you know, i put the word "IF" in caps to try to make it really clear to folks like you who keep putting their words in others' mouths. "IF" means "if," get it? i expect Apple products will get a 6 month refresh sometimes, IF a real upgrade is ready to deploy - so not necessarily every time. got it?
IF pigs fly.
Then you said a new Mini is Spring in likely and two/year updates from now on could be the norm.
Quote:
i think a V.2 mini in the Spring is even more likely. we might see two incremental iPad updates per year from now on
One special case incident and you see it ready to move to twice/year from now on.
That's absurd. Apple can barely keep up with annual releases. It is hard enough to come up with enough advancement for a yearly model and actually build them all into a cohesive product in that timeframe. Look at the 4s. 16 months between releases and loads of complaints that it wasn't much of an advancement. This has nothing to do with contracts. That delay hurt sales a lot. One year is barely enough time to build/debug/test/launch a product, let alone 6 months.
2/year release become normal is ridiculous. It was a one time anomaly to synch up with a new product.
My bet would be that the Mini becomes the #1 selling tablet, ahead of the 9.7" versions. I think Apple prepared for that as well, which is why those extra $30 over $299 were important. If Mini significantly cannibalizes 9.7" sales it will shrink both iPad ASP and iPad margins. From a business perspective, they want to avoid collapsing margins too much.
Yes, this is true but better that Apple does this than Amazon or Google.
I think that they'll get a good number of upsells to the 32GB model + LTE. That will help both ASP and margins.
The A5 is now 3 generations behind other iPads, the iOS UI is more than dated at this point, the display is not even close to the resolution/quality of other 7 to 8 inch tablet devices (or even most modern smartphones) and the price is 'a bit much' for anything but the base model, especially the US $130.00 additional just for GPS/Cellular radios.
When it comes down to it, the iPad Mini is just another variation on the same 5 year-old iOS theme, which for many will be enough, but it does beg the question: Is Apple Just Running Out of New Ideas?
This is a silly argument. The A5 was released in 2011. It is used to power the larger and still for sale iPad 2. Further, the Tegra chip used to power the Nexus Tablets was also released in 2011. What should matter is performance. The benchmarks for the iPad Mini show it performs the same as the iPad 3. That is pretty impressive. Reviewers have mentioned the performance is excellent. It doesn't need the A6 (which would bring the cost up) because it has a smaller screen to power.
As for screen resolution, the only people that that will be an issue for is people who have used an iPad 3 or other retina display device. The rest of the market will find no issue with the display quality, which is better than the still selling iPad 2. Moreover, the screen has been improved. Without providing the same resolution as the iPhone 5, it uses the same technology. It is sharper, brighter, and the pixels closer to the surface than the iPad 2.
Some reviewers are going further. It sounds like some of them prefer the Mini over the iPad as their primary tablet, even if they had to get used to the lower screen resolution. That's a pretty compelling compliment. But it also makes you wonder how, after allegedly extensive research, Apple decided 9.7" was the optimal size. Regardless, these reviews prove Apple right, once again.
Both Pogue and Gruber point out had they not been accustomed to the Retina Display, the display wouldn't be an issue at all. It is better than the iPad 2.
Then you said a new Mini is Spring in likely and two/year updates from now on could be the norm.
you need to go to bonehead English class. yes, i think a V2 mini is "likely" next spring, because a retina screen for it (@ 326 dpi like the iPhone) could be ready by then. and twice annual updates for the iPads "could" become routine. but "likely" does not = "certain," and "could" does not = "will." stop being so argumentative, and stop spinning my words your way.
you need to go to bonehead English class. yes, i think a V2 mini is "likely" next spring, because a retina screen for it (@ 326 dpi like the iPhone) could be ready by then. and twice annual updates for the iPads "could" become routine. but "likely" does not = "certain," and "could" does not = "will." stop being so argumentative, and stop spinning my words your way.
Likely is also not 50:50, it indicates that you have an expectation it will happen. Which would be unprecedented for a new Apple product.
This is nothing more than wishful thinking. It will be ~1Year before anything happens with the Mini and it might not get a Retina screen in it's first upgrade.
It's the same thing as when everyone was thinking iPad 2 woudl have a retina screen. People let wishful thinking cloud their reason.
Come talk to me when when iOS devices no longer rule Consumer Satisfaction figures with an iron fist year after year, troll.
True, but. You don't wait for customers to stop being satisfied before you start acting. You do all you can to keep them satisfied. Otherwise, you risk to end up like RIM, Nokia... I'm pretty sure they were feeling very safe back in 2007.
Apple is acting, but. Is it enough? Time will tell.
It depends on whether Apple wants to go quad core A15 vs 64 bit and presumably better ipc and remain dual core. How many true quad core iOS apps are there?
I'd guess there are none that specifically support it but since GCD has been in iOS since v4.0 wouldn't the OS just handle that in the background? I can see it being nothing mroe than a few lines of code to add support, if any.
Apple has the ARM roadmap way ahead of any public announcements and they don't need to be a real Cortex A50, just "A50 class" and implement 64 bit ARMv8 instructions. 64 bit ARMv8 was announced back in 2010 or 2011 (if not earlier) and work started in 2007.
I wouldn't doubt if Apple has 64-bit planned out for iOS since the beginning.
I bet you $10 to your (preferably online) charity of choice that the A7 will be 64 bit ARMv8.
That's likely the next iPhone ASIC so you're predicting in less than a year we'll see 64-bit in the A7. I'll take that bet.
Likely is also not 50:50, it indicates that you have an expectation it will happen. Which would be unprecedented for a new Apple product.
This is nothing more than wishful thinking. It will be ~1Year before anything happens with the Mini and it might not get a Retina screen in it's first upgrade.
It's the same thing as when everyone was thinking iPad 2 woudl have a retina screen. People let wishful thinking cloud their reason.
correct. likely for me means about 2 chances out of 3. but wrong, the iPad 4 IS the precedent. my thought is that Cook will adopt a strategy of more frequent updates for the iPad in particular because of the much-increased competition. IF they have a significant upgrade ready to go in six months - the screen being the #1 issue for almost every review - i don't know why they would hold it back. Apple already has the 326 dpi screen being manufactured for the iPhone, so the only issue is scaling it up in size at volume production for the mini at acceptable cost. yes, this will be different than the Jobs era. we are finally seeing the differences now - the iPad 4 release timing was certainly Cook's decision. and then there is yesterday's huge management shake-up. i think it is also likely we will see some major changes to iOS 7 at WWDC next spring, thanks to Ive now being in control instead of Forestall - also certainly Cook's decision.
given these big changes in Apple leadership this last year, i think assuming other things won't change in some major ways is very unlikely. the Jobs era really is over now. you think i engage in wishful thinking. i think you are stuck in the past.
I said unprecedented for a new Apple product. The iPad 4 is the 4th iteration. And it was a special case driven by synchronizing with a new product in the family.
Apple has never brought out a new (ie version 1) and then released version 2, six months later. So that would be unprecedented to do version 2 of the Mini in spring, no matter how much you want it to happen.
You keep using a single special case, one time event, as the basis for a potential, every 6 months upgrade fantasy. That is just silly.
Even two events wouldn't be enough for a pattern. But one is nothing more than an anomaly.
That's likely the next iPhone ASIC so you're predicting in less than a year we'll see 64-bit in the A7. I'll take that bet.
PS: I hope I lose this one.
The A4 debuted on the iPad followed by the iPhone 4 and the A5 appeared on the iPad 2 before the 4S. My guess is that the A6 was late...so if the A7 is late as well and Apple ends up on a 1.5 year CPU cycle then yah, 2014. That might lead to the iPhone 6 and iPad 5 remaining on a Cortex A15 variant...which would kinda suck. Far more annoying than giving some worthwhile charity ten bucks.
I couldn't agree more with Slurpy's comment. Some were hoping to see a $299 tag but why should the Mini sell at that price with all the quality and usability/eco-system it has?? And in the tablets market, sometimes even if you are prepared to pay more you don't necessarily get the same quality product - Samsung's all plastic Galaxy Tab 7" is the best example. Its cheap silver-painted plastic edge screams "cheap" every time you pick it up. Since Samsung loves to copy Apple, I really don't understand how they could have missed this important bit!
Some reviewers are going further. It sounds like some of them prefer the Mini over the iPad as their primary tablet, even if they had to get used to the lower screen resolution. That's a pretty compelling compliment. But it also makes you wonder how, after allegedly extensive research, Apple decided 9.7" was the optimal size. Regardless, these reviews prove Apple right, once again.
Apple decided to launch the 9.7" tablet first - and that is by far the most popular size on the market today.
I don't understand people who claim that iOS needs to be fundamentally changed. iOS is timeless. Just because YOU don't understand why the UI is infinitely better if it doesn't change doesn't mean (I HATE the "just because doesn't mean" sentence structure…) Apple needs to bow to your wishes.
Just as I don't understand people who can't understand that hardware evolves and who can't understand that there's room for two different sizes of iPads.
True, but. You don't wait for customers to stop being satisfied before you start acting. You do all you can to keep them satisfied. Otherwise, you risk to end up like RIM, Nokia... I'm pretty sure they were feeling very safe back in 2007.
Apple is acting, but. Is it enough? Time will tell.
Yes, time will tell - but it's far more likely that Apple is right. What are your credentials? What successes do you have to rival Apple's?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
you know, i put the word "IF" in caps to try to make it really clear to folks like you who keep putting their words in others' mouths. "IF" means "if," get it? i expect Apple products will get a 6 month refresh sometimes, IF a real upgrade is ready to deploy - so not necessarily every time. got it?
IF pigs fly.
Then you said a new Mini is Spring in likely and two/year updates from now on could be the norm.
Quote:
i think a V.2 mini in the Spring is even more likely. we might see two incremental iPad updates per year from now on
One special case incident and you see it ready to move to twice/year from now on.
That's absurd. Apple can barely keep up with annual releases. It is hard enough to come up with enough advancement for a yearly model and actually build them all into a cohesive product in that timeframe. Look at the 4s. 16 months between releases and loads of complaints that it wasn't much of an advancement. This has nothing to do with contracts. That delay hurt sales a lot. One year is barely enough time to build/debug/test/launch a product, let alone 6 months.
2/year release become normal is ridiculous. It was a one time anomaly to synch up with a new product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65
My bet would be that the Mini becomes the #1 selling tablet, ahead of the 9.7" versions. I think Apple prepared for that as well, which is why those extra $30 over $299 were important. If Mini significantly cannibalizes 9.7" sales it will shrink both iPad ASP and iPad margins. From a business perspective, they want to avoid collapsing margins too much.
Yes, this is true but better that Apple does this than Amazon or Google.
I think that they'll get a good number of upsells to the 32GB model + LTE. That will help both ASP and margins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
Nice tablet, but...
The A5 is now 3 generations behind other iPads, the iOS UI is more than dated at this point, the display is not even close to the resolution/quality of other 7 to 8 inch tablet devices (or even most modern smartphones) and the price is 'a bit much' for anything but the base model, especially the US $130.00 additional just for GPS/Cellular radios.
When it comes down to it, the iPad Mini is just another variation on the same 5 year-old iOS theme, which for many will be enough, but it does beg the question: Is Apple Just Running Out of New Ideas?
This is a silly argument. The A5 was released in 2011. It is used to power the larger and still for sale iPad 2. Further, the Tegra chip used to power the Nexus Tablets was also released in 2011. What should matter is performance. The benchmarks for the iPad Mini show it performs the same as the iPad 3. That is pretty impressive. Reviewers have mentioned the performance is excellent. It doesn't need the A6 (which would bring the cost up) because it has a smaller screen to power.
As for screen resolution, the only people that that will be an issue for is people who have used an iPad 3 or other retina display device. The rest of the market will find no issue with the display quality, which is better than the still selling iPad 2. Moreover, the screen has been improved. Without providing the same resolution as the iPhone 5, it uses the same technology. It is sharper, brighter, and the pixels closer to the surface than the iPad 2.
Some reviewers are going further. It sounds like some of them prefer the Mini over the iPad as their primary tablet, even if they had to get used to the lower screen resolution. That's a pretty compelling compliment. But it also makes you wonder how, after allegedly extensive research, Apple decided 9.7" was the optimal size. Regardless, these reviews prove Apple right, once again.
Both Pogue and Gruber point out had they not been accustomed to the Retina Display, the display wouldn't be an issue at all. It is better than the iPad 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65
IF pigs fly.
Then you said a new Mini is Spring in likely and two/year updates from now on could be the norm.
you need to go to bonehead English class. yes, i think a V2 mini is "likely" next spring, because a retina screen for it (@ 326 dpi like the iPhone) could be ready by then. and twice annual updates for the iPads "could" become routine. but "likely" does not = "certain," and "could" does not = "will." stop being so argumentative, and stop spinning my words your way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
you need to go to bonehead English class. yes, i think a V2 mini is "likely" next spring, because a retina screen for it (@ 326 dpi like the iPhone) could be ready by then. and twice annual updates for the iPads "could" become routine. but "likely" does not = "certain," and "could" does not = "will." stop being so argumentative, and stop spinning my words your way.
Likely is also not 50:50, it indicates that you have an expectation it will happen. Which would be unprecedented for a new Apple product.
This is nothing more than wishful thinking. It will be ~1Year before anything happens with the Mini and it might not get a Retina screen in it's first upgrade.
It's the same thing as when everyone was thinking iPad 2 woudl have a retina screen. People let wishful thinking cloud their reason.
Because... a lot of them are Apple customers as well?
Originally Posted by nikon133
Because... a lot of them are Apple customers as well?
Then they should either buy something they think they want instead or educate themselves on why they're wrong.
True, but. You don't wait for customers to stop being satisfied before you start acting. You do all you can to keep them satisfied. Otherwise, you risk to end up like RIM, Nokia... I'm pretty sure they were feeling very safe back in 2007.
Apple is acting, but. Is it enough? Time will tell.
Check this, by the way.
http://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/apple-inc-aapl-iphone-loyalty-trending-downward-26511/
And this.
http://wmpoweruser.com/q3-2012-survey-finds-windows-phones-outscore-iphone-5-in-customer-satisfaction/
Legit? Don't know. Worth some reflection? Probably.
That is not a bad answer, though I was joking. Apple trolls are trolling under others' bridges anyway.
I'd guess there are none that specifically support it but since GCD has been in iOS since v4.0 wouldn't the OS just handle that in the background? I can see it being nothing mroe than a few lines of code to add support, if any.
I wouldn't doubt if Apple has 64-bit planned out for iOS since the beginning.
That's likely the next iPhone ASIC so you're predicting in less than a year we'll see 64-bit in the A7. I'll take that bet.
PS: I hope I lose this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65
Likely is also not 50:50, it indicates that you have an expectation it will happen. Which would be unprecedented for a new Apple product.
This is nothing more than wishful thinking. It will be ~1Year before anything happens with the Mini and it might not get a Retina screen in it's first upgrade.
It's the same thing as when everyone was thinking iPad 2 woudl have a retina screen. People let wishful thinking cloud their reason.
correct. likely for me means about 2 chances out of 3. but wrong, the iPad 4 IS the precedent. my thought is that Cook will adopt a strategy of more frequent updates for the iPad in particular because of the much-increased competition. IF they have a significant upgrade ready to go in six months - the screen being the #1 issue for almost every review - i don't know why they would hold it back. Apple already has the 326 dpi screen being manufactured for the iPhone, so the only issue is scaling it up in size at volume production for the mini at acceptable cost. yes, this will be different than the Jobs era. we are finally seeing the differences now - the iPad 4 release timing was certainly Cook's decision. and then there is yesterday's huge management shake-up. i think it is also likely we will see some major changes to iOS 7 at WWDC next spring, thanks to Ive now being in control instead of Forestall - also certainly Cook's decision.
given these big changes in Apple leadership this last year, i think assuming other things won't change in some major ways is very unlikely. the Jobs era really is over now. you think i engage in wishful thinking. i think you are stuck in the past.
I said unprecedented for a new Apple product. The iPad 4 is the 4th iteration. And it was a special case driven by synchronizing with a new product in the family.
Apple has never brought out a new (ie version 1) and then released version 2, six months later. So that would be unprecedented to do version 2 of the Mini in spring, no matter how much you want it to happen.
You keep using a single special case, one time event, as the basis for a potential, every 6 months upgrade fantasy. That is just silly.
Even two events wouldn't be enough for a pattern. But one is nothing more than an anomaly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That's likely the next iPhone ASIC so you're predicting in less than a year we'll see 64-bit in the A7. I'll take that bet.
PS: I hope I lose this one.
The A4 debuted on the iPad followed by the iPhone 4 and the A5 appeared on the iPad 2 before the 4S. My guess is that the A6 was late...so if the A7 is late as well and Apple ends up on a 1.5 year CPU cycle then yah, 2014. That might lead to the iPhone 6 and iPad 5 remaining on a Cortex A15 variant...which would kinda suck. Far more annoying than giving some worthwhile charity ten bucks.
Now all we have to do is remember this next year.
Originally Posted by philky
And in the tablets market, sometimes even if you are prepared to pay more you don't necessarily get the same quality product
There's no tablet market. There's an iPad market. People know they pay for quality.
Bet you can't do this:
Apple decided to launch the 9.7" tablet first - and that is by far the most popular size on the market today.
Just as I don't understand people who can't understand that hardware evolves and who can't understand that there's room for two different sizes of iPads.
Yes, time will tell - but it's far more likely that Apple is right. What are your credentials? What successes do you have to rival Apple's?