If they follow their iPad mini pattern a larger iPhone-like* device would have a 4.904" display. That would allow them to use the 264 PPI display panels already utilized in the iPad (4) whilst maintaining the same resolution of the iPhone 5.
* Uses the same iPhone and iPod Touch apps in the same way the iPad and iPad mini use the same apps.
My aging eyes might have an easier time trying to use an iPhone with a large 264ppi interface, but I suspect the market for such a zoomed UI is smaller than the market for a higher resolution one, i.e. an iPhone with a 720p, 900x1600 or 1080p display.
Perfect answer. There are a lot of reasons but it all comes down to margins. If one thinks that the the tech available and margins will be good enough — without some canned BS answer that Apple can do anything — to release a retina iPad mini in 3 months then I welcome any logical reasoning for it. So far all I've read are comments from saucer-eyed people that are wishing it into existence. For some reason people think 2048x1536 display in 7.85" should be much cheaper than than at 9.7". I would love for there to be a retina iPad mini in 3 months but it simply doesn't seem feasible based on the current state of tech.
My aging eyes might have an easier time trying to use an iPhone with a large 264ppi interface, but I suspect the market for such a zoomed UI is smaller than the market for a higher resolution one, i.e. an iPhone with a 720p, 900x1600 or 1080p display.
1) As noted previously those Galaxy Notes and other large, expensive phones seem to have a solid hold in some markets. My biggest concern is that expanded a UI for a bigger display would have a much smaller window of idealness than shrinking a UI. It works for the iPad mini but could a 5" iPhone still look like a decent device? I'm not so sure.
2) I wouldn't expect Apple to release an iPhone that fits into the 720p and 1080p definition just for the hell of it. There resolutions and aspect ratios are carefully chosen.
But the 2nd gen iPad started at $499 and so did the 3rd, right? So why would a retina mini go up in price when the retina iPad didn't?
Apple couldn't release a $299 iPad mini last year without sacrificing margin so the first mini shipped at $329. By the next release date it will have absorbed its design costs and be able to fall to $299.
The $399 price point currently occupied by the iPad 2 is the natural place for the retina iPad mini to slide into.
$299, $399, $499..... I think that was the goal all along.
Apple couldn't release a $299 iPad mini last year without sacrificing margin so the first mini shipped at $329. By the next release date it will have absorbed its design costs and be able to fall to $299.
The $399 price point currently occupied by the iPad 2 is the natural place for the retina iPad mini to slide into.
$299, $399, $499..... I think that was the goal all along.
That's one way or doing it and moving from a higher price to a lower price is easy to do but Apple has very little history on making such moves that I'm guessing $329 will likely stay for awhile.
Do you think we'll see a 1st generation iPad mini at $229 (or $249) once the 2nd generations are out like with the new and old iPod Touch being sold side-by-side?
Apple couldn't release a $299 iPad mini last year without sacrificing margin so the first mini shipped at $329. By the next release date it will have absorbed its design costs and be able to fall to $299.
The $399 price point currently occupied by the iPad 2 is the natural place for the retina iPad mini to slide into.
$299, $399, $499..... I think that was the goal all along.
If they keep around a non retina mini (or if it replaces iPad 2) I can see the price coming down. I have a hard time believing a retina mini would go up in price. When's the last time a newer iOS device was more expensive than its predecessor?
I don't like this kind of 6-month cycles at all. Makes customers delay purchases and hurt resale values, which in turns cheapen the brand. Hope it's not happening.
The post-pc era is also the era of appliance computing... Like it or not they need to release upgrades to existing products in a more timely manner to remain competitive. Likely, because of Apple's quality, price/value equation and ecosystem -- these devices will have higher resale and hand-me-down value then the competition. It just will be for a shorter period of time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
This just makes no sense.
If Apple goes to faster release cycles, they get criticized for "obsoleting" products too quickly. If they only release once a year, they get criticized for going too long between updates. I don't see that they need to be slaves to the calendar. If they can release a new product with significant enhancements, they should do so when they are ready to do it.
I agree totally with this -- upgrade when you have something to offer and/or gain a competitive advantage (or preclude competition).
Faster 802.11ac WiFi, alone, would be cause to upgrade these devices.
I wonder if Apple's plans include an upgrade to Apple's Ax and AxX Processors 2 times per year or as available.
Seems too big to me but if the Galaxy Note seems quite popular in many cultures.
PS: didn't run the numbers for the 3:2 960x640 version but it would be a little smaller. I assume Apple will be deprecating the older aspect ratio.
Actually, I'd much rather see an iPhone in the 4.5" range with a 3:2 aspect ratio than anything in the 4.9" range.
.... anyway... back to this iPad upgrade silliness.
"iPad upgrade silliness?
What if the current iPad Mini 16 GB WiFi + cellular is offered for $329 (currently $429) and promoted * as a personal appliance (smart phone and tablet computer) for emerging [technology] countries.
* Add internal earphone and BT mic/earphone so it could be used as a phone.
I've read that China Mobile, alone, will have 233 million subscribers available for LTE by the end of 2013.
Quote:
Our December report showed that Mobile China would have a third of their market on 4G in the coming year which works out to a potential target of 233 million subscribers that Apple would be able to sell into. That's a market that's double the current US smartphone subscriber base.
Customers with a defective product that has to be replaced will end up with the next generation of the product for free.
Since that doesn't happen now, ever, for any of their products, why would you assume it would happen in the future?
Originally Posted by shard
The only reason Apple updated the iPad twice last year is because they wanted everything to be on the Lightning connector.
Really?
The iPad 3 is underpowered for a retina display device of that size -- and it gets hot.
There is a free app called Condition One on the app store. It displays HD video and allows the user to manipulate what you see over 180 degrees with the accelerometer or a finger swipe.
The iPad 4 handles this with ease -- the iPad 3 struggles.
That is just coverage area. They have a long way to go to getting their subscribers onto 3G. I think one poster on AI familiar with the company said you have to switch phone numbers on China Mobile to go from 2G to 3G service.
That is just coverage area. They have a long way to go to getting their subscribers onto 3G. I think one poster on AI familiar with the company said you have to switch phone numbers on China Mobile to go from 2G to 3G service.
I read somewhere that China Mobile was feeling pressure to sign a deal with Apple -- as they are losing 3G subs to the competing carriers within China.
I don't like this kind of 6-month cycles at all. Makes customers delay purchases and hurt resale values, which in turns cheapen the brand. Hope it's not happening.
Only the spec whores and tech elite would fret over having the absolute latest and greatest hardware. Everyone else is happy to have an Apple product.
Is your banned list accurate? Are those people officially banned?
He means banned as in blocked.
Sorry Dick, just for illustrative purposes. Anyway, go there, do this, and you can take out of view people you don't want to see.
Also on that note, Gazoobee, if you want to update your visible list in your signature, note that TECHSTUD and iSheldon were the same person, he's banned from the site again (so when you see another one, let me know; he's psychotic), and so is JerrySwitched26 (who was ConradJoe, Heller, I am a Zither Zather Zuzz, and ten other accounts; also psychotic).
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
The iPad 3 is underpowered for a retina display device of that size -- and it gets hot.
The iPad 4 handles this with ease -- the iPad 3 struggles.
Wait, what's… your point? Sorry, it just seemed like a step sideways rather than forward.
I read somewhere that China Mobile was feeling pressure to sign a deal with Apple -- as they are losing 3G subs to the competing carriers within China.
On the other hand, I think 'China Mobile' is the company with a "Made-in-China" version of LTE, which it would like Apple to implement.
If they keep around a non retina mini (or if it replaces iPad 2) I can see the price coming down. I have a hard time believing a retina mini would go up in price. When's the last time a newer iOS device was more expensive than its predecessor?
The Retina Mini probably won't replace the current Mini (especially if it's coming out in 3 months as rumored). It will likely be sold in addition to the non-Retina Mini. So no Apple wouldn't be raising the price. They would be adding a more high end option (see: 5G iPod Touch).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
Apple couldn't release a $299 iPad mini last year without sacrificing margin so the first mini shipped at $329. By the next release date it will have absorbed its design costs and be able to fall to $299.
The $399 price point currently occupied by the iPad 2 is the natural place for the retina iPad mini to slide into.
$299, $399, $499..... I think that was the goal all along.
Think $329 for the non-Retina and $429 for the Retina, to match the $399 for the non-Retina iPad 2 and $499 for the Retina iPad 4. If Apple has no problem selling Mini's for $329, why lower the price so soon?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That's one way or doing it and moving from a higher price to a lower price is easy to do but Apple has very little history on making such moves that I'm guessing $329 will likely stay for awhile.
Do you think we'll see a 1st generation iPad mini at $229 (or $249) once the 2nd generations are out like with the new and old iPod Touch being sold side-by-side?
Well if, as I've assumed, Apple adds a Retina model this spring for a $100 upcharge I don't see the current model's price dropping.
If Apple were to continue selling non-Retina Minis after this 1st generation then I could see the price dropping to $229. But what I think is more likely, is once technology catches up, we'll see the price of the Retina Mini dropping to $329.
The Retina Mini probably won't replace the current Mini (especially if it's coming out in 3 months as rumored). It will likely be sold in addition to the non-Retina Mini. So no Apple wouldn't be raising the price. They would be adding a more high end option (see: 5G iPod Touch).
But when has Apple done that before with their iOS devices? They didn't raise the price when the 3rd gen came out. The base price was still $499 and they dropped the price of iPad 2 to $399. The 5th gen iPod touch is $299 for 32GB, the 4th gen was $299 for 16GB. The 64GB model is the same price - $399. Raising the price on a retina mini would not be in sync with what Apple has done in the past. My guess is we won't see a retina mini until Apple can make one they can sell at the current price.
Actually this does make sense. This will allow Apple to stay ahead of any competition with a continually fresh lineup. What happened to the iPhone was that Apple did not stay far enough ahead of the competition and other players were able to capitalize on this. I think Apple with the iPad just like the iPod wants to snuff everyone out to an 80% to 20% market share, if not greater.
Which is nothing but bull crap. People don't get it, Apple has clearly said that they won't repeat the mistakes they made with the Mac. One of those mistakes was not keeping the product up to date and competitive. IPads future will be bleak if they let the Android market get a toe hold. That means bing aggressive with new models and technology. That action will keep the value in the brand.
I don't like this kind of 6-month cycles at all. Makes customers delay purchases and hurt resale values, which in turns cheapen the brand. Hope it's not happening.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If they follow their iPad mini pattern a larger iPhone-like* device would have a 4.904" display. That would allow them to use the 264 PPI display panels already utilized in the iPad (4) whilst maintaining the same resolution of the iPhone 5.
* Uses the same iPhone and iPod Touch apps in the same way the iPad and iPad mini use the same apps.
My aging eyes might have an easier time trying to use an iPhone with a large 264ppi interface, but I suspect the market for such a zoomed UI is smaller than the market for a higher resolution one, i.e. an iPhone with a 720p, 900x1600 or 1080p display.
Perfect answer. There are a lot of reasons but it all comes down to margins. If one thinks that the the tech available and margins will be good enough — without some canned BS answer that Apple can do anything — to release a retina iPad mini in 3 months then I welcome any logical reasoning for it. So far all I've read are comments from saucer-eyed people that are wishing it into existence. For some reason people think 2048x1536 display in 7.85" should be much cheaper than than at 9.7". I would love for there to be a retina iPad mini in 3 months but it simply doesn't seem feasible based on the current state of tech.
1) As noted previously those Galaxy Notes and other large, expensive phones seem to have a solid hold in some markets. My biggest concern is that expanded a UI for a bigger display would have a much smaller window of idealness than shrinking a UI. It works for the iPad mini but could a 5" iPhone still look like a decent device? I'm not so sure.
2) I wouldn't expect Apple to release an iPhone that fits into the 720p and 1080p definition just for the hell of it. There resolutions and aspect ratios are carefully chosen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
But the 2nd gen iPad started at $499 and so did the 3rd, right? So why would a retina mini go up in price when the retina iPad didn't?
Apple couldn't release a $299 iPad mini last year without sacrificing margin so the first mini shipped at $329. By the next release date it will have absorbed its design costs and be able to fall to $299.
The $399 price point currently occupied by the iPad 2 is the natural place for the retina iPad mini to slide into.
$299, $399, $499..... I think that was the goal all along.
That's one way or doing it and moving from a higher price to a lower price is easy to do but Apple has very little history on making such moves that I'm guessing $329 will likely stay for awhile.
Do you think we'll see a 1st generation iPad mini at $229 (or $249) once the 2nd generations are out like with the new and old iPod Touch being sold side-by-side?
Quote:
Originally Posted by drobforever
I don't like this kind of 6-month cycles at all. Makes customers delay purchases and hurt resale values, which in turns cheapen the brand. Hope it's not happening.
The post-pc era is also the era of appliance computing... Like it or not they need to release upgrades to existing products in a more timely manner to remain competitive. Likely, because of Apple's quality, price/value equation and ecosystem -- these devices will have higher resale and hand-me-down value then the competition. It just will be for a shorter period of time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
This just makes no sense.
If Apple goes to faster release cycles, they get criticized for "obsoleting" products too quickly. If they only release once a year, they get criticized for going too long between updates. I don't see that they need to be slaves to the calendar. If they can release a new product with significant enhancements, they should do so when they are ready to do it.
I agree totally with this -- upgrade when you have something to offer and/or gain a competitive advantage (or preclude competition).
Faster 802.11ac WiFi, alone, would be cause to upgrade these devices.
I wonder if Apple's plans include an upgrade to Apple's Ax and AxX Processors 2 times per year or as available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Seems too big to me but if the Galaxy Note seems quite popular in many cultures.
PS: didn't run the numbers for the 3:2 960x640 version but it would be a little smaller. I assume Apple will be deprecating the older aspect ratio.
Actually, I'd much rather see an iPhone in the 4.5" range with a 3:2 aspect ratio than anything in the 4.9" range.
.... anyway... back to this iPad upgrade silliness.
"iPad upgrade silliness?
What if the current iPad Mini 16 GB WiFi + cellular is offered for $329 (currently $429) and promoted * as a personal appliance (smart phone and tablet computer) for emerging [technology] countries.
* Add internal earphone and BT mic/earphone so it could be used as a phone.
I've read that China Mobile, alone, will have 233 million subscribers available for LTE by the end of 2013.
Quote:
Our December report showed that Mobile China would have a third of their market on 4G in the coming year which works out to a potential target of 233 million subscribers that Apple would be able to sell into. That's a market that's double the current US smartphone subscriber base.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/01/china-mobile-admits-to-a-confidentiality-agreement-with-apple.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Customers with a defective product that has to be replaced will end up with the next generation of the product for free.
Since that doesn't happen now, ever, for any of their products, why would you assume it would happen in the future?
Originally Posted by shard
The only reason Apple updated the iPad twice last year is because they wanted everything to be on the Lightning connector.
Really?
The iPad 3 is underpowered for a retina display device of that size -- and it gets hot.
There is a free app called Condition One on the app store. It displays HD video and allows the user to manipulate what you see over 180 degrees with the accelerometer or a finger swipe.
The iPad 4 handles this with ease -- the iPad 3 struggles.
That is just coverage area. They have a long way to go to getting their subscribers onto 3G. I think one poster on AI familiar with the company said you have to switch phone numbers on China Mobile to go from 2G to 3G service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I've read that China Mobile, alone, will have 233 million subscribers available for LTE by the end of 2013.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/01/china-mobile-admits-to-a-confidentiality-agreement-with-apple.html
That is just coverage area. They have a long way to go to getting their subscribers onto 3G. I think one poster on AI familiar with the company said you have to switch phone numbers on China Mobile to go from 2G to 3G service.
I read somewhere that China Mobile was feeling pressure to sign a deal with Apple -- as they are losing 3G subs to the competing carriers within China.
Only the spec whores and tech elite would fret over having the absolute latest and greatest hardware. Everyone else is happy to have an Apple product.
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Is your banned list accurate? Are those people officially banned?
He means banned as in blocked.
Sorry Dick, just for illustrative purposes. Anyway, go there, do this, and you can take out of view people you don't want to see.
Also on that note, Gazoobee, if you want to update your visible list in your signature, note that TECHSTUD and iSheldon were the same person, he's banned from the site again (so when you see another one, let me know; he's psychotic), and so is JerrySwitched26 (who was ConradJoe, Heller, I am a Zither Zather Zuzz, and ten other accounts; also psychotic).
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
The iPad 3 is underpowered for a retina display device of that size -- and it gets hot.
The iPad 4 handles this with ease -- the iPad 3 struggles.
Wait, what's… your point? Sorry, it just seemed like a step sideways rather than forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I read somewhere that China Mobile was feeling pressure to sign a deal with Apple -- as they are losing 3G subs to the competing carriers within China.
On the other hand, I think 'China Mobile' is the company with a "Made-in-China" version of LTE, which it would like Apple to implement.
Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
If they keep around a non retina mini (or if it replaces iPad 2) I can see the price coming down. I have a hard time believing a retina mini would go up in price. When's the last time a newer iOS device was more expensive than its predecessor?
The Retina Mini probably won't replace the current Mini (especially if it's coming out in 3 months as rumored). It will likely be sold in addition to the non-Retina Mini. So no Apple wouldn't be raising the price. They would be adding a more high end option (see: 5G iPod Touch).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
Apple couldn't release a $299 iPad mini last year without sacrificing margin so the first mini shipped at $329. By the next release date it will have absorbed its design costs and be able to fall to $299.
The $399 price point currently occupied by the iPad 2 is the natural place for the retina iPad mini to slide into.
$299, $399, $499..... I think that was the goal all along.
Think $329 for the non-Retina and $429 for the Retina, to match the $399 for the non-Retina iPad 2 and $499 for the Retina iPad 4. If Apple has no problem selling Mini's for $329, why lower the price so soon?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That's one way or doing it and moving from a higher price to a lower price is easy to do but Apple has very little history on making such moves that I'm guessing $329 will likely stay for awhile.
Do you think we'll see a 1st generation iPad mini at $229 (or $249) once the 2nd generations are out like with the new and old iPod Touch being sold side-by-side?
Well if, as I've assumed, Apple adds a Retina model this spring for a $100 upcharge I don't see the current model's price dropping.
If Apple were to continue selling non-Retina Minis after this 1st generation then I could see the price dropping to $229. But what I think is more likely, is once technology catches up, we'll see the price of the Retina Mini dropping to $329.
And exactly what happened to the iPhone?