I think one thing people need to remember is that Apple can put any SoC they want into this device. So it could be A5, A5X, A6, basically anything that fits the task at hand. As far as iPad 3, well that at the very least should get a die shrunk processor. The performance behavior of A6 is unknown when driving high resolution displays. However it has long been rumored that Apple had dual development tracks going for microprocessors. If that is real, they could easily have a high bandwidth, A6X if you will, processor ready right now for the current iPad.
There is a significant disparity in performance needs when it comes to iPad and iPhone so I have a degree of confidence that an A6 derived processoris ready right now. The only question is this, will Apple bump the iPad significantly next week or just tweak it. Due to the Microsoft thing I think Apple will be more agressive than they have been in the past. They will do everything possible to make all of MS tablets look bad.
I don't think my opinion is baseless here, Apple has publicly stated many times that they have no intentions of making the mistakes of the past. That might upset a few people that see security in predictability but you never want to be predictable with respect to the competition. Frankly I agree with managements attitude, this is Apples game to loose, they could repeat the horror of the past or try to keep as much market share as they can. Current market share numbers will change but I still believe they could whip MS badly with the right revision to iPad and an agressive design of iPad Mini.
I think one thing people need to remember is that Apple can put any SoC they want into this device. So it could be A5, A5X, A6, basically anything that fits the task at hand. As far as iPad 3, well that at the very least should get a die shrunk processor. The performance behavior of A6 is unknown when driving high resolution displays. However it has long been rumored that Apple had dual development tracks going for microprocessors. If that is real, they could easily have a high bandwidth, A6X if you will, processor ready right now for the current iPad.
There is a significant disparity in performance needs when it comes to iPad and iPhone so I have a degree of confidence that an A6 derived processoris ready right now. The only question is this, will Apple bump the iPad significantly next week or just tweak it. Due to the Microsoft thing I think Apple will be more agressive than they have been in the past. They will do everything possible to make all of MS tablets look bad.
I don't think my opinion is baseless here, Apple has publicly stated many times that they have no intentions of making the mistakes of the past. That might upset a few people that see security in predictability but you never want to be predictable with respect to the competition. Frankly I agree with managements attitude, this is Apples game to loose, they could repeat the horror of the past or try to keep as much market share as they can. Current market share numbers will change but I still believe they could whip MS badly with the right revision to iPad and an agressive design of iPad Mini.
This^
I don't know if Apple has the capability to move now…. But if they could bring the iPad 3's processing power into line with its pixel density they could set the standard for the next 1-2 years…
And the next two years may be critical for high-end tablets – who buys them, who manufactures the CPUs, and the jobs they are asked to do.
You are right -- this is Apple's game to lose... and timing may be the determining factor.
I think one thing people need to remember is that Apple can put any SoC they want into this device. So it could be A5, A5X, A6, basically anything that fits the task at hand. As far as iPad 3, well that at the very least should get a die shrunk processor. The performance behavior of A6 is unknown when driving high resolution displays. However it has long been rumored that Apple had dual development tracks going for microprocessors. If that is real, they could easily have a high bandwidth, A6X if you will, processor ready right now for the current iPad.
There is a significant disparity in performance needs when it comes to iPad and iPhone so I have a degree of confidence that an A6 derived processoris ready right now. The only question is this, will Apple bump the iPad significantly next week or just tweak it. Due to the Microsoft thing I think Apple will be more agressive than they have been in the past. They will do everything possible to make all of MS tablets look bad.
I don't think my opinion is baseless here, Apple has publicly stated many times that they have no intentions of making the mistakes of the past. That might upset a few people that see security in predictability but you never want to be predictable with respect to the competition. Frankly I agree with managements attitude, this is Apples game to loose, they could repeat the horror of the past or try to keep as much market share as they can. Current market share numbers will change but I still believe they could whip MS badly with the right revision to iPad and an agressive design of iPad Mini.
Very interesting.
I just hope that Foxconn and the Chinese factories will be ready for this push.
I think one thing people need to remember is that Apple can put any SoC they want into this device. So it could be A5, A5X, A6, basically anything that fits the task at hand. As far as iPad 3, well that at the very least should get a die shrunk processor. The performance behavior of A6 is unknown when driving high resolution displays. However it has long been rumored that Apple had dual development tracks going for microprocessors. If that is real, they could easily have a high bandwidth, A6X if you will, processor ready right now for the current iPad.
There is a significant disparity in performance needs when it comes to iPad and iPhone so I have a degree of confidence that an A6 derived processoris ready right now. The only question is this, will Apple bump the iPad significantly next week or just tweak it. Due to the Microsoft thing I think Apple will be more agressive than they have been in the past. They will do everything possible to make all of MS tablets look bad.
I don't think my opinion is baseless here, Apple has publicly stated many times that they have no intentions of making the mistakes of the past. That might upset a few people that see security in predictability but you never want to be predictable with respect to the competition. Frankly I agree with managements attitude, this is Apples game to loose, they could repeat the horror of the past or try to keep as much market share as they can. Current market share numbers will change but I still believe they could whip MS badly with the right revision to iPad and an agressive design of iPad Mini.
Sorry that I couldn't help myself... it's "lose"... game to lose, not loose.
When the iPhone 5 and iPod touch were introduced, there was a glitch on the Dutch AppleStore. It said iPad from EUR319. This would correspond with a US price of $299.
I made a screen shot when the glitch occurred on September 12:
On September 12, Dutch price to US price for iPod touch, for example, was EUR 209 against $199. For iPod Nano, it was EUR 169 against $149. For iPod Classic, it was EUR 259 against $249.
Sorry that I couldn't help myself... it's "lose"... game to lose, not loose.
English causes too many people to lose their way with these "o" words, not just Wizard69.
Someone posted a mnemonic like this a while back: "If your belt is too loose you're going to lose your pants."
Ough
The baker that went into the forrest to get wood for his ovens...
Being thorough, he thought to gather fallen branches as he walked through the woods -- but that stirred up the dust and made him cough, Then he tried cutting boughs from trees -- but that made his doughy hands rough... Enough! I'm through... All this gives me the hiccoughs.
So here's what confuses me about the talk of a $299 iPad mini -- Apple just released the new iPod touch, and the starting price -- $299. I can't see Apple pricing the iPad mini at the same starting point as the iPod touch. Consumers would be left with the choice between a $299 iPod or a $299 iPad? Hmmmmm... I'm guessing $349 for the start point, even at 16GB.
Gruber effectively addresses your point without claiming to know what Apple will ultimately price the product. There is a difference between making a smaller product and a miniature product. Smaller products are generally associated with being cheaper versions of a product whereas miniature products generally carry a premium. He explains it better than I do.
The assumption of many people is that because the iPod Touch is theoretically smaller than the announced iPad Mini, you would pay less for the iPod Touch when in fact for most products you pay more for miniaturization. His thinking is the iPad Mini will be a cheaper version of the iPad, whereas the iPod Touch is a miniature version.
He guesses Apple could even undercut the price of the iPod Touch and price the iPad Mini at $249 (without guessing it will do that). People who want an iPod Touch generally want it because it will fit in one's pocket. They aren't going to buy an iPad Mini instead. At the end of the day, a sale of any Apple product at the expense of a competitor product is a sale and that is what Apple cares about.
I for one think Apple will price the iPad Mini slightly higher than the iPod Touch. Apple isn't going to sacrifice margins terribly. If Apple aggressively prices the product it will bring the cost of building the product down and/or limit features. It will build something into the product that will at least make you think about getting the more expensive version.
Gruber effectively addresses your point without claiming to know what Apple will ultimately price the product. There is a difference between making a smaller product and a miniature product. Smaller products are generally associated with being cheaper versions of a product whereas miniature products generally carry a premium. He explains it better than I do.
The assumption of many people is that because the iPod Touch is theoretically smaller than the announced iPad Mini, you would pay less for the iPod Touch when in fact for most products you pay more for miniaturization. His thinking is the iPad Mini will be a cheaper version of the iPad, whereas the iPod Touch is a miniature version.
He guesses Apple could even undercut the price of the iPod Touch and price the iPad Mini at $249 (without guessing it will do that). People who want an iPod Touch generally want it because it will fit in one's pocket. They aren't going to buy an iPod Mini instead. At the end of the day, a sale of any Apple product at the expense of a competitor product is a sale and that is what Apple cares about.
I for one think Apple will price the iPad Mini slightly higher than the iPod Touch. Apple isn't going to sacrifice margins terribly. If Apple aggressively prices the product it will bring the cost of building the product down and/or limit features. It will build something into the product that will at least make you think about getting the more expensive version.
Well I one believe Gruber will be eating crow on this one. His miniature pricing conveniently fits his theory, but what about MacBook Air and Pros. You certainly don't pay a premium for an 11" MBA. If the iPad Mini lands anywhere near $249, I'll be shocked. The only possibility is having a cheap 8gb model for education.
When the iPhone 5 and iPod touch were introduced, there was a glitch on the Dutch AppleStore. It said iPad from EUR319. This would correspond with a US price of $299.
Apple does not "correspond" prices. It's the same numbers everywhere, be it $ or £ or œ?´®®†¥¨¨ˆ¡™£¢¢?§§¶••ªƒç˜å??ç
That was me trying to find the Euro symbol and somehow hitting some combination that submits posts.
I still think we could see a $299 starting price point. $329 or $350 would be a lot harder sell unless it has the latest processor, front/rear cameras, retina, Siri. And nobody is expecting all that. An 8" iPad 2 staring at over $300, with Google coming out a few days later and announcing a 7" Nexus with twice the storage for $250 would be a tougher sell for Apple. Can they really charge $50-$70 more for the "ecosystem"?
I still think we could see a $299 starting price point. $329 or $350 would be a lot harder sell unless it has the latest processor, front/rear cameras, retina, Siri. And nobody is expecting all that. An 8" iPad 2 staring at over $300, with Google coming out a few days later and announcing a 7" Nexus with twice the storage for $250 would be a tougher sell for Apple. Can they really charge $50-$70 more for the "ecosystem"?
If Apple has a starting price for $299 (16GB) for the iPad that means their 32GB version would be $399. If Google's 32GB Nexus is being introduced for $250, that would mean Apple is charging $149 more for their ecosystem. Since the debut of Jelly Bean, Google's ecosystem has been getting better so that could be a tough sell. I don't personally care for Google's ecosystem but many out there do.
If Apple has a starting price for $299 (16GB) for the iPad that means their 32GB version would be $399. If Google's 32GB Nexus is being introduced for $250, that would mean Apple is charging $149 more for their ecosystem. Since the debut of Jelly Bean, Google's ecosystem has been getting better so that could be a tough sell. I don't personally care for Google's ecosystem but many out there do.
That's assuming they would charge $100 more for each bmp in storage. This might be one area where what they've done in the past, what they typically do won't work. I don't use Android myself, but the Nexus tablet got great reviews and I know a few people who have it and like it a lot. There is competition in the sub 10" space. If I were Apple I'd rather take a hit on margins than lose a sale altogether. Unless they don't feel any threat from Amazon or Google. But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?
I find all this research for a product that isn't even out absolutely ridiculous. It's only necessary for this people to justify their work, and for sites like AI to have something to talk about.
If I were Apple I'd rather take a hit on margins than lose a sale altogether. Unless they don't feel any threat from Amazon or Google. But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?
Good point. I suspect they do feel some heat from the competition. Both Google and Amazon are taking a hit on each sale of their tablets.
(However, I think much of this is Apple's ongoing nuclear war on Google.)
There's a fine line Apple has to tread. It needs to price this thing in between the low end bottom feeders while staying true to a quality premium brand.
The challenge also is that to many, a cheaper decently built Nexus 7 is good enough.
This is why I think Apple will position this iPad mini as the tablet for reading books. Lightweight, thin and has iBooks (not simple pdfs).
If iBooks takes off the way iTunes did, it would be game over for the competition.
Unless they don't feel any threat from Amazon or Google. But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?
Did Apple feel a threat when the offered the iPod Shuffle? At the time the device was a surprise because the competition was trying to best Apple with PMPs that had more and more features than the iPod. Sometimes it's just trying to close off any holes when you see an opportunity. How about with the original iPad? Seems to me it was a synergy of tech that made it the right time and they absolutely no competition to deal with.
That isn't to say Apple doesn't see the 7" tablet as a threat but an 8" tablet (40% more screen real estate) that is 50% more expensive than the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire isn't proof that they feel threatened either. It's always been expected that Apple will expand their tablet offerings when it was feasible for them to do so.
That's assuming they would charge $100 more for each bmp in storage. This might be one area where what they've done in the past, what they typically do won't work. I don't use Android myself, but the Nexus tablet got great reviews and I know a few people who have it and like it a lot. There is competition in the sub 10" space. If I were Apple I'd rather take a hit on margins than lose a sale altogether. Unless they don't feel any threat from Amazon or Google. But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?
"But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?"
The biggest reason I would say is there's a growing market for people who want a tablet that's thin / light to carry around everywhere they go as opposed to a fulls-size (10"+) tablet.
And as you stated, there is definitely a growing threat in the sub-10" tablet space as well. Not only that, come end of this month, there will also be a threat in the full-size tablet space as well with MS Surface officially going on sale in less than a week and a rumor that Google will be announcing a Nexus 10, 10.1" tablet at their event on October 29th.
"But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?"
The biggest reason I would say is there's a growing market for people who want a tablet that's thin / light to carry around everywhere they go as opposed to a fulls-size (10"+) tablet.
And as you stated, there is definitely a growing threat in the sub-10" tablet space as well. Not only that, come end of this month, there will also be a threat in the full-size tablet space as well with MS Surface officially going on sale in less than a week and a rumor that Google will be announcing a Nexus 10, 10.1" tablet at their event on October 29th.
1) I think the Kindle Fire HD will be a bigger threat to iPad sales than the MS Surface.
2) I'd think a 2560x1600 resolution display on an Android tablet will absolute crap. I think it will run slow, have relatively poor battery life, and have almost nothing optimize for that high density display. I think it'll just be a "me too" release.
The current iPad 3 is a power hog and I'd expect Apple to do anything they can to cut back its consumption. If I read things right the A6 is a lower power consumption device with higher performance as a plus. Also the newer integrated displays use less power then the iPad 3 double light-bar design.
Now since Microsoft loves to skate to where the puck had been, now, on the eve of Microsoft's big Surface release, is a great time to move the puck again. The newer iPad 3 with faster graphics, longer battery life and lighter weight would blow three holes in the bow of the S. S. Ballmer before it can even leave port.
...and this isn't even taking in account what surprises we may see from Lion and Mountain Lion...
Screw the iPad mini....Lions can spray something 7-10 feet behind them??? This is new information to me.
Comments
There is a significant disparity in performance needs when it comes to iPad and iPhone so I have a degree of confidence that an A6 derived processoris ready right now. The only question is this, will Apple bump the iPad significantly next week or just tweak it. Due to the Microsoft thing I think Apple will be more agressive than they have been in the past. They will do everything possible to make all of MS tablets look bad.
I don't think my opinion is baseless here, Apple has publicly stated many times that they have no intentions of making the mistakes of the past. That might upset a few people that see security in predictability but you never want to be predictable with respect to the competition. Frankly I agree with managements attitude, this is Apples game to loose, they could repeat the horror of the past or try to keep as much market share as they can. Current market share numbers will change but I still believe they could whip MS badly with the right revision to iPad and an agressive design of iPad Mini.
This^
I don't know if Apple has the capability to move now…. But if they could bring the iPad 3's processing power into line with its pixel density they could set the standard for the next 1-2 years…
And the next two years may be critical for high-end tablets – who buys them, who manufactures the CPUs, and the jobs they are asked to do.
You are right -- this is Apple's game to lose... and timing may be the determining factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I think one thing people need to remember is that Apple can put any SoC they want into this device. So it could be A5, A5X, A6, basically anything that fits the task at hand. As far as iPad 3, well that at the very least should get a die shrunk processor. The performance behavior of A6 is unknown when driving high resolution displays. However it has long been rumored that Apple had dual development tracks going for microprocessors. If that is real, they could easily have a high bandwidth, A6X if you will, processor ready right now for the current iPad.
There is a significant disparity in performance needs when it comes to iPad and iPhone so I have a degree of confidence that an A6 derived processoris ready right now. The only question is this, will Apple bump the iPad significantly next week or just tweak it. Due to the Microsoft thing I think Apple will be more agressive than they have been in the past. They will do everything possible to make all of MS tablets look bad.
I don't think my opinion is baseless here, Apple has publicly stated many times that they have no intentions of making the mistakes of the past. That might upset a few people that see security in predictability but you never want to be predictable with respect to the competition. Frankly I agree with managements attitude, this is Apples game to loose, they could repeat the horror of the past or try to keep as much market share as they can. Current market share numbers will change but I still believe they could whip MS badly with the right revision to iPad and an agressive design of iPad Mini.
Very interesting.
I just hope that Foxconn and the Chinese factories will be ready for this push.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I think one thing people need to remember is that Apple can put any SoC they want into this device. So it could be A5, A5X, A6, basically anything that fits the task at hand. As far as iPad 3, well that at the very least should get a die shrunk processor. The performance behavior of A6 is unknown when driving high resolution displays. However it has long been rumored that Apple had dual development tracks going for microprocessors. If that is real, they could easily have a high bandwidth, A6X if you will, processor ready right now for the current iPad.
There is a significant disparity in performance needs when it comes to iPad and iPhone so I have a degree of confidence that an A6 derived processoris ready right now. The only question is this, will Apple bump the iPad significantly next week or just tweak it. Due to the Microsoft thing I think Apple will be more agressive than they have been in the past. They will do everything possible to make all of MS tablets look bad.
I don't think my opinion is baseless here, Apple has publicly stated many times that they have no intentions of making the mistakes of the past. That might upset a few people that see security in predictability but you never want to be predictable with respect to the competition. Frankly I agree with managements attitude, this is Apples game to loose, they could repeat the horror of the past or try to keep as much market share as they can. Current market share numbers will change but I still believe they could whip MS badly with the right revision to iPad and an agressive design of iPad Mini.
Sorry that I couldn't help myself... it's "lose"... game to lose, not loose.
When the iPhone 5 and iPod touch were introduced, there was a glitch on the Dutch AppleStore. It said iPad from EUR319. This would correspond with a US price of $299.
I made a screen shot when the glitch occurred on September 12:
[IMG]http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=371038&stc=1&d=1350810559[/IMG]
On September 12, Dutch price to US price for iPod touch, for example, was EUR 209 against $199. For iPod Nano, it was EUR 169 against $149. For iPod Classic, it was EUR 259 against $249.
So iPad mini would correspond with $299.
English causes too many people to lose their way with these "o" words, not just Wizard69.
Someone posted a mnemonic like this a while back: "If your belt is too loose you're going to lose your pants."
Ough
The baker that went into the forrest to get wood for his ovens...
Being thorough, he thought to gather fallen branches as he walked through the woods -- but that stirred up the dust and made him cough, Then he tried cutting boughs from trees -- but that made his doughy hands rough... Enough! I'm through... All this gives me the hiccoughs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeypk07
So here's what confuses me about the talk of a $299 iPad mini -- Apple just released the new iPod touch, and the starting price -- $299. I can't see Apple pricing the iPad mini at the same starting point as the iPod touch. Consumers would be left with the choice between a $299 iPod or a $299 iPad? Hmmmmm... I'm guessing $349 for the start point, even at 16GB.
Gruber effectively addresses your point without claiming to know what Apple will ultimately price the product. There is a difference between making a smaller product and a miniature product. Smaller products are generally associated with being cheaper versions of a product whereas miniature products generally carry a premium. He explains it better than I do.
The assumption of many people is that because the iPod Touch is theoretically smaller than the announced iPad Mini, you would pay less for the iPod Touch when in fact for most products you pay more for miniaturization. His thinking is the iPad Mini will be a cheaper version of the iPad, whereas the iPod Touch is a miniature version.
He guesses Apple could even undercut the price of the iPod Touch and price the iPad Mini at $249 (without guessing it will do that). People who want an iPod Touch generally want it because it will fit in one's pocket. They aren't going to buy an iPad Mini instead. At the end of the day, a sale of any Apple product at the expense of a competitor product is a sale and that is what Apple cares about.
I for one think Apple will price the iPad Mini slightly higher than the iPod Touch. Apple isn't going to sacrifice margins terribly. If Apple aggressively prices the product it will bring the cost of building the product down and/or limit features. It will build something into the product that will at least make you think about getting the more expensive version.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Gruber effectively addresses your point without claiming to know what Apple will ultimately price the product. There is a difference between making a smaller product and a miniature product. Smaller products are generally associated with being cheaper versions of a product whereas miniature products generally carry a premium. He explains it better than I do.
The assumption of many people is that because the iPod Touch is theoretically smaller than the announced iPad Mini, you would pay less for the iPod Touch when in fact for most products you pay more for miniaturization. His thinking is the iPad Mini will be a cheaper version of the iPad, whereas the iPod Touch is a miniature version.
He guesses Apple could even undercut the price of the iPod Touch and price the iPad Mini at $249 (without guessing it will do that). People who want an iPod Touch generally want it because it will fit in one's pocket. They aren't going to buy an iPod Mini instead. At the end of the day, a sale of any Apple product at the expense of a competitor product is a sale and that is what Apple cares about.
I for one think Apple will price the iPad Mini slightly higher than the iPod Touch. Apple isn't going to sacrifice margins terribly. If Apple aggressively prices the product it will bring the cost of building the product down and/or limit features. It will build something into the product that will at least make you think about getting the more expensive version.
Well I one believe Gruber will be eating crow on this one. His miniature pricing conveniently fits his theory, but what about MacBook Air and Pros. You certainly don't pay a premium for an 11" MBA. If the iPad Mini lands anywhere near $249, I'll be shocked. The only possibility is having a cheap 8gb model for education.
My guess:
iPad Mini
7" non-retina display
$299 for 16gb
$349 for 32gb
vs.
iPad Touch
4" retina display
$299 for 32gb
Originally Posted by John F.
When the iPhone 5 and iPod touch were introduced, there was a glitch on the Dutch AppleStore. It said iPad from EUR319. This would correspond with a US price of $299.
Apple does not "correspond" prices. It's the same numbers everywhere, be it $ or £ or œ?´®®†¥¨¨ˆ¡™£¢¢?§§¶••ªƒç˜å??ç
That was me trying to find the Euro symbol and somehow hitting some combination that submits posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
I still think we could see a $299 starting price point. $329 or $350 would be a lot harder sell unless it has the latest processor, front/rear cameras, retina, Siri. And nobody is expecting all that. An 8" iPad 2 staring at over $300, with Google coming out a few days later and announcing a 7" Nexus with twice the storage for $250 would be a tougher sell for Apple. Can they really charge $50-$70 more for the "ecosystem"?
If Apple has a starting price for $299 (16GB) for the iPad that means their 32GB version would be $399. If Google's 32GB Nexus is being introduced for $250, that would mean Apple is charging $149 more for their ecosystem. Since the debut of Jelly Bean, Google's ecosystem has been getting better so that could be a tough sell. I don't personally care for Google's ecosystem but many out there do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
If I were Apple I'd rather take a hit on margins than lose a sale altogether. Unless they don't feel any threat from Amazon or Google. But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?
Good point. I suspect they do feel some heat from the competition. Both Google and Amazon are taking a hit on each sale of their tablets.
(However, I think much of this is Apple's ongoing nuclear war on Google.)
There's a fine line Apple has to tread. It needs to price this thing in between the low end bottom feeders while staying true to a quality premium brand.
The challenge also is that to many, a cheaper decently built Nexus 7 is good enough.
This is why I think Apple will position this iPad mini as the tablet for reading books. Lightweight, thin and has iBooks (not simple pdfs).
If iBooks takes off the way iTunes did, it would be game over for the competition.
Did Apple feel a threat when the offered the iPod Shuffle? At the time the device was a surprise because the competition was trying to best Apple with PMPs that had more and more features than the iPod. Sometimes it's just trying to close off any holes when you see an opportunity. How about with the original iPad? Seems to me it was a synergy of tech that made it the right time and they absolutely no competition to deal with.
That isn't to say Apple doesn't see the 7" tablet as a threat but an 8" tablet (40% more screen real estate) that is 50% more expensive than the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire isn't proof that they feel threatened either. It's always been expected that Apple will expand their tablet offerings when it was feasible for them to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
That's assuming they would charge $100 more for each bmp in storage. This might be one area where what they've done in the past, what they typically do won't work. I don't use Android myself, but the Nexus tablet got great reviews and I know a few people who have it and like it a lot. There is competition in the sub 10" space. If I were Apple I'd rather take a hit on margins than lose a sale altogether. Unless they don't feel any threat from Amazon or Google. But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?
"But if that was the case then why do a smaller iPad in the first place?"
The biggest reason I would say is there's a growing market for people who want a tablet that's thin / light to carry around everywhere they go as opposed to a fulls-size (10"+) tablet.
And as you stated, there is definitely a growing threat in the sub-10" tablet space as well. Not only that, come end of this month, there will also be a threat in the full-size tablet space as well with MS Surface officially going on sale in less than a week and a rumor that Google will be announcing a Nexus 10, 10.1" tablet at their event on October 29th.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/21/3533548/google-samsung-nexus-10-android-4-2-rumor (that's a 10.1" tablet with a 16:10 aspect ratio, 2560x1600 resolution - great than iPad Retina)
1) I think the Kindle Fire HD will be a bigger threat to iPad sales than the MS Surface.
2) I'd think a 2560x1600 resolution display on an Android tablet will absolute crap. I think it will run slow, have relatively poor battery life, and have almost nothing optimize for that high density display. I think it'll just be a "me too" release.
The entry 16 GB iPad Mini will sell for $249...
Because it is smaller than... and bigger than...
It should cost less than... and more than...
And $249 is half of $499!
Screw the iPad mini....Lions can spray something 7-10 feet behind them??? This is new information to me.