As someone else pointed out, Apple is great at the upsell. So forget about the pros and cons of an 7" iPad and think about how pretty Apple will be sitting with a tablet at $300, $400, $500 and up. Some people will think they want the 7" and end up paying more while others who may not ever have thought about an iPad will now be able to afford one since they have a firm spending limit of $300 in their mind. I am sure many parents with several kids can justify $300 to buy their kid an iPad far easier than $500 or even $400 in a household budget where every penny counts.
This is a good move for Apple and just in time. Kick Android while they are down in the mud and their tablet sales are low. Without a cheaper 7" tablet they would have a niche they could expand and exploit. Most (not all) people prefer to use the same OS on their tablet and phone as it just makes life easier for contacts, app syncing, etc.. SO APple really need to continue dominating the tablet market. I hope iOS 7 really brings us some revolutionary new features as opposed to evolutionary. It is starting to get a little stale. Android has added a lot from 2.1 to Jellybean. Granted, 2.1 was not that great so there was a lot of room for improvement. But Jellybean gives iOS 5 and 6 a run for it's money. I would like to see iOS 7 leave Android in the dust again with some ideas no one thought possible but yet seem so obvious and essential. With hundreds of apps on our phones maybe they can improve the icon/folder based GUI. Maybe it is time for iOS to take some cues from OS X instead of the other way around.
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.
That is a good point. Also the smaller iPad probably isn't ideal for education anyway. The current iPad size is much better for simulating a textbook like experience. A smaller iPad is going to require a lot of zooming and panning like the iPhone. Pricing is going to be a challenge since all the devices essentially do the same thing with slightly different size screens. From a BOM standpoint they probably don't vary that much aside from Retina iPad. Perhaps they will keep the iPad 2 around as well for the education model. I'm not sure if Apple will use cheaper parts in the iPad mini or not, but I for one hope they at least offer a top of the line version with cellular. That is what I want. If it comes out as a cheap plastic crippled entry level device I probably won't buy it.
My hope is that Apple views the market as diversified for size requirements, not tiered price points. There are different situations where an iPhone is the best device and others where a full size iPad is better and still others where a smaller iPad would be ideal. The differentiation should be based on screen presentation requirements not price point. Within each model there should be price tiers obviously, but I don't want a cheap iPad mini built using cheap parts or by intentionally crippling the features.
.
That's a straw man argument. NO ONE said that the current iPad is unusable.
Instead, people are saying that the iPad is a great product and they could also offer a smaller version to appeal to even more people because of its smaller size and lower cost.
A friend of mine said his wife wanted an iPad that she could fit in her purse. I never looked at it that way, but I suppose it makes sense for a segment of the population.
Who says it's a response to what others are doing? It was reported here not that long ago that Jobs did NOT have a strong objection to a 7" tablet. His comments were largely marketing oriented.
The most likely scenario to me is that Apple had a smaller tablet in the back of their minds all along but decided to concentrate on one size to get the market moving and will add the smaller one on their own timetable.
Not even close to being true.
Apple has something like 60-65% of the tablet market. The remaining 35-40% is almost all either 7" or 10". I don't have a breakdown, but everything I've seen myself is that a large fraction of the non-Apple tablets are 7" - like the Amazon Fire, for example. So something like 20+% of the tablet market is 7" - and that's even when there are no good 7" tablets. If Apple introduces one, they could capture a large chunk of that, plus the people who want 7" but don't have a good option.
Furthermore, your story keeps changing. Before, you were saying that they would sell OK, but that they're crap. Now you're saying that they're not going to sell.
The fact is that there's no doubt that Apple could produce a good 7-8" tablet. They make a 3.5" iPhone/iPod Touch and a 10" tablet and both are recognized as the best in the market. You haven't given a single reason why they can't make a good 8" tablet. All of your arguments (like "it's too small to type") are thoroughly debunked by the success of the iPhone/iPod Touch.
As usual, you're simply ignoring that a reasonable number of people here say that they'd buy a 7" iPad Mini. There's also the fact that a reasonable percentage of others already buy 7" tablets - even though the ones that are available today are crap.
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.
So answer me this, would Apple be making a 7-8" tablet if none existed from other manufacturers?
What difference does it it make? A lot of people obviously want a smaller tablet. Why not provide one that is compatible with the Apple ecosystem. Seems logical. You get a lot of new first time Apple buyers and a lot of long time Apple buyers like me all wanting the new iPad mini, all for various reasons. Personally I just want improved portability so I welcome the new size. I already have an iPhone and an iPad and a MBP.
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.
Absolutely. And if he were alive he'd be roaming the stage in Oct waving the mini with a big s*^t eating grin. First due was the size we know, so let's not distract the public with too much variety, besides I'll tell them what they need. Later for other sizes. And, as I posted earlier, SJ's comments seem in retrospect more obviously a reality distortion sales pitch (not that I'm against RD : ) ) based on what was coming down the pike than anything he truly believed in. Jobs' remarks sometimes do end up in that category historically, and he wasn't a pusher of truth, he was a pusher of Apple.
Again, I'm a fan of Apple and Jobs, don't get me wrong, but his word was as sales pitch not explaining the whys and hows of technology options.
What difference does it it make? A lot of people obviously want a smaller tablet. Why not provide one that is compatible with the Apple ecosystem. Seems logical. You get a lot of new first time Apple buyers and a lot of long time Apple buyers like me all wanting the new iPad mini, all for various reasons. Personally I just want improved portability so I welcome the new size. I already have an iPhone and an iPad and a MBP.
Name me one time Apple did something because it was what the people wanted? People would buy Macs by the truckload if they priced them to compete with PCs. All of a sudden the years and years the R&D department spent working on the iPad to find the ideal size is wrong?
Name me one time Apple did something because it was what the people wanted? People would buy Macs by the truckload if they priced them to compete with PCs. All of a sudden the years and years the R&D department spent working on the iPad to find the ideal size is wrong?
Apple also has a record of discontinuing products that don't sell well so if the iPad mini does not sell well it will be discontinued.
Name me one time Apple did something because it was what the people wanted? People would buy Macs by the truckload if they priced them to compete with PCs. All of a sudden the years and years the R&D department spent working on the iPad to find the ideal size is wrong?
This has nothing to do with the original iPad size being "wrong". It has only to do with another, new, additional model.
This has nothing to do with the original iPad size being "wrong". It has only to do with another, new, additional model.
I think he may be referring to the fact that when the iPad was first rumoured, a lot of people argued that it was too big and that it should have been in the 8" (diagonal) size instead. So in many ways the iPad mini is the rediscovery of a size format that lots of people thought the iPad should be in the first place.
I think it will be an interesting product. One the one hand it will be cheap and "for kids" but on the other hand, in many ways it will be a sort of "iPad Pro." It won't be very useful to type on the thing in landscape mode and there probably won't be any keyboard cases either, so ... since all the pro users tend to use the iPad "naked," (without keyboards, keyboard cases etc.), it may end up being far better for mobile typing (thumb typing), than even the original iPad is.
It may end up being a far better design for those that want to do actual work with an iPad, even as it's a better consumption device at the same time. It may end up that the bigger "regular" iPad is the one your grandma might use, and the real pros use a mini.
That is a good point. Also the smaller iPad probably isn't ideal for education anyway. The current iPad size is much better for simulating a textbook like experience. A smaller iPad is going to require a lot of zooming and panning like the iPhone. Pricing is going to be a challenge since all the devices essentially do the same thing with slightly different size screens. From a BOM standpoint they probably don't vary that much aside from Retina iPad. Perhaps they will keep the iPad 2 around as well for the education model. I'm not sure if Apple will use cheaper parts in the iPad mini or not, but I for one hope they at least offer a top of the line version with cellular. That is what I want. If it comes out as a cheap plastic crippled entry level device I probably won't buy it.
My hope is that Apple views the market as diversified for size requirements, not tiered price points. There are different situations where an iPhone is the best device and others where a full size iPad is better and still others where a smaller iPad would be ideal. The differentiation should be based on screen presentation requirements not price point. Within each model there should be price tiers obviously, but I don't want a cheap iPad mini built using cheap parts or by intentionally crippling the features.
I could see them positioning the iPad 2 as an education device, and the iPad 3 as more of a "Pro" device to differentiate from the Mini. The Mini will probably be more of an every mans tablet.
Even next year when a new iPad comes out Apple will probably keep the iPad 2 around as an education model, like they did with white MacBooks and the eMac all those years ago.
Even next year when a new iPad comes out Apple will probably keep the iPad 2 around as an education model, like they did with white MacBooks and the eMac all those years ago.
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.
I often wonder if the people who claim a 7 or 8" iPad would be too small have ever used a Kindle or a similar eReader.
I'm looking at this as someone who owns a full range of iOS and OS X products (including an iPad), as well as a cheap 7" Android tablet. The 7" tablet is a superior format for reading, and for carrying around. Despite protestations to the contrary, it absolutely does fit in pockets and other storage areas that the iPad will not -- including the back pocket of my size 32 jeans. People don't carry 10" x12" hardcover books around with them everywhere they go, but they'll certainly take that paperback they're reading on the bus, train, to the park, beach, etc, etc... That's certainly my case. The iPad stays at home, ALWAYS, and the Android tablet comes with me everywhere.
That doesn't mean I like Android. It sucks. I hate it. It is a good eReader, but it's not very good at much else. I absolutely would prefer an iOS device, just not at the expense of giving up the superior form factor of the 7" device.
Name me one time Apple did something because it was what the people wanted? People would buy Macs by the truckload if they priced them to compete with PCs. All of a sudden the years and years the R&D department spent working on the iPad to find the ideal size is wrong?
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.
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.
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.
After looking at the rendering I wonder, since the side bezels are so narrow, if they will be designing it for use with Smart Cover or not. Perhaps it is not necessary and a straight cover like iPad 1 will be sufficient. In some ways I liked that cover style better than the smart cover in conjunction with a back cover that I am now using on my iPad 3
I guess it works ... I can't see them going below $249 otherwise it screws with the touch too much... even tho the market for a 4" device and a 7" device are quite different it's kinda hard seeing you can get 2x the screen size and 2x the storage for 50 bucks more ... or the same price if they try to hit that 199 mark... Something I just don't see them doing.
As it is I don't see the 8GB touch surviving at the current price. Its feels like they'd have to make athe touch 8GB @ 149 and bring the 16 down to 199.
If they could bring the 8GB touch down to 99 it would be just as 'major' as bringing out an iPod @ 199. The kids would go totally nuts and every one of em would have one under the tree this December.
They could solve the problem of the iPod touch pricing problem via the new mini iPad by simply adding a memory slot. Release one with a minimum amount of internal storage, say around 4GB and let the user add what they like. You can buy a 64GB card for about $42. Will they ever ofter this option on any iOS device? Very doubtful and very un-Apple like because that is a big incentive for people to upgrade sooner. I can still dream of an iPhone 5 standard with 64GB with the option to double the storage to 128GB. But who knows, Apple has surprised me before and if flash memory prices keeps them from expanding beyond 64GB they might at least consider the option of expandable memory. It would make a lot of people very happy I am sure.
In a year or two we might be having the exact same discussion about rumors of a larger iPad around 13"
I sure hope so. I might be in the market for an upgrade right around then, and I'm wishing occasionally that my iPad was larger already.
And mstone raised another good point about education with the bit about panning that got me thinking:
Textbooks. They'll all need to be redone for a smaller iPad, even if it's the same aspect ratio. The text can't be TOO small, meaning less text per page, meaning all the pages will have to be reformatted, with images (and their subtitle boxes) resized, etc.
Now, you want to think about how insignificant this is. And I know where you're coming from; every time Apple releases a new resolution, developers just take it in stride. And with the 6th iPhone, they'll have to work with a wider screen—potentially three aspect ratios at once (3:2, 4:3, and 16:9) for compatibility with all of Apple's devices.
But apps and books are different. Take a gander at the eBook industry. The GOOD eBook industry. There's not much going on there. Apps have absolutely exploded in the four (yes, just four!) years since the first meaningful App Store.
But books? No. And it's because the publishers hate change. More than that, they haven't shown they know how to properly content-enrich digital copies of physical books, so there's no real value reason other than PHYSICAL space (and crazy-simple searchability) to buy the digital versions! Take the Steve Jobs biography. The physical one has pictures in the back. That's a nice little intimate peek into his life. So you'd figure the digital copy could take that further. Maybe a home video, maybe an audio clip of Steve Jobs himself, or maybe, just maybe, those same photos (not even MORE photos) at a resolution even close to passable! Nope. The physical book's pictures look better than the digital one's.
They just don't know what to do with the format! Same with magazine makers. You see terrible reviews for Newsstand magazines all the time, citing lack of interactivity, extra content, and what have you over the print version when the format is SO much better suited for that!
They could be making it so that instead of the static regular print ads just digitized, all ads in the magazine are replaced with iAds that change over time! So, and listen to this, so they could be remonetizing people reading old issues. Infinite ads, but only one "printing".
But I'm getting off on a tangent. I apologize. Back to the publishers and their unwillingness to change.
Apple has created a spectacular gateway into beautiful, rich-content eBooks. It's only a first step (definitely only a first step), but it's the right way to move forward. The more work Apple puts into it, the more the barrier of unwillingness gets torn away as ease of creation increases. I don't think that jamming an extra form factor in the mix would be the best idea right now, particularly in the field of textbooks.
Originally Posted by gwmac
They could solve the problem of the iPod touch pricing problem via the new mini iPad by simply adding a memory slot.
This is Apple, you remember. You have options to double storage, they're just at point of purchase. I hope that NAND chip prices just start to drop precipitously to help remove this concern from the equation. For those following that part of the industry, is there any indication thereof?
Comments
As someone else pointed out, Apple is great at the upsell. So forget about the pros and cons of an 7" iPad and think about how pretty Apple will be sitting with a tablet at $300, $400, $500 and up. Some people will think they want the 7" and end up paying more while others who may not ever have thought about an iPad will now be able to afford one since they have a firm spending limit of $300 in their mind. I am sure many parents with several kids can justify $300 to buy their kid an iPad far easier than $500 or even $400 in a household budget where every penny counts.
This is a good move for Apple and just in time. Kick Android while they are down in the mud and their tablet sales are low. Without a cheaper 7" tablet they would have a niche they could expand and exploit. Most (not all) people prefer to use the same OS on their tablet and phone as it just makes life easier for contacts, app syncing, etc.. SO APple really need to continue dominating the tablet market. I hope iOS 7 really brings us some revolutionary new features as opposed to evolutionary. It is starting to get a little stale. Android has added a lot from 2.1 to Jellybean. Granted, 2.1 was not that great so there was a lot of room for improvement. But Jellybean gives iOS 5 and 6 a run for it's money. I would like to see iOS 7 leave Android in the dust again with some ideas no one thought possible but yet seem so obvious and essential. With hundreds of apps on our phones maybe they can improve the icon/folder based GUI. Maybe it is time for iOS to take some cues from OS X instead of the other way around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
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.
That is a good point. Also the smaller iPad probably isn't ideal for education anyway. The current iPad size is much better for simulating a textbook like experience. A smaller iPad is going to require a lot of zooming and panning like the iPhone. Pricing is going to be a challenge since all the devices essentially do the same thing with slightly different size screens. From a BOM standpoint they probably don't vary that much aside from Retina iPad. Perhaps they will keep the iPad 2 around as well for the education model. I'm not sure if Apple will use cheaper parts in the iPad mini or not, but I for one hope they at least offer a top of the line version with cellular. That is what I want. If it comes out as a cheap plastic crippled entry level device I probably won't buy it.
My hope is that Apple views the market as diversified for size requirements, not tiered price points. There are different situations where an iPhone is the best device and others where a full size iPad is better and still others where a smaller iPad would be ideal. The differentiation should be based on screen presentation requirements not price point. Within each model there should be price tiers obviously, but I don't want a cheap iPad mini built using cheap parts or by intentionally crippling the features.
A friend of mine said his wife wanted an iPad that she could fit in her purse. I never looked at it that way, but I suppose it makes sense for a segment of the population.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
So answer me this, would Apple be making a 7-8" tablet if none existed from other manufacturers?
What difference does it it make? A lot of people obviously want a smaller tablet. Why not provide one that is compatible with the Apple ecosystem. Seems logical. You get a lot of new first time Apple buyers and a lot of long time Apple buyers like me all wanting the new iPad mini, all for various reasons. Personally I just want improved portability so I welcome the new size. I already have an iPhone and an iPad and a MBP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
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.
Absolutely. And if he were alive he'd be roaming the stage in Oct waving the mini with a big s*^t eating grin. First due was the size we know, so let's not distract the public with too much variety, besides I'll tell them what they need. Later for other sizes. And, as I posted earlier, SJ's comments seem in retrospect more obviously a reality distortion sales pitch (not that I'm against RD : ) ) based on what was coming down the pike than anything he truly believed in. Jobs' remarks sometimes do end up in that category historically, and he wasn't a pusher of truth, he was a pusher of Apple.
Again, I'm a fan of Apple and Jobs, don't get me wrong, but his word was as sales pitch not explaining the whys and hows of technology options.
Name me one time Apple did something because it was what the people wanted? People would buy Macs by the truckload if they priced them to compete with PCs. All of a sudden the years and years the R&D department spent working on the iPad to find the ideal size is wrong?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Name me one time Apple did something because it was what the people wanted? People would buy Macs by the truckload if they priced them to compete with PCs. All of a sudden the years and years the R&D department spent working on the iPad to find the ideal size is wrong?
Apple also has a record of discontinuing products that don't sell well so if the iPad mini does not sell well it will be discontinued.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Name me one time Apple did something because it was what the people wanted? People would buy Macs by the truckload if they priced them to compete with PCs. All of a sudden the years and years the R&D department spent working on the iPad to find the ideal size is wrong?
This has nothing to do with the original iPad size being "wrong". It has only to do with another, new, additional model.
In a year or two we might be having the exact same discussion about rumors of a larger iPad around 13"
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
This has nothing to do with the original iPad size being "wrong". It has only to do with another, new, additional model.
I think he may be referring to the fact that when the iPad was first rumoured, a lot of people argued that it was too big and that it should have been in the 8" (diagonal) size instead. So in many ways the iPad mini is the rediscovery of a size format that lots of people thought the iPad should be in the first place.
I think it will be an interesting product. One the one hand it will be cheap and "for kids" but on the other hand, in many ways it will be a sort of "iPad Pro." It won't be very useful to type on the thing in landscape mode and there probably won't be any keyboard cases either, so ... since all the pro users tend to use the iPad "naked," (without keyboards, keyboard cases etc.), it may end up being far better for mobile typing (thumb typing), than even the original iPad is.
It may end up being a far better design for those that want to do actual work with an iPad, even as it's a better consumption device at the same time. It may end up that the bigger "regular" iPad is the one your grandma might use, and the real pros use a mini.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
That is a good point. Also the smaller iPad probably isn't ideal for education anyway. The current iPad size is much better for simulating a textbook like experience. A smaller iPad is going to require a lot of zooming and panning like the iPhone. Pricing is going to be a challenge since all the devices essentially do the same thing with slightly different size screens. From a BOM standpoint they probably don't vary that much aside from Retina iPad. Perhaps they will keep the iPad 2 around as well for the education model. I'm not sure if Apple will use cheaper parts in the iPad mini or not, but I for one hope they at least offer a top of the line version with cellular. That is what I want. If it comes out as a cheap plastic crippled entry level device I probably won't buy it.
My hope is that Apple views the market as diversified for size requirements, not tiered price points. There are different situations where an iPhone is the best device and others where a full size iPad is better and still others where a smaller iPad would be ideal. The differentiation should be based on screen presentation requirements not price point. Within each model there should be price tiers obviously, but I don't want a cheap iPad mini built using cheap parts or by intentionally crippling the features.
I could see them positioning the iPad 2 as an education device, and the iPad 3 as more of a "Pro" device to differentiate from the Mini. The Mini will probably be more of an every mans tablet.
Even next year when a new iPad comes out Apple will probably keep the iPad 2 around as an education model, like they did with white MacBooks and the eMac all those years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
Even next year when a new iPad comes out Apple will probably keep the iPad 2 around as an education model, like they did with white MacBooks and the eMac all those years ago.
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.
I'm looking at this as someone who owns a full range of iOS and OS X products (including an iPad), as well as a cheap 7" Android tablet. The 7" tablet is a superior format for reading, and for carrying around. Despite protestations to the contrary, it absolutely does fit in pockets and other storage areas that the iPad will not -- including the back pocket of my size 32 jeans. People don't carry 10" x12" hardcover books around with them everywhere they go, but they'll certainly take that paperback they're reading on the bus, train, to the park, beach, etc, etc... That's certainly my case. The iPad stays at home, ALWAYS, and the Android tablet comes with me everywhere.
That doesn't mean I like Android. It sucks. I hate it. It is a good eReader, but it's not very good at much else. I absolutely would prefer an iOS device, just not at the expense of giving up the superior form factor of the 7" device.
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.
After looking at the rendering I wonder, since the side bezels are so narrow, if they will be designing it for use with Smart Cover or not. Perhaps it is not necessary and a straight cover like iPad 1 will be sufficient. In some ways I liked that cover style better than the smart cover in conjunction with a back cover that I am now using on my iPad 3
IPod touch 4.4" retina screen 8GB, wifi - $199
IPad 7.85" retina(?) screen 16GB wifi - $299(?) $249(?)
iPad 2 10" non retina 16GB ... 399
IPad 3 10" retina 16GB $499
I guess it works ... I can't see them going below $249 otherwise it screws with the touch too much... even tho the market for a 4" device and a 7" device are quite different it's kinda hard seeing you can get 2x the screen size and 2x the storage for 50 bucks more ... or the same price if they try to hit that 199 mark... Something I just don't see them doing.
As it is I don't see the 8GB touch surviving at the current price. Its feels like they'd have to make athe touch 8GB @ 149 and bring the 16 down to 199.
If they could bring the 8GB touch down to 99 it would be just as 'major' as bringing out an iPod @ 199. The kids would go totally nuts and every one of em would have one under the tree this December.
They could solve the problem of the iPod touch pricing problem via the new mini iPad by simply adding a memory slot. Release one with a minimum amount of internal storage, say around 4GB and let the user add what they like. You can buy a 64GB card for about $42. Will they ever ofter this option on any iOS device? Very doubtful and very un-Apple like because that is a big incentive for people to upgrade sooner. I can still dream of an iPhone 5 standard with 64GB with the option to double the storage to 128GB. But who knows, Apple has surprised me before and if flash memory prices keeps them from expanding beyond 64GB they might at least consider the option of expandable memory. It would make a lot of people very happy I am sure.
Originally Posted by gwmac
In a year or two we might be having the exact same discussion about rumors of a larger iPad around 13"
I sure hope so. I might be in the market for an upgrade right around then, and I'm wishing occasionally that my iPad was larger already.
And mstone raised another good point about education with the bit about panning that got me thinking:
Textbooks. They'll all need to be redone for a smaller iPad, even if it's the same aspect ratio. The text can't be TOO small, meaning less text per page, meaning all the pages will have to be reformatted, with images (and their subtitle boxes) resized, etc.
Now, you want to think about how insignificant this is. And I know where you're coming from; every time Apple releases a new resolution, developers just take it in stride. And with the 6th iPhone, they'll have to work with a wider screen—potentially three aspect ratios at once (3:2, 4:3, and 16:9) for compatibility with all of Apple's devices.
But apps and books are different. Take a gander at the eBook industry. The GOOD eBook industry. There's not much going on there. Apps have absolutely exploded in the four (yes, just four!) years since the first meaningful App Store.
But books? No. And it's because the publishers hate change. More than that, they haven't shown they know how to properly content-enrich digital copies of physical books, so there's no real value reason other than PHYSICAL space (and crazy-simple searchability) to buy the digital versions! Take the Steve Jobs biography. The physical one has pictures in the back. That's a nice little intimate peek into his life. So you'd figure the digital copy could take that further. Maybe a home video, maybe an audio clip of Steve Jobs himself, or maybe, just maybe, those same photos (not even MORE photos) at a resolution even close to passable! Nope. The physical book's pictures look better than the digital one's.
They just don't know what to do with the format! Same with magazine makers. You see terrible reviews for Newsstand magazines all the time, citing lack of interactivity, extra content, and what have you over the print version when the format is SO much better suited for that!
They could be making it so that instead of the static regular print ads just digitized, all ads in the magazine are replaced with iAds that change over time! So, and listen to this, so they could be remonetizing people reading old issues. Infinite ads, but only one "printing".
But I'm getting off on a tangent. I apologize. Back to the publishers and their unwillingness to change.
Apple has created a spectacular gateway into beautiful, rich-content eBooks. It's only a first step (definitely only a first step), but it's the right way to move forward. The more work Apple puts into it, the more the barrier of unwillingness gets torn away as ease of creation increases. I don't think that jamming an extra form factor in the mix would be the best idea right now, particularly in the field of textbooks.
Originally Posted by gwmac
They could solve the problem of the iPod touch pricing problem via the new mini iPad by simply adding a memory slot.
This is Apple, you remember. You have options to double storage, they're just at point of purchase. I hope that NAND chip prices just start to drop precipitously to help remove this concern from the equation. For those following that part of the industry, is there any indication thereof?