anyone else but him is entitled to an opinion. He doesn't think there's a place for a smaller iPad and no matter how many people say otherwise, he insists that he's right and they're wrong. Not surprising that he'd back a troll who also refuses to accept the idea of Apple doing something that he doesn't like.
Originally Posted by mstone
When the moderator gives props to trolls, I know this thread has gone way off the reservation and considerably north of crazy town.
How does that saying go… "Listen to the words of the madman without treating them as such. While the words themselves may not be mad, that does not, then, make the man sane."
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Who exactly is they?
Apple's current executive team.
Originally Posted by jragosta
Well, you have a moderator who absolutely refuses to believe that anyone else but him is entitled to an opinion. He doesn't think there's a place for a smaller iPad and no matter how many people say otherwise, he insists that he's right and they're wrong. Not surprising that he'd back a troll who also refuses to accept the idea of Apple doing something that he doesn't like.
It's a shame this is full of so many outright lies; it's probably a good position otherwise.
Where in that article does it have a quote from SJ in private?
10" makes very difficult having a good profit after 399$, the 7" allows for low price and good profit.
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Where in that article does it have a quote from SJ in private?
Also note that Jobs isn't CC'd on the e-mail itself, which seems odd.
Originally Posted by ShAdOwXPR
10" makes very difficult having a good profit after 399$, the 7" allows for low price and good profit.
When it's two years past its prime, it doesn't need to have the same profit per device (though there is profit on every device) as during its primary run. The iPhone 3GS is free on contract. Apple still makes money on every one sold.
When iPad 4 comes out iPad 3 will take the place of ipad 2. Apple does not want to maintain older hardware only the 3GS iPhone has survive this long so it can compete with the free android phones in the market.
Might an iPad mini like this be more comfortable/convenient to hold?
Originally Posted by ShAdOwXPR
When iPad 4 comes out iPad 3 will take the place of ipad 2. Apple does not want to maintain older hardware only the 3GS iPhone has survive this long so it can compete with the free android phones in the market.
Take the place of, sure. But don't be so quick to dismiss the iPad 2 from the market. I made the same mistake with the 3GS at the 4S' launch. It's quite possible they'll bump the iPad 2 down even further, to reiterate, to $299. iPad 3'll be $399.
If you're referring to me I never said it wasn't a good idea just that I don't see Apple doing it.
The email is from Eddy Cue and he says that Jobs was very receptive to the idea.
And I can guarantee that Eddy Cue knew Jobs' attitudes somewhere between 20 million and 100 million times better than you do.
Unless you suddenly became a moderator, I clearly wasn't referring to you.
Originally Posted by jragosta
And I can guarantee that Eddy Cue knew Jobs' attitudes somewhere between 20 million and 100 million times better than you do.
Agreed, minus hyperbole. And I can guarantee you that when a megalomaniacal, precision-driven, nit-picking, approve-everything CEO isn't CC'd on an e-mail, there's probably a reason.
Predictable. And boring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waverunnr
Predictable. And boring.
Very self-descriptive.