The iPad mini is essentially a large iPod Touch running iPad software, and will replace it as early as next Summer.
Prediction:
Apple will continue offering the current 5th gen. iPod Touch for $200 after the next iDevice product cycle upgrade until it sells out. Then it will be dead. Long live the Touch.
The iPad mini will drop to $300 with only a processor upgrade, filling the void left by the Touch. After the Touch is discontinued, the mini 2 will drop to the $200 price point after the next refresh and the 3rd gen retina mini assumes the $300 price point.
The iPad 2 will be replaced by the current iPad (4) at $400 as the new iPad (5) takes the top spot.
The iPhone will be the last device left running the small screen version of iOS, and why shouldn't it be? If people really are clamoring for a more mobile iPad, then the Touch will be redundant. At least until the mini is able to make phone calls, the iPhone is safe. However, I wouldn't rule out people buying an LTE mini and using it with VOIP apps as a traditional cell phone replacement. Maybe we have it backwards and they will keep their full-sized iPads and get rid of their iPhone instead!
Product snapshot circa Summer 2014:
IPod Suffle (6) -- $50
IPod Nano (9) -- $100
IPad mini (2) -- $200
iPad mini retina -- $300
iPad (5) -- $400
iPad (6) -- $500
iPhone (8) -- $600 (unlocked)
Totally wrong and still in dreamworld that thought the Mini would be $250 to start with.
18 months to 24 months from now and you will likely see this:
iPod Touch (16:9) 16 GB $199
iPad Mini 16GB $299
iPad Mini Retina 16GB $399
iPad Retina Full size 16GB $499
Perfect $100 increments from pocket size regular to full size Retina.
iPad 2 will be retired (soon) and they won't keep old models of the full size iPad in the lineup. They only reason the IPad 2 dragged on was to supply a cheaper non-retina model, which won't matter anymore with the above lineup.
Totally wrong and still in dreamworld that thought the Mini would be $250 to start with.
18 months to 24 months from now and you will likely see this:
iPod Touch (16:9) 16 GB $199
iPad Mini 16GB $299
iPad Mini Retina 16GB $399
iPad Retina Full size 16GB $499
Perfect $100 increments from pocket size regular to full size Retina.
iPad 2 will be retired (soon) and they won't keep old models of the full size iPad in the lineup. They only reason the IPad 2 dragged on was to supply a cheaper non-retina model, which won't matter anymore with the above lineup.
I don't see them adding Retina to the iPad mini until it will fit in with the current cost structure. Also, since they now have multiple models filling all price points, I don't see them continuing with also selling last year's models of each product either.
For that reason I think it really unlikely that you will see the mini broken out into "regular" and "Retina" types next year. It's far more likely that the mini will quickly move to Retina displays so the entire line is Retina. They will offer them at the same price point and only drop prices (if ever) after that.
Next year's iPad lineup seems more likely to be exactly the same as this year's in terms of price and size offerings with the exception of the iPad 2 being dropped entirely.
I just saw the iPad mini for the first time today at the Apple store in San Francisco. Absolutely gorgeous piece of engineering. It was interesting lookng at the crowd. The iPad4 table was sparse but the iPad mini had all the action. Was quite intrigued by it.
Apple is going to sell truckloads of these. I really wanted to see what the big deal was with the screens. It's not a retina, but it is still far better than the iPad2. The text was sharper and smoother due to the higher PPI. I had zero problem with the text.
Ignore the whining from the iHaters, trolls, and tech-heads that think they know what's best.
If it weren't for me buying the iPad3 a few months ago, I definitely would have the mini as my next tablet. The form factor/weight is just that nice. Put the mini next to any Android garbage out there and you'll immediately see where the money goes.
Android sheep should be ashamed of themselves for spewing downright lies and having laughably low-to-no standards.
Out of all the criticisms, my biggest complaint is that the 32 GB should be more like $70 more than the 16GB. Anything more is a ripoff....this coming from an Apple Fan/shareholder. It's a small thing, but when you think about it, the most desired size is 32GB, Apple knows this and is willing to piss off customers just to make a few extra dollars.
64GB at $100 more than the 32GB is acceptable.
I've been banging on this perception of ripoff for memory for a while now. It is not just a matter of the cost of the parts!
Each memory differentiation costs money in parts inventory tracking, logistics and production, and later in inventory and sales.There have to be separate production lines for each memory model, and this is multiplied by the connectivity options and (probably) by colors. Each line requires new factory space and trained shifts of workers. And so on.
Unless you can cost all that out and present us with an analysis you have no business assuming it's a ripoff.
Totally wrong and still in dreamworld that thought the Mini would be $250 to start with.
18 months to 24 months from now and you will likely see this:
iPod Touch (16:9) 16 GB $199
iPad Mini 16GB $299
iPad Mini Retina 16GB $399
iPad Retina Full size 16GB $499
Perfect $100 increments from pocket size regular to full size Retina.
iPad 2 will be retired (soon) and they won't keep old models of the full size iPad in the lineup. They only reason the IPad 2 dragged on was to supply a cheaper non-retina model, which won't matter anymore with the above lineup.
I don't see them adding Retina to the iPad mini until it will fit in with the current cost structure. Also, since they now have multiple models filling all price points, I don't see them continuing with also selling last year's models of each product either.
For that reason I think it really unlikely that you will see the mini broken out into "regular" and "Retina" types next year. It's far more likely that the mini will quickly move to Retina displays so the entire line is Retina. They will offer them at the same price point and only drop prices (if ever) after that.
Next year's iPad lineup seems more likely to be exactly the same as this year's in terms of price and size offerings with the exception of the iPad 2 being dropped entirely.
While there are no certainties.
I think it extremely probable that when the Retina Mini joins the lineup, the regular mini will stay and fall in price. It will always be less expensive to build and it will likely stay as the anchor of the iPad lineup for years to come.
Also, the best way the Retina Mini fall in price to meet to current retail is to actually build it even at a higher price, because initially that screen is going to cost a lot and Apple will want to charge a lot to maintain margins. Only real production in large numbers will get it's price down eventually.
It all points to a Retina Mini Moving up in price co-existing with regular Mini moving down in price.
Though we have to wait at least a year to find out I am right.
Out of all the criticisms, my biggest complaint is that the 32 GB should be more like $70 more than the 16GB. Anything more is a ripoff....this coming from an Apple Fan/shareholder. It's a small thing, but when you think about it, the most desired size is 32GB, Apple knows this and is willing to piss off customers just to make a few extra dollars.
64GB at $100 more than the 32GB is acceptable.
But it is the same "ripoff" that saintly Google charges on the Nexus 10. $399 16GB, $499 32GB.
This isn't to rip you off. It is because the bottom end products are somewhat loss leaders, while the upper models beef up the margin.
Do you think you would rather pay $50 delta instead. So is this:
16GB $349, $32GB $399
Better than:
16GB $299, $32GB $399
Those big jumps in memory margin, help keep the base model at lower price.
There is a problem, the hardware and price. If you are going for premium sell a iPad Mini Retina & with A6 chip. If you will go with non retina and A5(which the A6X makes obsolete) then don't ask 329$ (premium amount compare to the competition). A lot of people will be disappointed with the mini IMHO. Sure next year they will upgraded but it will still be outdated when new top of the line iPad is release...
That being said it will sell millions and normal people wont realize its under power until next year.
Except you are uninformed. According to the recently releases third party benchmarks, the iPad Mini beats out the just released six months ago iPad 3 in terms of performance. You know the one people were perfectly happy with and weren't expecting to be updated until six months from now? Moreover, unlike the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD (again third party reviews), you aren't going to experience any performance lag.
According to Apple, 48 percent of weekend buyers of the Mini never bought a tablet before. These people aren't going to be unhappy with the lack of a retina display because they never used a tablet with a retina display. Moreover, the iPad Mini's display is better than the iPad 2's display that Apple is still selling a lot of.
Further, people like you claim the iPad is priced at a premium, however, you seem to think the lighter weight, better materials and build quality, the extra and improved camera, superior customer services, dedicated apps, insured to be upgradable to iOS 7, and better resale value is not worth a measly $140 more. Strange really.
The issue with the retina display NOT being on the mini is the fact that we all know apple well enough that in a year or two, we will have a mini with retina display and it will be marketed just as the full sized iPad is now. I find this argument about utilizing pixel density in a "special" way invalid. If Apple has perfected the screen for the mini, then we will never see a retina display integrated into this product. I am sorry, but these reviews can make all the excuses for Apple such as the ones stated in this article, but that will just delay the company in putting in the features consumers want.
You are arguing from a perspective of what you imagine possible. There are some constraints imposed by reality, at least right now in 2012. No doubt the pace of technology will someday allow (2014?) a Retina Display with an A6X class processor in a light thin mini outline. But today that would cost way too much money.
Nobody else is offering a 2048x1536 display on a 8" tablet. The critics are just looking for patterns and demanding that Apple sell $2000 in hardware at the same price as Android licensee's $200 loss leaders. This argument is what I find "invalid."
Apple didn't need web commenters demanding a Retina Display to put one on the iPhone 4 in 2010, and it doesn't need that to do so for the iPad mini when it becomes practical and affordable to do it. There are a lot of more useful and practical technologies the mini could adopt before getting an 8" Retina ++ display.
And think about it for a moment: if iPhone 5 is currently constrained because it's hard to build a 4 inch RD screen in quantity, how would Apple meet demand for a product that requires a perfect screen 4x as large at the same pixel density? It's more expensive to build 300+ppi screens at larger sizes, which is partly why iPads and MacBooks offer 220-265 ppi screens. That's just ~1.5x the density of iPad mini. So you're getting less improvement at a very high cost.
iPad mini is 162 ppi. Retina Display via doubling would require 324 pip. iPhone 5 is a similar 326ppi.
The Retina Display iPad, however, is 264 pip, and Retina Display MacBooks are 220-227ppi.
The iPad mini is essentially a large iPod Touch running iPad software, and will replace it as early as next Summer.
Prediction:
Apple will continue offering the current 5th gen. iPod Touch for $200 after the next iDevice product cycle upgrade until it sells out. Then it will be dead. Long live the Touch.
The iPad mini will drop to $300 with only a processor upgrade, filling the void left by the Touch. After the Touch is discontinued, the mini 2 will drop to the $200 price point after the next refresh and the 3rd gen retina mini assumes the $300 price point.
The iPad 2 will be replaced by the current iPad (4) at $400 as the new iPad (5) takes the top spot.
The iPhone will be the last device left running the small screen version of iOS, and why shouldn't it be? If people really are clamoring for a more mobile iPad, then the Touch will be redundant. At least until the mini is able to make phone calls, the iPhone is safe. However, I wouldn't rule out people buying an LTE mini and using it with VOIP apps as a traditional cell phone replacement. Maybe we have it backwards and they will keep their full-sized iPads and get rid of their iPhone instead!
Product snapshot circa Summer 2014:
IPod Suffle (6) -- $50
IPod Nano (9) -- $100
IPad mini (2) -- $200
iPad mini retina -- $300
iPad (5) -- $400
iPad (6) -- $500
iPhone (8) -- $600 (unlocked)
You are bat shit nuts. The iPod Touch is a completely different product aimed at a completely different market. I'm not going to quote or regurgitate the logical arguments everyone else has posed to you. You're a forum junkie/egomaniac. Your long-winded replies are proof of that. If you feel so strongly about your opinions then contact Apple and apply for a job. Until then you're "just a guy in his living room".
You are bat shit nuts. The iPod Touch is a completely different product aimed at a completely different market. I'm not going to quote or regurgitate the logical arguments everyone else has posed to you. You're a forum junkie/egomaniac. Your long-winded replies are proof of that. If you feel so strongly about your opinions then contact Apple and apply for a job. Until then you're "just a guy in his living room".
LOL. Yes, tell my spin instructor to stick the iPad Mini in her pocket. Further, the Touch is the best selling iPod. Of course, if the iPod Touch stops selling, it is possible the iPod Nano will remain.
I've been banging on this perception of ripoff for memory for a while now. It is not just a matter of the cost of the parts!
Each memory differentiation costs money in parts inventory tracking, logistics and production, and later in inventory and sales.There have to be separate production lines for each memory model, and this is multiplied by the connectivity options and (probably) by colors. Each line requires new factory space and trained shifts of workers. And so on.
Unless you can cost all that out and present us with an analysis you have no business assuming it's a ripoff.
Moreover, the 16GB acts as a loss leader. Apple's making a profit on the lower end model, but not likely the normal profit it likes or needs to stay healthy. So the extra hundred bucks is to subsidize the reduced margins for the 16GB.
Moreover, the 16GB acts as a loss leader. Apple's making a profit on the lower end model, but not likely the normal profit it likes or needs to stay healthy. So the extra hundred bucks is to subsidize the reduced margins for the 16GB.
Could be. What's certain is that we have no hard figures, so it's perverse to assume and write in a public forum that we're being ripped off. Like, as if the company is your enemy. Yes, they make money off us, but the rewards are that they are putting out great stuff that is well is worth the money. And I don't have the impression that we're being gouged.
The new iPhone, iPod touch and the iPad mini, not to mention the latest iPad, this pace of productivity is what Tim Cook is doing with the company's—our—money. I ain't complaining about anything (except maybe no video camera on the nano).
Could be. What's certain is that we have no hard figures, so it's perverse to assume and write in a public forum that we're being ripped off. Like, as if the company is your enemy. Yes, they make money off us, but the rewards are that they are putting out great stuff that is well is worth the money. And I don't have the impression that we're being gouged.
The new iPhone, iPod touch and the iPad mini, not to mention the latest iPad, this pace of productivity is what Tim Cook is doing with the company's—our—money. I ain't complaining about anything (except maybe no video camera on the nano).
Sure, we have to make assumptions but the odds that Apple makes less profit on the 16GB v the 64GB are very high. I certainly wouldn't bet against that. That's what is meant by loss leader here, not that Apple is selling it at a loss of profit, but only that it prices the higher end models to make up for the lower profit at the lower end for an aggregate average profit margin for the category.
If you want a cheaper experience, the only option from Apple is the $200, previous generation iPod touch (the latest model is actually $70 more expensive than the entry level iPad mini, albeit packing 32GB of storage.
That's innacurate. The latest iPod touch is $30 cheaper than the entry level iPad mini.
LOL. Yes, tell my spin instructor to stick the iPad Mini in her pocket. Further, the Touch is the best selling iPod. Of course, if the iPod Touch stops selling, it is possible the iPod Nano will remain.
So your spin instructor doesn't have an iPhone? The spin instructor at my gym uses her iPhone. Also, I've never been in a gym with wifi. Frankly, if I wanted an iPod for the gym, I'd pick the Nano, or shuffle.
People keep saying it's the best selling iPod, and its a completely different device than the mini, yet Even Apple has marketed it as a gaming device, citing the top 10 downloads for both the iPhone/Touch and iPad are games. So why is it the best selling iPod, and aside from size, exactly how is the Touch so different from the mini in application? Since the mini is brand new, only time will tell ... But if the primary reason the Touch is the best selling iPod is as a portable gaming device, rather than an MP3 player, the similarly priced mini may well knock the Touch out of that distinction.
It's as usable as your iPad 2, which means very usable. It might have the occasional lag and apps don't open as fast, etc, but it's still very much sufficient for what's out there right now.
Everyone is focused on retina displays because everyone has been spoiled the last few years with them. If you use a retina display of any sort for long periods of time, and then look at a non-retina display, you can easily notice the pixelation and roughness of text. If you've been mostly using non-retina displays, you'll be more than happy with the higher PPI of the mini.
Thanks much! Unfortunately, it's not my iPad 2, it's the girlfriend's, and I have only occasionally used it to look things up and have no practical day-to-day experience with it to see if it's laggy. She has a 4S and I have a 4 and the lag on my phone in comparison is horrible. If the Mini is that slow in comparison, I think I'll have to wait for the iPad Mini 2
My pet peeve (and really only complaint about the iPad mini, aside from the price) is how the mini renders iPhone apps.
On the retina iPads, when an iPhone app is opened in x2 mode (that is, when you tap the "x2" to make it basically fill the screen rather than being just a tiny app with a huge border), it takes advantage of the retina-level graphics and font rendering so it looks pretty good. It you look closely, you see that it's showing a pixel-doubled version of a retina iPhone app. So the text is not razor-sharp, but it's as good as the native text on a first or second gen iPad.
On the other hand, doing the same thing on an iPad mini, look terrible. I'm at a conference where the meeting materials are distributed as an iPhone app (don't ask me why THEY don't bother releasing a universal/iPad-friendly version, but they haven't). Using this app on the iPad mini is grating. It's pixel-doubles the non-retina version of the iPhone app, so the text looks terrible. I had this complaint with the iPad 2, and was happen when the iPad (3) improved on it by using the retina version. You don't need a retina display on the iPad to show a pixel-doubled version of a retina iPhone app.
This isn't a huge deal, but it does reflect poorly on the iPad mini. My theory is that Apple wants developers to create proper universal apps with iPod-specific layouts, etc. rather than having them say "the iPhone version is good enough." So while I have zero doubt that Apple could the mini render iPhone apps the way I want, I don't think they will. Apple's answer will be that a pixel-double version of the iPhone app isn't the "right" user experience on the iPad, and it's the developers job to fix that by (fairly easily) making the app universal. It's just too bad for users for those developers who don't bother do to so.
bottom line, the mini will immediately become Apple's top-selling iPad, as DED concludes. and total sales of all iPad/tablet models (including the iPod touch) will jump yet again this holiday quarter - always the biggest - compared to last year.
the mini will expand Apple's reach to new customers as well as supplant iPad 4 sales. that's what matters long-term. the more people who get into the Apple ecosystem, the more that will stay there through generations of product cycles - the benefit of installed base inertia.
Amazon's Fire will still sell OK to its devotees. and cheap Android tablets will fill the world's discount bins in large numbers.
Totally wrong and still in dreamworld that thought the Mini would be $250 to start with.
18 months to 24 months from now and you will likely see this:
iPod Touch (16:9) 16 GB $199
iPad Mini 16GB $299
iPad Mini Retina 16GB $399
iPad Retina Full size 16GB $499
The only reason I don't agree about the mini is that we didn't see this happen with the iPad, nor the IPhone, nor the Touch.
Once Apple establishes a price, they stick with it, or lower it. Not that they couldn't, but it would be going against precedent to price the next major improvement of the mini $70 more then the original. If anything I would expect to see the price drop as the economies of scale improve. How else could Apple afford to add Retina to the iPhone and iPad but keep the price the same?
I do agree the iPad 2 might be replaced. I used to think the mini would replace it as the low end iPad, until I saw the mini. Flawed or not, my rationale about the mini replacing the Touch seems more likely to me now, as the iPad 2 has taken on a prominent role in education with some pretty good arguments for a 10" tablet for that purpose made here.
If Apple continues its previous pattern, then it makes perfect sense that in two years we would see the previous generation of the mini drop to $200, just like the iPad 2. Retina displays, or whatever cutting edge technology Apple implements in their flagship models will always be in short supply at introduction, so giving customers a reason to buy something else also helps relieve the pressure. And I see no reason for them not to continue this pattern, as it further helps them get the maximum return on their investment setting up production lines for a particular model every year.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac_128
The iPad mini is essentially a large iPod Touch running iPad software, and will replace it as early as next Summer.
Prediction:
Apple will continue offering the current 5th gen. iPod Touch for $200 after the next iDevice product cycle upgrade until it sells out. Then it will be dead. Long live the Touch.
The iPad mini will drop to $300 with only a processor upgrade, filling the void left by the Touch. After the Touch is discontinued, the mini 2 will drop to the $200 price point after the next refresh and the 3rd gen retina mini assumes the $300 price point.
The iPad 2 will be replaced by the current iPad (4) at $400 as the new iPad (5) takes the top spot.
The iPhone will be the last device left running the small screen version of iOS, and why shouldn't it be? If people really are clamoring for a more mobile iPad, then the Touch will be redundant. At least until the mini is able to make phone calls, the iPhone is safe. However, I wouldn't rule out people buying an LTE mini and using it with VOIP apps as a traditional cell phone replacement. Maybe we have it backwards and they will keep their full-sized iPads and get rid of their iPhone instead!
Product snapshot circa Summer 2014:
IPod Suffle (6) -- $50
IPod Nano (9) -- $100
IPad mini (2) -- $200
iPad mini retina -- $300
iPad (5) -- $400
iPad (6) -- $500
iPhone (8) -- $600 (unlocked)
Totally wrong and still in dreamworld that thought the Mini would be $250 to start with.
18 months to 24 months from now and you will likely see this:
iPod Touch (16:9) 16 GB $199
iPad Mini 16GB $299
iPad Mini Retina 16GB $399
iPad Retina Full size 16GB $499
Perfect $100 increments from pocket size regular to full size Retina.
iPad 2 will be retired (soon) and they won't keep old models of the full size iPad in the lineup. They only reason the IPad 2 dragged on was to supply a cheaper non-retina model, which won't matter anymore with the above lineup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65
Totally wrong and still in dreamworld that thought the Mini would be $250 to start with.
18 months to 24 months from now and you will likely see this:
iPod Touch (16:9) 16 GB $199
iPad Mini 16GB $299
iPad Mini Retina 16GB $399
iPad Retina Full size 16GB $499
Perfect $100 increments from pocket size regular to full size Retina.
iPad 2 will be retired (soon) and they won't keep old models of the full size iPad in the lineup. They only reason the IPad 2 dragged on was to supply a cheaper non-retina model, which won't matter anymore with the above lineup.
I don't see them adding Retina to the iPad mini until it will fit in with the current cost structure. Also, since they now have multiple models filling all price points, I don't see them continuing with also selling last year's models of each product either.
For that reason I think it really unlikely that you will see the mini broken out into "regular" and "Retina" types next year. It's far more likely that the mini will quickly move to Retina displays so the entire line is Retina. They will offer them at the same price point and only drop prices (if ever) after that.
Next year's iPad lineup seems more likely to be exactly the same as this year's in terms of price and size offerings with the exception of the iPad 2 being dropped entirely.
Apple is going to sell truckloads of these. I really wanted to see what the big deal was with the screens. It's not a retina, but it is still far better than the iPad2. The text was sharper and smoother due to the higher PPI. I had zero problem with the text.
Ignore the whining from the iHaters, trolls, and tech-heads that think they know what's best.
If it weren't for me buying the iPad3 a few months ago, I definitely would have the mini as my next tablet. The form factor/weight is just that nice. Put the mini next to any Android garbage out there and you'll immediately see where the money goes.
Android sheep should be ashamed of themselves for spewing downright lies and having laughably low-to-no standards.
I've been banging on this perception of ripoff for memory for a while now. It is not just a matter of the cost of the parts!
Each memory differentiation costs money in parts inventory tracking, logistics and production, and later in inventory and sales.There have to be separate production lines for each memory model, and this is multiplied by the connectivity options and (probably) by colors. Each line requires new factory space and trained shifts of workers. And so on.
Unless you can cost all that out and present us with an analysis you have no business assuming it's a ripoff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowdog65
Totally wrong and still in dreamworld that thought the Mini would be $250 to start with.
18 months to 24 months from now and you will likely see this:
iPod Touch (16:9) 16 GB $199
iPad Mini 16GB $299
iPad Mini Retina 16GB $399
iPad Retina Full size 16GB $499
Perfect $100 increments from pocket size regular to full size Retina.
iPad 2 will be retired (soon) and they won't keep old models of the full size iPad in the lineup. They only reason the IPad 2 dragged on was to supply a cheaper non-retina model, which won't matter anymore with the above lineup.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I don't see them adding Retina to the iPad mini until it will fit in with the current cost structure. Also, since they now have multiple models filling all price points, I don't see them continuing with also selling last year's models of each product either.
For that reason I think it really unlikely that you will see the mini broken out into "regular" and "Retina" types next year. It's far more likely that the mini will quickly move to Retina displays so the entire line is Retina. They will offer them at the same price point and only drop prices (if ever) after that.
Next year's iPad lineup seems more likely to be exactly the same as this year's in terms of price and size offerings with the exception of the iPad 2 being dropped entirely.
While there are no certainties.
I think it extremely probable that when the Retina Mini joins the lineup, the regular mini will stay and fall in price. It will always be less expensive to build and it will likely stay as the anchor of the iPad lineup for years to come.
Also, the best way the Retina Mini fall in price to meet to current retail is to actually build it even at a higher price, because initially that screen is going to cost a lot and Apple will want to charge a lot to maintain margins. Only real production in large numbers will get it's price down eventually.
It all points to a Retina Mini Moving up in price co-existing with regular Mini moving down in price.
Though we have to wait at least a year to find out I am right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewys808
Out of all the criticisms, my biggest complaint is that the 32 GB should be more like $70 more than the 16GB. Anything more is a ripoff....this coming from an Apple Fan/shareholder. It's a small thing, but when you think about it, the most desired size is 32GB, Apple knows this and is willing to piss off customers just to make a few extra dollars.
64GB at $100 more than the 32GB is acceptable.
But it is the same "ripoff" that saintly Google charges on the Nexus 10. $399 16GB, $499 32GB.
This isn't to rip you off. It is because the bottom end products are somewhat loss leaders, while the upper models beef up the margin.
Do you think you would rather pay $50 delta instead. So is this:
16GB $349, $32GB $399
Better than:
16GB $299, $32GB $399
Those big jumps in memory margin, help keep the base model at lower price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShAdOwXPR
There is a problem, the hardware and price. If you are going for premium sell a iPad Mini Retina & with A6 chip. If you will go with non retina and A5(which the A6X makes obsolete) then don't ask 329$ (premium amount compare to the competition). A lot of people will be disappointed with the mini IMHO. Sure next year they will upgraded but it will still be outdated when new top of the line iPad is release...
That being said it will sell millions and normal people wont realize its under power until next year.
Except you are uninformed. According to the recently releases third party benchmarks, the iPad Mini beats out the just released six months ago iPad 3 in terms of performance. You know the one people were perfectly happy with and weren't expecting to be updated until six months from now? Moreover, unlike the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD (again third party reviews), you aren't going to experience any performance lag.
According to Apple, 48 percent of weekend buyers of the Mini never bought a tablet before. These people aren't going to be unhappy with the lack of a retina display because they never used a tablet with a retina display. Moreover, the iPad Mini's display is better than the iPad 2's display that Apple is still selling a lot of.
Further, people like you claim the iPad is priced at a premium, however, you seem to think the lighter weight, better materials and build quality, the extra and improved camera, superior customer services, dedicated apps, insured to be upgradable to iOS 7, and better resale value is not worth a measly $140 more. Strange really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtoxin
The issue with the retina display NOT being on the mini is the fact that we all know apple well enough that in a year or two, we will have a mini with retina display and it will be marketed just as the full sized iPad is now. I find this argument about utilizing pixel density in a "special" way invalid. If Apple has perfected the screen for the mini, then we will never see a retina display integrated into this product. I am sorry, but these reviews can make all the excuses for Apple such as the ones stated in this article, but that will just delay the company in putting in the features consumers want.
You are arguing from a perspective of what you imagine possible. There are some constraints imposed by reality, at least right now in 2012. No doubt the pace of technology will someday allow (2014?) a Retina Display with an A6X class processor in a light thin mini outline. But today that would cost way too much money.
Nobody else is offering a 2048x1536 display on a 8" tablet. The critics are just looking for patterns and demanding that Apple sell $2000 in hardware at the same price as Android licensee's $200 loss leaders. This argument is what I find "invalid."
Apple didn't need web commenters demanding a Retina Display to put one on the iPhone 4 in 2010, and it doesn't need that to do so for the iPad mini when it becomes practical and affordable to do it. There are a lot of more useful and practical technologies the mini could adopt before getting an 8" Retina ++ display.
And think about it for a moment: if iPhone 5 is currently constrained because it's hard to build a 4 inch RD screen in quantity, how would Apple meet demand for a product that requires a perfect screen 4x as large at the same pixel density? It's more expensive to build 300+ppi screens at larger sizes, which is partly why iPads and MacBooks offer 220-265 ppi screens. That's just ~1.5x the density of iPad mini. So you're getting less improvement at a very high cost.
iPad mini is 162 ppi. Retina Display via doubling would require 324 pip. iPhone 5 is a similar 326ppi.
The Retina Display iPad, however, is 264 pip, and Retina Display MacBooks are 220-227ppi.
Quote:
The iPad mini is essentially a large iPod Touch running iPad software, and will replace it as early as next Summer.
Prediction:
Apple will continue offering the current 5th gen. iPod Touch for $200 after the next iDevice product cycle upgrade until it sells out. Then it will be dead. Long live the Touch.
The iPad mini will drop to $300 with only a processor upgrade, filling the void left by the Touch. After the Touch is discontinued, the mini 2 will drop to the $200 price point after the next refresh and the 3rd gen retina mini assumes the $300 price point.
The iPad 2 will be replaced by the current iPad (4) at $400 as the new iPad (5) takes the top spot.
The iPhone will be the last device left running the small screen version of iOS, and why shouldn't it be? If people really are clamoring for a more mobile iPad, then the Touch will be redundant. At least until the mini is able to make phone calls, the iPhone is safe. However, I wouldn't rule out people buying an LTE mini and using it with VOIP apps as a traditional cell phone replacement. Maybe we have it backwards and they will keep their full-sized iPads and get rid of their iPhone instead!
Product snapshot circa Summer 2014:
IPod Suffle (6) -- $50
IPod Nano (9) -- $100
IPad mini (2) -- $200
iPad mini retina -- $300
iPad (5) -- $400
iPad (6) -- $500
iPhone (8) -- $600 (unlocked)
You are bat shit nuts. The iPod Touch is a completely different product aimed at a completely different market. I'm not going to quote or regurgitate the logical arguments everyone else has posed to you. You're a forum junkie/egomaniac. Your long-winded replies are proof of that. If you feel so strongly about your opinions then contact Apple and apply for a job. Until then you're "just a guy in his living room".
Quote:
Originally Posted by timthepainter
You are bat shit nuts. The iPod Touch is a completely different product aimed at a completely different market. I'm not going to quote or regurgitate the logical arguments everyone else has posed to you. You're a forum junkie/egomaniac. Your long-winded replies are proof of that. If you feel so strongly about your opinions then contact Apple and apply for a job. Until then you're "just a guy in his living room".
LOL. Yes, tell my spin instructor to stick the iPad Mini in her pocket. Further, the Touch is the best selling iPod. Of course, if the iPod Touch stops selling, it is possible the iPod Nano will remain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
I've been banging on this perception of ripoff for memory for a while now. It is not just a matter of the cost of the parts!
Each memory differentiation costs money in parts inventory tracking, logistics and production, and later in inventory and sales.There have to be separate production lines for each memory model, and this is multiplied by the connectivity options and (probably) by colors. Each line requires new factory space and trained shifts of workers. And so on.
Unless you can cost all that out and present us with an analysis you have no business assuming it's a ripoff.
Moreover, the 16GB acts as a loss leader. Apple's making a profit on the lower end model, but not likely the normal profit it likes or needs to stay healthy. So the extra hundred bucks is to subsidize the reduced margins for the 16GB.
Could be. What's certain is that we have no hard figures, so it's perverse to assume and write in a public forum that we're being ripped off. Like, as if the company is your enemy. Yes, they make money off us, but the rewards are that they are putting out great stuff that is well is worth the money. And I don't have the impression that we're being gouged.
The new iPhone, iPod touch and the iPad mini, not to mention the latest iPad, this pace of productivity is what Tim Cook is doing with the company's—our—money. I ain't complaining about anything (except maybe no video camera on the nano).
Sure, we have to make assumptions but the odds that Apple makes less profit on the 16GB v the 64GB are very high. I certainly wouldn't bet against that. That's what is meant by loss leader here, not that Apple is selling it at a loss of profit, but only that it prices the higher end models to make up for the lower profit at the lower end for an aggregate average profit margin for the category.
Quote:
If you want a cheaper experience, the only option from Apple is the $200, previous generation iPod touch (the latest model is actually $70 more expensive than the entry level iPad mini, albeit packing 32GB of storage.
That's innacurate. The latest iPod touch is $30 cheaper than the entry level iPad mini.
People keep saying it's the best selling iPod, and its a completely different device than the mini, yet Even Apple has marketed it as a gaming device, citing the top 10 downloads for both the iPhone/Touch and iPad are games. So why is it the best selling iPod, and aside from size, exactly how is the Touch so different from the mini in application? Since the mini is brand new, only time will tell ... But if the primary reason the Touch is the best selling iPod is as a portable gaming device, rather than an MP3 player, the similarly priced mini may well knock the Touch out of that distinction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalG
It's as usable as your iPad 2, which means very usable. It might have the occasional lag and apps don't open as fast, etc, but it's still very much sufficient for what's out there right now.
Everyone is focused on retina displays because everyone has been spoiled the last few years with them. If you use a retina display of any sort for long periods of time, and then look at a non-retina display, you can easily notice the pixelation and roughness of text. If you've been mostly using non-retina displays, you'll be more than happy with the higher PPI of the mini.
Thanks much! Unfortunately, it's not my iPad 2, it's the girlfriend's, and I have only occasionally used it to look things up and have no practical day-to-day experience with it to see if it's laggy. She has a 4S and I have a 4 and the lag on my phone in comparison is horrible. If the Mini is that slow in comparison, I think I'll have to wait for the iPad Mini 2
My pet peeve (and really only complaint about the iPad mini, aside from the price) is how the mini renders iPhone apps.
On the retina iPads, when an iPhone app is opened in x2 mode (that is, when you tap the "x2" to make it basically fill the screen rather than being just a tiny app with a huge border), it takes advantage of the retina-level graphics and font rendering so it looks pretty good. It you look closely, you see that it's showing a pixel-doubled version of a retina iPhone app. So the text is not razor-sharp, but it's as good as the native text on a first or second gen iPad.
On the other hand, doing the same thing on an iPad mini, look terrible. I'm at a conference where the meeting materials are distributed as an iPhone app (don't ask me why THEY don't bother releasing a universal/iPad-friendly version, but they haven't). Using this app on the iPad mini is grating. It's pixel-doubles the non-retina version of the iPhone app, so the text looks terrible. I had this complaint with the iPad 2, and was happen when the iPad (3) improved on it by using the retina version. You don't need a retina display on the iPad to show a pixel-doubled version of a retina iPhone app.
This isn't a huge deal, but it does reflect poorly on the iPad mini. My theory is that Apple wants developers to create proper universal apps with iPod-specific layouts, etc. rather than having them say "the iPhone version is good enough." So while I have zero doubt that Apple could the mini render iPhone apps the way I want, I don't think they will. Apple's answer will be that a pixel-double version of the iPhone app isn't the "right" user experience on the iPad, and it's the developers job to fix that by (fairly easily) making the app universal. It's just too bad for users for those developers who don't bother do to so.
OMG, all this hair splitting!
bottom line, the mini will immediately become Apple's top-selling iPad, as DED concludes. and total sales of all iPad/tablet models (including the iPod touch) will jump yet again this holiday quarter - always the biggest - compared to last year.
the mini will expand Apple's reach to new customers as well as supplant iPad 4 sales. that's what matters long-term. the more people who get into the Apple ecosystem, the more that will stay there through generations of product cycles - the benefit of installed base inertia.
Amazon's Fire will still sell OK to its devotees. and cheap Android tablets will fill the world's discount bins in large numbers.
but ... MS' Surface will be mini Road Kill.
Once Apple establishes a price, they stick with it, or lower it. Not that they couldn't, but it would be going against precedent to price the next major improvement of the mini $70 more then the original. If anything I would expect to see the price drop as the economies of scale improve. How else could Apple afford to add Retina to the iPhone and iPad but keep the price the same?
I do agree the iPad 2 might be replaced. I used to think the mini would replace it as the low end iPad, until I saw the mini. Flawed or not, my rationale about the mini replacing the Touch seems more likely to me now, as the iPad 2 has taken on a prominent role in education with some pretty good arguments for a 10" tablet for that purpose made here.
If Apple continues its previous pattern, then it makes perfect sense that in two years we would see the previous generation of the mini drop to $200, just like the iPad 2. Retina displays, or whatever cutting edge technology Apple implements in their flagship models will always be in short supply at introduction, so giving customers a reason to buy something else also helps relieve the pressure. And I see no reason for them not to continue this pattern, as it further helps them get the maximum return on their investment setting up production lines for a particular model every year.