What way would that be? Leave out the cameras? Give us the shittiest screen they can get their hands on? That isn't the Apple we know.
I just find it incredibly hard to believe that the iPad mini and iPod touch 5G would both start at $299.
The iPod touch 4G 16GB currently sells for $199. It has a retina display and camera. The iPad 2 16GB currently sells for $399. Apple could clearly fit something in between. Their historical practice in iPhone and iPad is to make small margins on the base model, and make most of their money from people willing to pay through the nose for extra flash memory. And they don't need to make much money on the iPad mini -- it's worth a lot to them to avoid letting competition get a foothold in the tablet market. The iPad mini base model may be a very good deal.
Give us the shittiest screen they can get their hands on? That isn't the Apple we know.
The iPod touch 4G 16GB currently sells for $199. It has a retina display and camera.
Note up until this new iPod was announced last week the 4th gen iPod Touch's display was significantly and noticeably inferior to that of the iPhone 4/4S. The one interesting thing they said about the new Touch is that it uses the exact same display as the iPhone 5.
Nobody is considering that the target market for an iPad mini might range from little kids in kindergartens and elementary grades to casual users who can carry one in a jacket pocket without worrying about it, situations where an expensive retina display would be overkill. The selling point would be sturdy metal construction that doesn't offend the parents' or the kids' sensibilities, and the Apple ecosystem, in which parents and teachers can load the tablets with good stuff for kids easily.
Everybody here except maybe [B]herbapou[/B] is assuming the target buyer is themselves. They may get the retina screen eventually, or even right away for more money. But Apple shouldn't let the kinder market suffer with cheap plastic and laggy software. They have kids in Cupertino too.
The iPod touch 4G 16GB currently sells for $199. It has a retina display and camera. The iPad 2 16GB currently sells for $399. Apple could clearly fit something in between. Their historical practice in iPhone and iPad is to make small margins on the base model, and make most of their money from people willing to pay through the nose for extra flash memory. And they don't need to make much money on the iPad mini -- it's worth a lot to them to avoid letting competition get a foothold in the tablet market. The iPad mini base model may be a very good deal.
Is Apple that afraid of the competition? I think not.
Nobody is considering that the target market for an iPad mini might range from little kids in kindergartens and elementary grades to casual users who can carry one in a jacket pocket without worrying about it, situations where an expensive retina display would be overkill. The selling point would be sturdy metal construction that doesn't offend the parents' or the kids' sensibilities, and the Apple ecosystem, in which parents and teachers can load the tablets with good stuff for kids easily.
Everybody here except maybe herbapou is assuming the target buyer is themselves. They may get the retina screen eventually, or even right away for more money. But Apple shouldn't let the kinder market suffer with cheap plastic and laggy software. They have kids in Cupertino too.
.
Kids in kindergarten, really? At that age pencil and paper is much more beneficial
I'll answer that, but let's set the context. Apple first releases an iPad mini that fits their standards. It's a 7.85in Retina display, the A5X chip with 1GB RAM, a 5mp camera with FaceTime front cam, etc. Essentially a smaller, lighter, thinner version of the iPad 3. And Apple brings it in at $399.
Then next year HP releases a 7.85in Android copycat tablet with the specs listed by that previous poster for $299.
Once you frame it that way, you can see how the battles would play out around these parts. We'd be chiding HP for skimping on quality for the sake of market share and proud of Apple for releasing the best product they could make, even if it meant a higher price tag. For creating a brand new product because it makes us look at tablets a little differently, not to lower the iPad price floor. If Apple releases a smaller tablet then this is how it should play out; anything else and it's the start of Tim Cook taking Apple into the generic electronics abyss.
Apple doesn't make limited use disposable stuff for the low end? They sure do. Quality standards of what? A good quality Nano? Shuffle? Lots of stuff that makes no sense (between the stuff that does click) if you plug it into an Apple meter of highest quality and caring not about the low market. They fill whatever $200 market there is to fill. They make plenty of "quality" hardware that's cheap enough to give as a gift and useless enough that you wouldn't give one to yourself. Apple has made Shuffle/Nano end stuff for ages, under Jobs, and they're good only for the few things they feebly do and only for their gym niche market. Never stopped them from revamping them.
You may not see why a smaller Pad with less than stellar resolution, the best camera, and fastest processor has any reason to exist, but those are the very reasons FOR it to exist, and it will no way come out at $399.
I'll answer that, but let's set the context. Apple first releases an iPad mini that fits their standards. It's a 7.85in Retina display, the A5X chip with 1GB RAM, a 5mp camera with FaceTime front cam, etc. Essentially a smaller, lighter, thinner version of the iPad 3. And Apple brings it in at $399.
this $399 price tag would work only until the iPad4 isn't there. Because then the iPad3 would have that same price tag of the iPad mini, with the same specs but smaller screen.
Could we expect Apple not releasing another iPad for... how long? or the newer iPad wouldn't be 9,7 inch but bigger, for higher price tag than the actual new model?
Kids in kindergarten, really? At that age pencil and paper is much more beneficial
There are iPad Stations in the Childrens rooms of some Brooklyn NY Public Libraries, at least the Park Slope Branch I was just in. Several iPads, connected to a table. Very popular.
Apple doesn't make limited use disposable stuff for the low end? They sure do. Quality standards of what? A good quality Nano? Shuffle? Lots of stuff that makes no sense (between the stuff that does click) if you plug it into an Apple meter of highest quality and caring not about the low market. They fill whatever $200 market there is to fill. They make plenty of "quality" hardware that's cheap enough to give as a gift and useless enough that you wouldn't give one to yourself. Apple has made Shuffle/Nano end stuff for ages, under Jobs, and they're good only for the few things they feebly do and only for their gym niche market. Never stopped them from revamping them.
You may not see why a smaller Pad with less than stellar resolution, the best camera, and fastest processor has any reason to exist, but those are the very reasons FOR it to exist, and it will no way come out at $399.
What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.
What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.
It's a good example because some people can't understand why anyone would want such a limited function, no frills, limited "user experience" smaller device for less $$$, and some even say Apple doesn't go there. With some of the reasoning given why a 7" less than fully decked out cheaper tablet is very bad idea these wouldn't never have existed, so it negates much of that reasoning.
Apple doesn't make limited use disposable stuff for the low end? They sure do. Quality standards of what? A good quality Nano? Shuffle? Lots of stuff that makes no sense (between the stuff that does click) if you plug it into an Apple meter of highest quality and caring not about the low market. They fill whatever $200 market there is to fill. They make plenty of "quality" hardware that's cheap enough to give as a gift and useless enough that you wouldn't give one to yourself. Apple has made Shuffle/Nano end stuff for ages, under Jobs, and they're good only for the few things they feebly do and only for their gym niche market. Never stopped them from revamping them.
You may not see why a smaller Pad with less than stellar resolution, the best camera, and fastest processor has any reason to exist, but those are the very reasons FOR it to exist, and it will no way come out at $399.
And it'll sell a gagillion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
It's a good example because some people can't understand why anyone would want such a limited function, no frills, limited "user experience" smaller device for less $$$, and some even say Apple doesn't go there. With some of the reasoning given why a 7" less than fully decked out cheaper tablet is very bad idea these wouldn't never have existed, so it negates much of that reasoning.
The reason iPods are a bad example is because they are VERY expensive for what you get. the Shuffle cost 3x as much as most 2GB music players with even less of a UI than most and the Nano has always costed 2-3x more than it's competition as well, and we see how expensive the new iPod Touch is...
And what's with the "limited user experience" thing? I'm pretty sure everyone expects the iPad Mini to do everything the big iPad can do for half the price. It's not going to be a book reader only. If Apple were to make it, it would probably still be well equipped just with older internals than the other iPads.
I think the problem here is that an iPad Mini would be a better product for women, or at least women who carry purses (and there aren't many women on these forums, so it seems like no one would want it.) Men don't tend to carry bags smaller than what would comfortably house an 11" Macbook air or standard iPad, so it doesn't seem to have much utility. Too big for your pocket, and other devices fit in any bag that you might own. If you had a purse, on the other hand, you could potentially take an iPad Mini with you everywhere (unlike an ultrabook or standard tab.)
The size of a book, drop it in your purse and go. Not appealing to men, but potentially there is still a reasonable female market.
Funny you say "low tech" and then claim specs that match the new iPod Touch which was priced at $299 and only has a 4 inch screen mind you.
I'm surprised the rumor mill is still purporting the Mini real when all we've seen are "mockups" and not ACTUAL leaks.
If I were to place a bet, I'd say the iPad Mini ends up being a an "ipad 2" sized resolution screen with the specs of the new iPod Touch and only 100$ more than the iPod Touch.
That said, I'm not sold on it either. They might be principally targeted at "Comic/Manga/Book" formats which is roughly the size it's good for. But then again considering the iPhone 5's screen size bump, they could also just bump up the iPad 2 resolution and change the shape to be taller. I'm actually less sold on the iPhone 5's "larger screen" as I thought the screen size was just fine. There's little reason to upgrade to the iPhone 5 or iPad Mini from an an existing device other than "I don't have one yet" or "the one I have is 4 years old."
re:Pegatron , you might remember these guys under their previous name - AsusTek. Pegatron originally was a part of AsusTek. Asus is generally considered the highest quality OEM/Retail (motherboard) parts you can get. I'm not sure if that is true for Pegatron itself. as you never see anything labeled "Pegatron", just "made in China"
Answer me this. How much ridicule would a competing device get on this forum if it had those specs and was announced tomorrow?
None at all. Proven hardware using a proven OS. Smaller form factor, different heat/power requirements and hence a good reason for using recent but not bleeding edge components.
.
Kids in kindergarten, really? At that age pencil and paper is much more beneficial
Then what about charcoal and a cave wall?
Kids want to live and learn in the world they're born into, not the one their grandparents grew up in. Sheesh. Anyway, pencil and paper writing should be taught as art forms, since they're no longer needed for communication.
They may or may not introduce a mini. What's certain is that the iPad mini will not compete with the iPod touch. The iPod touch is a different device. Not just smaller - it has a different UI paradigm. You don't swipe to navigate. Like the iPad you mainly stay on the main screen and use tabs or popovers.
Similar prices don't matter. The iPod touch is still seen as a music player or a games player. The iPad is a tablet.
And as for not introducing cheap versions of iOS devices, the cheapest is $199. And that's incredible for what you get. In fact I can see the touches becoming phones someday. It's true that Apple like to bring in a more expensive model and close the price umbrella the next year, so we may see a mini at $399 this year dropping to $299 next, or at $350 dropping to $250.
It depends on whether they see competition in that space as being a big deal, or not.
Nobody is considering that the target market for an iPad mini might range from little kids in kindergartens and elementary grades to casual users who can carry one in a jacket pocket without worrying about it, situations where an expensive retina display would be overkill. The selling point would be sturdy metal construction that doesn't offend the parents' or the kids' sensibilities, and the Apple ecosystem, in which parents and teachers can load the tablets with good stuff for kids easily.
Everybody here except maybe herbapou is assuming the target buyer is themselves. They may get the retina screen eventually, or even right away for more money. But Apple shouldn't let the kinder market suffer with cheap plastic and laggy software. They have kids in Cupertino too.
I actually think the iPad 2 is better for really young children. I was at the Apple store on Saturday and the kids were having fun on the iPads. The buttons are really big in the learning games. A mini is better suited for adults who can more precisely manipulate smaller interfaces.
I was all on board with an iPad mini and thought it would be a great seller and do amazing.
Then the iPod touch came out- $100 more than it should have been. That kills the iPad mini- period.
A4? Faulty A5s? Are you all delusional? Yeah- let's have Apple use 2-3 year old hardware and price it $100 MORE than the competition. I'm a "user experience" vs "specs" (android) guy as much as the next- but that would be absolutely ridiculous and apple would lose all credibility. The iPad mini needed to be the exact specs of the iPod touch. And at the iPod touch price (could have been 8gb). That would have been $100 over the competition- but the quality build, Retina display, and iOS would have made it easily worth it.
As it stands- if the ipad mini comes out- you won't see it until late 2013- when the currnt iPod touch drops to $199 and they release the iPad mini @ $299.
The bottom line is the touch is ridiculously overpriced for what you get. I would've bought one at $199 (8gb is fine). But $299 is crazy- and I believe the sales will show it.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacVicta
What way would that be? Leave out the cameras? Give us the shittiest screen they can get their hands on? That isn't the Apple we know.
I just find it incredibly hard to believe that the iPad mini and iPod touch 5G would both start at $299.
The iPod touch 4G 16GB currently sells for $199. It has a retina display and camera. The iPad 2 16GB currently sells for $399. Apple could clearly fit something in between. Their historical practice in iPhone and iPad is to make small margins on the base model, and make most of their money from people willing to pay through the nose for extra flash memory. And they don't need to make much money on the iPad mini -- it's worth a lot to them to avoid letting competition get a foothold in the tablet market. The iPad mini base model may be a very good deal.
Note up until this new iPod was announced last week the 4th gen iPod Touch's display was significantly and noticeably inferior to that of the iPhone 4/4S. The one interesting thing they said about the new Touch is that it uses the exact same display as the iPhone 5.
Everybody here except maybe [B]herbapou[/B] is assuming the target buyer is themselves. They may get the retina screen eventually, or even right away for more money. But Apple shouldn't let the kinder market suffer with cheap plastic and laggy software. They have kids in Cupertino too.
Is Apple that afraid of the competition? I think not.
Kids in kindergarten, really? At that age pencil and paper is much more beneficial
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacVicta
I'll answer that, but let's set the context. Apple first releases an iPad mini that fits their standards. It's a 7.85in Retina display, the A5X chip with 1GB RAM, a 5mp camera with FaceTime front cam, etc. Essentially a smaller, lighter, thinner version of the iPad 3. And Apple brings it in at $399.
Then next year HP releases a 7.85in Android copycat tablet with the specs listed by that previous poster for $299.
Once you frame it that way, you can see how the battles would play out around these parts. We'd be chiding HP for skimping on quality for the sake of market share and proud of Apple for releasing the best product they could make, even if it meant a higher price tag. For creating a brand new product because it makes us look at tablets a little differently, not to lower the iPad price floor. If Apple releases a smaller tablet then this is how it should play out; anything else and it's the start of Tim Cook taking Apple into the generic electronics abyss.
Apple doesn't make limited use disposable stuff for the low end? They sure do. Quality standards of what? A good quality Nano? Shuffle? Lots of stuff that makes no sense (between the stuff that does click) if you plug it into an Apple meter of highest quality and caring not about the low market. They fill whatever $200 market there is to fill. They make plenty of "quality" hardware that's cheap enough to give as a gift and useless enough that you wouldn't give one to yourself. Apple has made Shuffle/Nano end stuff for ages, under Jobs, and they're good only for the few things they feebly do and only for their gym niche market. Never stopped them from revamping them.
You may not see why a smaller Pad with less than stellar resolution, the best camera, and fastest processor has any reason to exist, but those are the very reasons FOR it to exist, and it will no way come out at $399.
And it'll sell a gagillion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacVicta
I'll answer that, but let's set the context. Apple first releases an iPad mini that fits their standards. It's a 7.85in Retina display, the A5X chip with 1GB RAM, a 5mp camera with FaceTime front cam, etc. Essentially a smaller, lighter, thinner version of the iPad 3. And Apple brings it in at $399.
this $399 price tag would work only until the iPad4 isn't there. Because then the iPad3 would have that same price tag of the iPad mini, with the same specs but smaller screen.
Could we expect Apple not releasing another iPad for... how long? or the newer iPad wouldn't be 9,7 inch but bigger, for higher price tag than the actual new model?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
.
Kids in kindergarten, really? At that age pencil and paper is much more beneficial
There are iPad Stations in the Childrens rooms of some Brooklyn NY Public Libraries, at least the Park Slope Branch I was just in. Several iPads, connected to a table. Very popular.
What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.
It's a good example because some people can't understand why anyone would want such a limited function, no frills, limited "user experience" smaller device for less $$$, and some even say Apple doesn't go there. With some of the reasoning given why a 7" less than fully decked out cheaper tablet is very bad idea these wouldn't never have existed, so it negates much of that reasoning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Yes, but these days, that just means they outsourced all of their manufacturing to mainland China.
Would be really funny if Pegatron outsourced to Foxconn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
Apple doesn't make limited use disposable stuff for the low end? They sure do. Quality standards of what? A good quality Nano? Shuffle? Lots of stuff that makes no sense (between the stuff that does click) if you plug it into an Apple meter of highest quality and caring not about the low market. They fill whatever $200 market there is to fill. They make plenty of "quality" hardware that's cheap enough to give as a gift and useless enough that you wouldn't give one to yourself. Apple has made Shuffle/Nano end stuff for ages, under Jobs, and they're good only for the few things they feebly do and only for their gym niche market. Never stopped them from revamping them.
You may not see why a smaller Pad with less than stellar resolution, the best camera, and fastest processor has any reason to exist, but those are the very reasons FOR it to exist, and it will no way come out at $399.
And it'll sell a gagillion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
What they feebly do is play music in a tiny form factor. They're designed to do one thing and one thing only, and it's more than just the gym crowd that buy them. That's a bad example. Not the same thing nor for the same reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd
It's a good example because some people can't understand why anyone would want such a limited function, no frills, limited "user experience" smaller device for less $$$, and some even say Apple doesn't go there. With some of the reasoning given why a 7" less than fully decked out cheaper tablet is very bad idea these wouldn't never have existed, so it negates much of that reasoning.
The reason iPods are a bad example is because they are VERY expensive for what you get. the Shuffle cost 3x as much as most 2GB music players with even less of a UI than most and the Nano has always costed 2-3x more than it's competition as well, and we see how expensive the new iPod Touch is...
And what's with the "limited user experience" thing? I'm pretty sure everyone expects the iPad Mini to do everything the big iPad can do for half the price. It's not going to be a book reader only. If Apple were to make it, it would probably still be well equipped just with older internals than the other iPads.
The size of a book, drop it in your purse and go. Not appealing to men, but potentially there is still a reasonable female market.
If I were to place a bet, I'd say the iPad Mini ends up being a an "ipad 2" sized resolution screen with the specs of the new iPod Touch and only 100$ more than the iPod Touch.
That said, I'm not sold on it either. They might be principally targeted at "Comic/Manga/Book" formats which is roughly the size it's good for. But then again considering the iPhone 5's screen size bump, they could also just bump up the iPad 2 resolution and change the shape to be taller. I'm actually less sold on the iPhone 5's "larger screen" as I thought the screen size was just fine. There's little reason to upgrade to the iPhone 5 or iPad Mini from an an existing device other than "I don't have one yet" or "the one I have is 4 years old."
re:Pegatron , you might remember these guys under their previous name - AsusTek. Pegatron originally was a part of AsusTek. Asus is generally considered the highest quality OEM/Retail (motherboard) parts you can get. I'm not sure if that is true for Pegatron itself. as you never see anything labeled "Pegatron", just "made in China"
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Answer me this. How much ridicule would a competing device get on this forum if it had those specs and was announced tomorrow?
None at all. Proven hardware using a proven OS. Smaller form factor, different heat/power requirements and hence a good reason for using recent but not bleeding edge components.
Then what about charcoal and a cave wall?
Kids want to live and learn in the world they're born into, not the one their grandparents grew up in. Sheesh. Anyway, pencil and paper writing should be taught as art forms, since they're no longer needed for communication.
Similar prices don't matter. The iPod touch is still seen as a music player or a games player. The iPad is a tablet.
And as for not introducing cheap versions of iOS devices, the cheapest is $199. And that's incredible for what you get. In fact I can see the touches becoming phones someday. It's true that Apple like to bring in a more expensive model and close the price umbrella the next year, so we may see a mini at $399 this year dropping to $299 next, or at $350 dropping to $250.
It depends on whether they see competition in that space as being a big deal, or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
Nobody is considering that the target market for an iPad mini might range from little kids in kindergartens and elementary grades to casual users who can carry one in a jacket pocket without worrying about it, situations where an expensive retina display would be overkill. The selling point would be sturdy metal construction that doesn't offend the parents' or the kids' sensibilities, and the Apple ecosystem, in which parents and teachers can load the tablets with good stuff for kids easily.
Everybody here except maybe herbapou is assuming the target buyer is themselves. They may get the retina screen eventually, or even right away for more money. But Apple shouldn't let the kinder market suffer with cheap plastic and laggy software. They have kids in Cupertino too.
I actually think the iPad 2 is better for really young children. I was at the Apple store on Saturday and the kids were having fun on the iPads. The buttons are really big in the learning games. A mini is better suited for adults who can more precisely manipulate smaller interfaces.
Then the iPod touch came out- $100 more than it should have been. That kills the iPad mini- period.
A4? Faulty A5s? Are you all delusional? Yeah- let's have Apple use 2-3 year old hardware and price it $100 MORE than the competition. I'm a "user experience" vs "specs" (android) guy as much as the next- but that would be absolutely ridiculous and apple would lose all credibility.
The iPad mini needed to be the exact specs of the iPod touch. And at the iPod touch price (could have been 8gb). That would have been $100 over the competition- but the quality build, Retina display, and iOS would have made it easily worth it.
As it stands- if the ipad mini comes out- you won't see it until late 2013- when the currnt iPod touch drops to $199 and they release the iPad mini @ $299.
The bottom line is the touch is ridiculously overpriced for what you get. I would've bought one at $199 (8gb is fine). But $299 is crazy- and I believe the sales will show it.
You can buy one at $199. What you can't buy is one of the new ones at $199.
What do you want, do you want them to go back to an inferior display quality for the Touch so it's cheaper?