I was hoping for a price of $199 on the 8 GB model. But 8 GB might not be practical.
Presently, Apple charges $100 for a double storage bump.
What if Apple priced a16 GB low-end iPad mini at $279?
Then, priced the 32 GB model at $349... and the 64 GB model at $449?
In other words, 16 GB of storage upgrade cost $70 and 32 GB of storage costs $100.
At first it seems a little messy… But as I think about it, it could be appealing to both Apple and the customer.
Edit: They could carry this over into the iPad 3 product line and even offer 128 GB option (64 GB additional storage)for a $149 price differential.
Apple charges $299 for a 32GB iPod Touch. I think $249 for a 16GB iPod "mini" would work out considering it has pretty much the same rumoured tech save for 4x the screen size but half the PPI and 3x the battery size in a larger case.
put an Apple on it, the fan boys will come a runnin...
I keep hearing this moronic "fanboy" sh*t.
Apple is on the verge of selling 50 million iPhones in a quarter and 20 million (or more) iPads. With this many buyers, and a lot of them new (and a lot of them previous Android owners), at what point does this consumer base not become just fanboys?
put an Apple on it, the fan boys will come a runnin...
Those "fan boys" are a huge chunk of the market at large. At what point does "fan boy" turn into "most everyone"? It's already happened. Years ago, in fact.
We, and they, come running because we know what to expect. We know what's behind the Apple logo and what it stands for, consistently.
Take a gander at the consumer satisfaction reports for the 8 years or so. You'll find one name consistently in the #1 position. Every year. In nearly every category Apple played/plays in at the time.
Apple is on the verge of selling 50 million iPhones in a quarter and 20 million (or more) iPads. With this many buyers, and a lot of them new (and a lot of them previous Android owners), at what point does this consumer base not become just fanboys?
Give your head a shake.
Sounds like p***s envy to me.. Haters will be haters!
Google is about to start a war of ecosystems with the tablet priced at $99.
BA HA HA! If Google wants to be synonymous with "utterly worthless garbage", more power to them.
There is a huge untapped market of those who do not belong to any of the camp yet (teens, college students, older folks, etc)
And they want to be part of Apple's camp. Google has to not only create something that will change their minds about that, they have to create something that will then actually keep them around for more than a few weeks once they've bought it.
…apple must provide a very low priced entry (perhaps with nearly zero margin)…
Google is about to start a war of ecosystems with the tablet priced at $99.
There is a huge untapped market of those who do not belong to any of the camp yet (teens, college students, older folks, etc)
Do you realize that once someone joins whatever ecosystem most likely will get locked and stay for very long time?
IMO apple must provide a very low priced entry (perhaps with nearly zero margin) for these people, so once they are locked they will be willing to upgrade to more premium products.
To stay relevant in this war Apple should not repeat mistakes of the pc vs Mac era.
Competing with Apple on price in the mobile space is usually a losing proposition.
And if Google wants to rule the shitastic junk-segment of mobile, then more power to them. They can keep that crown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
To stay relevant in this war Apple should not repeat mistakes of the pc vs Mac era.
I was hoping for a price of $199 on the 8 GB model. But 8 GB might not be practical.
Presently, Apple charges $100 for a double storage bump.
What if Apple priced a16 GB low-end iPad mini at $279?
Then, priced the 32 GB model at $349... and the 64 GB model at $449?
In other words, 16 GB of storage upgrade cost $70 and 32 GB of storage costs $100.
At first it seems a little messy… But as I think about it, it could be appealing to both Apple and the customer.
Edit: They could carry this over into the iPad 3 product line and even offer 128 GB option (64 GB additional storage)for a $149 price differential.
Apple charges $299 for a 32GB iPod Touch. I think $249 for a 16GB iPod "mini" would work out considering it has pretty much the same rumoured tech save for 4x the screen size but half the PPI and 3x the battery size in a larger case.
I was more interested in a [more realistic] sliding price differential when going from: 16-32, 32-64 and 64-128 GB of SSD storage.
I suspect that they will pick a starting price point that allows them to make their acceptable profit.
They offer SSD storage bumps at a sliding price differential on their computer products.
I realize that these are appliance products…. But there is a growing need for more SSD storage options! They can't just keep doubling SSD size and charging $100 for each bump.
Google is about to start a war of ecosystems with the tablet priced at $99.
There is a huge untapped market of those who do not belong to any of the camp yet (teens, college students, older folks, etc)
Do you realize that once someone joins whatever ecosystem most likely will get locked and stay for very long time?
IMO apple must provide a very low priced entry (perhaps with nearly zero margin) for these people, so once they are locked they will be willing to upgrade to more premium products.
To stay relevant in this war Apple should not repeat mistakes of the pc vs Mac era.
Which mistake is that? I assume you mean the battle for the thinnest profit margins.
Identity... no. Niche, yes. After 2 + years, the iPad _IS_ a category in the computing continuum. This is just a niche in that category. sort of like is a laptop the same as a desktop vs a workstation vs a server in the old PC days.
It's more along the lines of, 'who will buy this?' and we truly need to get out of the naval gazing that most of us techs do ("I will/won't buy this, because it will/won't meet _MY_ needs... therefore it's a monumental Success/Failure").
As a Stockholder, I tend to see, 'how does a particular function/price point improve Apple ' as more important than "would I buy it at this price?"
Sure - niche. But for the longest time, and still, people have been trying to niche away the iPad. Trying to define the category. Its OK to say that the iPad is a category but so what? Its meaningless in an of itself. When you categorized, classified or 'niched' the forthcoming iPad mini you called it a 'reader'. This is where the problem lies. Can you categorize the iPad along the same lines? A 'media consumption device' sure as hell doesn't work. I mean, who do you reckon buy an iPad?
put an Apple on it, the fan boys will come a runnin...
Those "fan boys" are a huge chunk of the market at large. At what point does "fan boy" turn into "most everyone"? It's already happened. Years ago, in fact.
We, and they, come running because we know what to expect. We know what's behind the Apple logo and what it stands for, consistently.
Take a gander at the consumer satisfaction reports for the 8 years or so. You'll find one name consistently in the #1 position. Every year. In nearly every category Apple played/plays in at the time.
Apple.
That isn't by accident.
+++
One of most humorous ads, to me… Is the Sammy add showing a group of purported Apple fanboy's waiting in a long line for the new iPhone 5…
The funny part, is that there are a bunch (too few to call a line, really) of Samdroids standing around watching the Apple fanboys...
Like the trolls here, are these Samdroids so embarrassed with their selected purchases that they have to seek out satisfied Apple customers and try to belittle them for their product of choice?
Sure - niche. But for the longest time, and still, people have been trying to niche away the iPad. Trying to define the category. Its OK to say that the iPad is a category but so what? Its meaningless in an of itself. When you categorized, classified or 'niched' the forthcoming iPad mini you called it a 'reader'. This is where the problem lies. Can you categorize the iPad along the same lines? A 'media consumption device' sure as hell doesn't work. I mean, who do you reckon buy an iPad?
There's no point in categorizing it. It still will do what it does, and evolve by the month, by the year, etc.
Call it a "cheeseburger", if you want. Whatever. It still is what it is, it's still the game-changer that it is, and its sales numbers are approaching iPhone figures.
I was more interested in a [more realistic] sliding price differential when going from: 16-32, 32-64 and 64-128 GB of SSD storage.
I suspect that they will pick a starting price point that allows them to make their acceptable profit.
They offer SSD storage bumps at a sliding price differential on their computer products.
I realize that these are appliance products…. But there is a growing need for more SSD storage options! They can't just keep doubling SSD size and charging $100 for each bump.
We won't see an SSD on these for some time, if ever. If we do it will be on the 10" iPad first as it has more room for multiple NAND chips and a controller. Now Apple could put the SSD controller on their ASIC in some future release but again this is something I'd think they'd test with the 10" iPad (or perhaps even the iPhone because it's flagship of the iOS device category) but not for an iPad "mini". Everything says it'll be on-board NAND not an SSD.
Price too low, cannibalize the big iPad while making less profit (lower margin)
Price too high, sell too few (while still cannibalizing iPad to some degree)
Famous quote from IBM: "If someone is going to cannibalize your product line… It might as well be [better be] you".
I was more interested in a [more realistic] sliding price differential when going from: 16-32, 32-64 and 64-128 GB of SSD storage.
I suspect that they will pick a starting price point that allows them to make their acceptable profit.
They offer SSD storage bumps at a sliding price differential on their computer products.
I realize that these are appliance products…. But there is a growing need for more SSD storage options! They can't just keep doubling SSD size and charging $100 for each bump.
We won't see an SSD on these for some time, if ever. If we do it will be on the 10" iPad first as it has more room for multiple NAND chips and a controller. Now Apple could put the SSD controller on their ASIC in some future release but again this is something I'd think they'd test with the 10" iPad (or perhaps even the iPhone because it's flagship of the iOS device category) but not for an iPad "mini". Everything says it'll be on-board NAND not an SSD.
Okay, I misspoke… I was trying to differentiate between RAM and flash storage.
But, you knew what I meant!
What about the concept of adjusting the price of incremental flash storage to the size of that storage.
But why would schools do that? I think they would think about it for 30 seconds and realize like everybody else that it would be false economy. The only place I can see an 8gb being a sensible choice is in situations where the only use will be to input data, such as in an inventory situation, POS situation, etc. where the device strictly serves a single purpose and is linked with a larger infrastructure.
No, 8GB is actually quite a lot of space as long as you are using the device for work/class related activities that would otherwise be done on a laptop or a desktop computer.
Documents (PDF's, Pages, Word Files, Excel, Numbers etc.) don't take up much space at all, nor does a properly formatted book. What takes up space is torrented movies, music, pictures and games. All of that is stuff you aren't really supposed to be worrying about in school or at work. Even if the class project is to do an iMovie, 8GB is fine when you consider that at the end of each class, the device is wiped and returned to a pristine state for the next class. There are lots of classes that use the iPad already and they go for the low-end 16GB one. The (presumed) $250 iPad mini would reduce the cost from roughly $400 a seat to roughly $200 a seat (there are discounts involved), and that will probably count for more than the slightly lower storage.
Okay, I misspoke… I was trying to differentiate between RAM and flash storage.
But, you knew what I meant!
What about the concept of adjusting the price of incremental flash storage to the size of that storage.
I'm not sure what you mean at all. Incremental to a per-GB charge so that, for instance, 16GB more to 32GB would be $50 more and 32GB more to 64GB would be $100 more? At some point they can't use the same price stepping because NAND will fall in price and the doubling increase will eventually become unwieldy.
Personally I'm expecting multiple NAND chips at a smaller lithography with an SSD controller so they can offer more capacity without a huge per chip cost (3x32GB NAND chips = 96GB) which will also allow much faster read/write times that could make a Lightening-to-Thunderbolt connector an accessory worth buying.
Comments
Apple charges $299 for a 32GB iPod Touch. I think $249 for a 16GB iPod "mini" would work out considering it has pretty much the same rumoured tech save for 4x the screen size but half the PPI and 3x the battery size in a larger case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by protaginets
put an Apple on it, the fan boys will come a runnin...
I keep hearing this moronic "fanboy" sh*t.
Apple is on the verge of selling 50 million iPhones in a quarter and 20 million (or more) iPads. With this many buyers, and a lot of them new (and a lot of them previous Android owners), at what point does this consumer base not become just fanboys?
Give your head a shake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by protaginets
put an Apple on it, the fan boys will come a runnin...
Those "fan boys" are a huge chunk of the market at large. At what point does "fan boy" turn into "most everyone"? It's already happened. Years ago, in fact.
We, and they, come running because we know what to expect. We know what's behind the Apple logo and what it stands for, consistently.
Take a gander at the consumer satisfaction reports for the 8 years or so. You'll find one name consistently in the #1 position. Every year. In nearly every category Apple played/plays in at the time.
Apple.
That isn't by accident.
Originally Posted by jason98
Google is about to start a war of ecosystems with the tablet priced at $99.
BA HA HA! If Google wants to be synonymous with "utterly worthless garbage", more power to them.
There is a huge untapped market of those who do not belong to any of the camp yet (teens, college students, older folks, etc)
And they want to be part of Apple's camp. Google has to not only create something that will change their minds about that, they have to create something that will then actually keep them around for more than a few weeks once they've bought it.
…apple must provide a very low priced entry (perhaps with nearly zero margin)…
Abject frigging nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jahblade
Sounds like p***s envy to me.. Haters will be haters!
Apple envy.
It took the industry and the market by storm years ago. Since the iPhone's debut it's intensified to astronomical levels.
Apple leads the industry today (hell, they lead it 5 years ago already.) Apple sneezes, and everyone else grabs a Kleenex.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
Your sarcasm is stupid.
Google is about to start a war of ecosystems with the tablet priced at $99.
There is a huge untapped market of those who do not belong to any of the camp yet (teens, college students, older folks, etc)
Do you realize that once someone joins whatever ecosystem most likely will get locked and stay for very long time?
IMO apple must provide a very low priced entry (perhaps with nearly zero margin) for these people, so once they are locked they will be willing to upgrade to more premium products.
To stay relevant in this war Apple should not repeat mistakes of the pc vs Mac era.
Competing with Apple on price in the mobile space is usually a losing proposition.
And if Google wants to rule the shitastic junk-segment of mobile, then more power to them. They can keep that crown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
To stay relevant in this war Apple should not repeat mistakes of the pc vs Mac era.
What mistakes?
I was more interested in a [more realistic] sliding price differential when going from: 16-32, 32-64 and 64-128 GB of SSD storage.
I suspect that they will pick a starting price point that allows them to make their acceptable profit.
They offer SSD storage bumps at a sliding price differential on their computer products.
I realize that these are appliance products…. But there is a growing need for more SSD storage options! They can't just keep doubling SSD size and charging $100 for each bump.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
Your sarcasm is stupid.
Google is about to start a war of ecosystems with the tablet priced at $99.
There is a huge untapped market of those who do not belong to any of the camp yet (teens, college students, older folks, etc)
Do you realize that once someone joins whatever ecosystem most likely will get locked and stay for very long time?
IMO apple must provide a very low priced entry (perhaps with nearly zero margin) for these people, so once they are locked they will be willing to upgrade to more premium products.
To stay relevant in this war Apple should not repeat mistakes of the pc vs Mac era.
Which mistake is that? I assume you mean the battle for the thinnest profit margins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff
Identity... no. Niche, yes. After 2 + years, the iPad _IS_ a category in the computing continuum. This is just a niche in that category. sort of like is a laptop the same as a desktop vs a workstation vs a server in the old PC days.
It's more along the lines of, 'who will buy this?' and we truly need to get out of the naval gazing that most of us techs do ("I will/won't buy this, because it will/won't meet _MY_ needs... therefore it's a monumental Success/Failure").
As a Stockholder, I tend to see, 'how does a particular function/price point improve Apple ' as more important than "would I buy it at this price?"
Sure - niche. But for the longest time, and still, people have been trying to niche away the iPad. Trying to define the category. Its OK to say that the iPad is a category but so what? Its meaningless in an of itself. When you categorized, classified or 'niched' the forthcoming iPad mini you called it a 'reader'. This is where the problem lies. Can you categorize the iPad along the same lines? A 'media consumption device' sure as hell doesn't work. I mean, who do you reckon buy an iPad?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98
Well $99 nexus is coming with perhaps comparable specs. Apple has to offer a $200 low margin option.
No. They. Don't.
+++
One of most humorous ads, to me… Is the Sammy add showing a group of purported Apple fanboy's waiting in a long line for the new iPhone 5…
The funny part, is that there are a bunch (too few to call a line, really) of Samdroids standing around watching the Apple fanboys...
Like the trolls here, are these Samdroids so embarrassed with their selected purchases that they have to seek out satisfied Apple customers and try to belittle them for their product of choice?
Price too low, cannibalize the big iPad while making less profit (lower margin)
Price too high, sell too few (while still cannibalizing iPad to some degree)
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Sure - niche. But for the longest time, and still, people have been trying to niche away the iPad. Trying to define the category. Its OK to say that the iPad is a category but so what? Its meaningless in an of itself. When you categorized, classified or 'niched' the forthcoming iPad mini you called it a 'reader'. This is where the problem lies. Can you categorize the iPad along the same lines? A 'media consumption device' sure as hell doesn't work. I mean, who do you reckon buy an iPad?
There's no point in categorizing it. It still will do what it does, and evolve by the month, by the year, etc.
Call it a "cheeseburger", if you want. Whatever. It still is what it is, it's still the game-changer that it is, and its sales numbers are approaching iPhone figures.
We won't see an SSD on these for some time, if ever. If we do it will be on the 10" iPad first as it has more room for multiple NAND chips and a controller. Now Apple could put the SSD controller on their ASIC in some future release but again this is something I'd think they'd test with the 10" iPad (or perhaps even the iPhone because it's flagship of the iOS device category) but not for an iPad "mini". Everything says it'll be on-board NAND not an SSD.
Famous quote from IBM: "If someone is going to cannibalize your product line… It might as well be [better be] you".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42
Price too low, cannibalize the big iPad while making less profit (lower margin)
Price too high, sell too few (while still cannibalizing iPad to some degree)
Or it could dominate its segment like the iPod did.
If we do get a smaller iPad, Apple will be following the iPod model. An entire family of devices. Bad news for competitors.
Okay, I misspoke… I was trying to differentiate between RAM and flash storage.
But, you knew what I meant!
What about the concept of adjusting the price of incremental flash storage to the size of that storage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
But why would schools do that? I think they would think about it for 30 seconds and realize like everybody else that it would be false economy. The only place I can see an 8gb being a sensible choice is in situations where the only use will be to input data, such as in an inventory situation, POS situation, etc. where the device strictly serves a single purpose and is linked with a larger infrastructure.
No, 8GB is actually quite a lot of space as long as you are using the device for work/class related activities that would otherwise be done on a laptop or a desktop computer.
Documents (PDF's, Pages, Word Files, Excel, Numbers etc.) don't take up much space at all, nor does a properly formatted book. What takes up space is torrented movies, music, pictures and games. All of that is stuff you aren't really supposed to be worrying about in school or at work. Even if the class project is to do an iMovie, 8GB is fine when you consider that at the end of each class, the device is wiped and returned to a pristine state for the next class. There are lots of classes that use the iPad already and they go for the low-end 16GB one. The (presumed) $250 iPad mini would reduce the cost from roughly $400 a seat to roughly $200 a seat (there are discounts involved), and that will probably count for more than the slightly lower storage.
I'm not sure what you mean at all. Incremental to a per-GB charge so that, for instance, 16GB more to 32GB would be $50 more and 32GB more to 64GB would be $100 more? At some point they can't use the same price stepping because NAND will fall in price and the doubling increase will eventually become unwieldy.
Personally I'm expecting multiple NAND chips at a smaller lithography with an SSD controller so they can offer more capacity without a huge per chip cost (3x32GB NAND chips = 96GB) which will also allow much faster read/write times that could make a Lightening-to-Thunderbolt connector an accessory worth buying.