Cue the usual suspects:
1. This needs to run full Mac OS X and side by side apps
2. This needs to have a pen
3. IGZO will save us all
4. Just wait until Broadwell or Skylake!
5. But but but Android tablets!
You knock it but a kickstand would actually be very helpful, especially when drawing or drafting. The version that Microsoft uses on their Surface Pro 3 is pretty fantastic, much better than any of the current cases that are currently available for the iPad Air 2. I'm not sure why you guys think things like this aren't any good, well that is until Apple implements it, then it becomes the best thing since sliced cheese.
I'm not disagreeing with you at all. But some here seem to think iPad mini needs to be a generation behind iPad air in order to keep margins high. But even if that is true, what good are high margins if no one is buying the device?
The margins argument means nothing, Apple is a different class of company now, lower margins often mean far more volume so it is really up to Apple to choose the optimal pricing on hardware.
You do have a much better point high margins are essentially worthless if you don't move product. Case in point Apples iPod Touch which hasn't been updated in years. Sales are tanking and yet they do nothing to keep the unit viable. It really makes no sense to me. At the very least I would have moved it to the 64 bit platform by now and expanded flash so that it would more effectively replaced the classic. However Apple apparently can't do this and would rather see a premature death.
By the way I'm not denying that the MP3 player market is slowly dying. However the market isn't dead completely and The Touch is far more than an MP3 player.
IMO in 2015 Apple needs to:
Eliminate all A5 devices from their iOS lineups
Make all iOS devices retina with laminated displays
Make all iOS devices 64-bit with Touch ID
Make 32GB the base storage for all iOS devices
Fix bugs and improve UX in iOS before adding new features.
yes this one is very important and frankly I'm not sure what is taking so long. This means that we need a small form factor iPhones that is 64 bit.
hopefully that will happen also.
actually I thought that was the point for getting rid of the A5. In any event the 64 bit transition should have been faster. There would be nothing better for developers than to not have any 32 bit devices to support in 2 years time.
well yes and no. The problem is corporate sales are sometimes dependent on low end hardware. Crazy as it may seem to some, the limited ability to store data directly on the phone is considered an advantage. As a compromise I'd rather see a much larger jump in storage capacities for each markup in price
actually this could apply to both Max OS and IOS plus any number of Apps Apple releases. There is no doubt imps my mind that quality control has suffered at Apple. It is something they need to address.
And for anyone complaining about margins and profits, I say, Apple has the cash to do it and increased sales would offset any hit they would take from $199/$499 taking a larger share of the iPhone/iPad mix.
The problem is the hit to margins is largely overblown anyways. In some cases modernization might actually lead to higher volumes for old form factors. I'd love a 64 bit iPhone in a iPhone 4 sized package for example.
By the way if margins where so important we wouldn't have seen some of the incredible discounts on iOS hardware this Black Friday. Sometimes sales can be more important than margins.
Then don't call it the mini 3, just add touch ID to the current mini and be done with it. Maybe this year would have been the perfect time to do away with the numbering system on iOS devices.
From a device management point of view you need to call it something else. In the end the little bit of extra hardware means a different OS build and maybe even different apps. The Mini 3 May not be perfect but it helps to distinguish it for the Mini 2. Considering the lackluster update calling the Mini 2T might have been a better move.
Given this move of Apples I do believe that they have shot themselves in the foot. My big concern is that they will see the Mini (due to bad sales) as being a product line in decline. This could easily result in long drawn out upgrades in the future and even no updates at all. The sad reality is that Apple does more to screw sales than they realize. If the Minis sales where bad, no updates to the platform wouldn't make them better.
By the way I don't like the idea that the Mini should be a scaled down Air with no major differences. It needs to be its own platform! However no material updates will kill the machine in the marketplace.
but a kickstand would actually be very helpful, especially when drawing or drafting. The version that Microsoft uses on their Surface Pro 3 is pretty fantastic, much better than any of the current cases that are currently available for the iPad Air 2. I'm not sure why you guys think things like this aren't any good, well that is until Apple implements it, then it becomes the best thing since sliced cheese.
I think you misunderstand my point. There have been complaints that the iPad doesn't come with a built-in kickstand going back to version 1. Apparently the absence of this makes it completely unusable. Not "It would be handy" but "It is essential".
Never mind that there are a number of accessories that perform the function of the kickstand at a reasonable price (and a few that are outrageously priced, but never mind). Also ignore that building in a kickstand makes the construction of the unit more complicated, and would play havoc with Jony Ive's design aesthetic.
Right... Sales replacing lost margins... That ALWAYS works well... in Fantasy land.... You should always fight for the margins and never let them go for increased sales unless the gain in sales is very high.
IPad has been far more successful than many had hoped for. As such they built in more margin than is really needed. I'd be happy if they maintained margins similar to what we see on Macs.
Since the tablet market is soft, letting go of your margins for increased sales is a losing proposition. There is such a huge chasm between the sub $200 tablets and the Ipads that these people will not buy an Apple tablet even at $100 less, you'll have a slight gain in sales and a huge decline in profitability. The tablets are already the least profitable thing they make, so I don't think it would be a good idea at all to do that.
Where did you get the idea that tablets are the least profitable things Apple makes? Everything I've seen indicates very good profitability when compared to the rest of the world. If you want to compote to an iPhone then that is a different story. However don't expect margins on an iPhone to last forever.
The Watch will probably have much better margins than the tablets, once they hit the market. You could bundle the watches at a slightly lower cost with tablets or phones, but alone reducing the price of tablets to much is a very bad idea.
Of course you don't want to reduce prices too much, however excessive margins can be very damaging to sales. Apple makes a huge profit on tablets and customers know that which means that a credible player could take significant sales from Apple. I'd be happy to see Apple make margins similar to its laptop lines.
Cash is such a precious commodity, you should never use it the way you talk about unless you are in a massively entrenched position, say like Walmart, Google or the Telecoms. Apple cannot be cavalier with its cash; that's why it is hording it.
While I don't agree with the other poster completely I do believe that it is time for Apple to overhaul its pricing structure with respect to the iPads. Apple went for years doing nothing to improve the value equation in these devices even while the prices on components fell like a rock. Seriously look at the cost of flash today and tell me that Apple is justified in keeping the same price structure on its machines. This after a modest correction this year to at least bring some reason to the pricing on the higher end model
Apples pricing structure might have made sense if they only expected to sell five million a year but they are doing around ten million a quarter now and as such it is much harder to justify the high prices in ones mind. They got away with it when iPad was the only game in town, it isn't anymore and as such they need to afresh the value equation in general and be more aggressive in pricing. That doesn't mean giving up all margins, but it does mean making sure that they stress what most of their customers value the most in an iPad.
No not yet because it's not available, it's still in crowdfunding.
I was under the impression that they had already shipped a few.
I did give 2000 CHF towards the project though, they sent me a really nice email afterwards. I've been a big Jolla supporter from the beginning. I don't know if you've ever used a Nokia N9 but it was an absolute pleasure to use, still my favorite phone of all time, well the development version the N950 was.
Nope! My very first smart phone was an iPhone. Back then I had looked at Nokias little PDA (N900 ?) like thing and was really disappointed with it. It had nowhere near enough flash and RAM for my interests at the time and the expansion slots did not impress me as a good solution for basic needs. In other words expansion slots are nice but not if you have issues stuffing your core OS and apps into the machines base flash allotment.
In the end I spent a lot of time looking at Nokia solutions back then and came away with two impressions that caused me to stay away. One was that they didn't have a clue about hardware design for this market. The other was that their software sucked and they clearly demonstrated that they had no ability to improve it. It was immediately apparent that Nokias PDA at the time was dead in the water the minute the iPhine came out, iPod Touch just finished it off completely.
I was a bit frustrated by the whole thing actually as they had some good ideas as to size of the device and an open nature but they obviously had nobody in management driving or commited to the project.
When Nokia announced that they were canceling the project I was devastated, especially when it was an extremely popular phone here in Europe. All wasn't lost though, the Nokia development team behind the project left to make Jolla.
I've only become aware of Jolla recently, as such I haven't been able to develop a definitive opinion of the device yet. Given that I do hope that the team has somebody driving the program in the right direction and a focus on getting high quality core apps out the door with the first release. Core apps here being a good web browser, E-Mail, a media player and a good PDF/E-Book reader. If Jolla doesn't ship with those in good order they will end up having a tough time in the marketplace.
Sailfish is right up my ally, a fast OS, full multitasking and very attractive.
It certainly is interesting. At the point it would take a lot to get me to give up an iPad, however it might have uses as a secondary machine.
There first phone, though not as attractive as the original Nokia N9,
In your hand a rose would look pale trying to compete with your glow!
is still very nice and build to last. I can't wait for their tablet.
I will need to spend more time reading up on it. One thing that caught my eye was the small battery size. That is never a good sign.
Well it is possible that they can make mistakes from time to time. Look at the price reduction on the original iPhone, on the ?TV which started out at $299 and is now $99. Look at how the price has come down on the MBA which was $1799 when first announced.
The MBA could result in a very long and interesting discussion all on its own. It is a perfect example of Apple relaxing a device that intitally had very high margins which result in very poor sales. Early adopters and rich folks can not sustain Apple considering the size of the company now.
The thing was the concept was excellent and apparently Apple recognized the potential in the machine. By repositioning it in the marketplace as a Mac Book replacement they effectively cut the price almost in half and generated a big success story for the laptop line. At this point Apple is very price sensitive with the Air and has continued to lower the price to keep it competitive in the marketplace. Competitive does not mean giving up on margins though.
The facts are iPad sales are declining. I happen to think one of the reasons is people are finding cheaper tablets that are "good enough".
All tablet sales are declining, it is simply the market stabilizing after a rather hot debut. Apple is still selling about twice as many iPads as it is Macs so there is no reason for alarm.
I thought when the original mini came out Apple priced it at $329 so when it went retina a year later they wouldn't have to increase the price. Yet they did, to $399.
That can be seen as pure greed on Apples part if you ask me. Nothing about that upgraded Mini justified a $70 increase in price.
That new Nokia N1 tablet is an all aluminum case with 64-bit, 2GB RAM, laminated retina display and slightly thinner and lighter than the mini. And it's $150 cheaper. Of course it's not running iOS but does the average consumer think iOS is worth a $150 premium?
That is a good question. Right now I'd find it hard to give up an iPad, but I've also put off upgrading my iPad 3 for two years now waiting for Apple to materially improve the hardware to deliver a significantly better experience. With the latest Air release they seem to begrudgingly released an update that is acceptable. Now with respect to the Mini, I wouldn't take an IPad 3 if Cook tried to give it to me personally. Why? Because the release is a bit of an insult to users expecting more.
From a device management point of view you need to call it something else. In the end the little bit of extra hardware means a different OS build and maybe even different apps. The Mini 3 May not be perfect but it helps to distinguish it for the Mini 2. Considering the lackluster update calling the Mini 2T might have been a better move.
Given this move of Apples I do believe that they have shot themselves in the foot. My big concern is that they will see the Mini (due to bad sales) as being a product line in decline. This could easily result in long drawn out upgrades in the future and even no updates at all. The sad reality is that Apple does more to screw sales than they realize. If the Minis sales where bad, no updates to the platform wouldn't make them better.
By the way I don't like the idea that the Mini should be a scaled down Air with no major differences. It needs to be its own platform! However no material updates will kill the machine in the marketplace.
Tim Cook needs somebody besides finance and marketing driving product decisions. Right now we have a combination of finance proping up margins and marketing pushing upsell nonsense and that's where you get an iPad mini 3 and 16 > 64 storage bump when Apple could easily afford to make 32GB the base storage. By going 16 > 64 Phil "upsell" Schiller can say "you get 4x the storage for only $100 more" and then Luca can report higher ASPs on the quarterly earnings calls.
At the end of FY 2014 Apple had over $155B in cash/marketable securities. They generated almost $60B in cash from operations in FY 2014. Apple can certainly afford to rethink some of their pricing structures. Isn't technology supposed to get cheaper over time?
That can be seen as pure greed on Apples part if you ask me. Nothing about that upgraded Mini justified a $70 increase in price.
That is a good question. Right now I'd find it hard to give up an iPad, but I've also put off upgrading my iPad 3 for two years now waiting for Apple to materially improve the hardware to deliver a significantly better experience. With the latest Air release they seem to begrudgingly released an update that is acceptable. Now with respect to the Mini, I wouldn't take an IPad 3 if Cook tried to give it to me personally. Why? Because the release is a bit of an insult to users expecting more.
People say Apple has no problem cannibalizing it it's own products but I don't think that's always true. It seems to me Apple does whatever it can to ensure that iPhone sales are never cannibalized by anything else. And I think the iPad mini pricing is set so it doesn't cannibalize iPad Air or iPhone sales. There's no way I would recommend a mini 3 to anyone. Touch ID is not worth $100 premium. I can only imagine what Steve Jobs would say if he saw the current iPad line up.
Well then how do you explain the mini essentially being the same as the Air last year but this year being a generation behind? If it's all about margins, as some here claim, then clearly last years mini was a mistake, no?
It obviously isn't all about margins. As for the Mini the move here is perplexing to say the least, If margins where a problem then why did they knock off $100 from what was last years model? Here is the thing I don't see the user base that is interested in the Mini being rabid fans of Touch ID and Apple Pay. This I'd be surprised to find the Touch ID variant doing well in the market because the perception is that the feature isn't worth $100 dollars. So effectively Apple lowered its margins significantly with the Mini
If not then why would Apple have gone away from the hardware parity they introduced last year?
I don't see a need for precise hardware parity the way some do. However I do expect that hardware will be materially upgraded from one year to the next. In this sense the iPad Mini 3 is a management failure at Apple.
Now why they failed is an open question. Was it a capacity problem? Who knows, the reality is that Apple did not meet the reasonable expectations of its customers.
I still think anyone buying a mini 3 right now is a sucker as I do think the real mini 3 will be announced next spring but called the mini 4.
For the most part I'd say yes. Of course there are exceptions and frankly anybody doing lots of online transaction might benefit from the Touch ID feature. Most users though would be better off saving a $100 and buying last years machine.
You knock it but a kickstand would actually be very helpful, especially when drawing or drafting. The version that Microsoft uses on their Surface Pro 3 is pretty fantastic, much better than any of the current cases that are currently available for the iPad Air 2.
You know how these guys are, anything that Apple has failed to implement is by definition crap. On the other hand the extensive use of cases with iPads really means that there is little opportunity for Apple here.
I'm not sure why you guys think things like this aren't any good, well that is until Apple implements it, then it becomes the best thing since sliced cheese.
Tim Cook needs somebody besides finance and marketing driving product decisions. Right now we have a combination of finance proping up margins and marketing pushing upsell nonsense and that's where you get an iPad mini 3 and 16 > 64 storage bump when Apple could easily afford to make 32GB the base storage.
I've mentioned this before but I really think the 16 GB devices are targeted at corporate sales. The IT folks at large corporations are obsessed with the security implications of cell phones and the like. In their world less is better as far as pocketable storage goes.
By going 16 > 64 Phil "upsell" Schiller can say "you get 4x the storage for only $100 more" and then Luca can report higher ASPs on the quarterly earnings calls.
Well that is far better than paying $100 for storage that generates a $5 delta in parts costs. Let's face it, it is a better deal than in the past when you might get half that much storage. I don't mind Apple getting a decent mark up on parts costs, it is when their markup becomes indecent that I begin to care.
At the end of FY 2014 Apple had over $155B in cash/marketable securities. They generated almost $60B in cash from operations in FY 2014. Apple can certainly afford to rethink some of their pricing structures. Isn't technology supposed to get cheaper over time?
Rethinking is certainly the order of the day for tablets. The market has matured and they are selling more than they imagined but sales are weakening. All I'm really saying is keep iPad margins consistent with laptop margins. They milked the early adopters, now is the time to put on a more aggressive sales posture.
I've mentioned this before but I really think the 16 GB devices are targeted at corporate sales. The IT folks at large corporations are obsessed with the security implications of cell phones and the like. In their world less is better as far as pocketable storage goes.
Well that is far better than paying $100 for storage that generates a $5 delta in parts costs. Let's face it, it is a better deal than in the past when you might get half that much storage. I don't mind Apple getting a decent mark up on parts costs, it is when their markup becomes indecent that I begin to care.
Rethinking is certainly the order of the day for tablets. The market has matured and they are selling more than they imagined but sales are weakening. All I'm really saying is keep iPad margins consistent with laptop margins. They milked the early adopters, now is the time to put on a more aggressive sales posture.
Agreed. But I still think 32GB should be base storage for all consumer iOS devices.
Having landscape speakers means that the sound won't be lopsided, and you'll actually notice stereo sound, with certain sounds coming from the left and others from the right.
You would have to have your nose pressed against the screen to detect stereo separation.
The only reason the Mini 3 exists is to support Touch ID. That was critical due to the need to get Apple Pay well supported at launch. This should be pretty obvious to many out there, Mini 3 wasn't so much an upgrade as it was a modification directly aimed at the Apple Pay launch.
So why didn't Apple just add Touch ID silently to the Mini 2 like they upgrade MacBook CPUs regularly (Mini 2 "Late 2014").
Marketing it as a 'new' model (and raising the price here in Australia) was just cynical.
So why didn't Apple just add Touch ID silently to the Mini 2 like they upgrade MacBook CPUs regularly (Mini 2 "Late 2014").
Marketing it as a 'new' model (and raising the price here in Australia) was just cynical.
:???: TouchID has become a valuable selling point so why would they do a silent update the way the did with the iPad 2 from 45nm to 32nm ceteris paribus.
You would have to have your nose pressed against the screen to detect stereo separation.
It seems to me that the distance between the speakers isn’t the actual issue here.
Rather that the angle formed between the speakers and the listener (and, on a small enough scale, the quadrilateral formed involving both ears) is important.
Comments
You knock it but a kickstand would actually be very helpful, especially when drawing or drafting. The version that Microsoft uses on their Surface Pro 3 is pretty fantastic, much better than any of the current cases that are currently available for the iPad Air 2. I'm not sure why you guys think things like this aren't any good, well that is until Apple implements it, then it becomes the best thing since sliced cheese.
You do have a much better point high margins are essentially worthless if you don't move product. Case in point Apples iPod Touch which hasn't been updated in years. Sales are tanking and yet they do nothing to keep the unit viable. It really makes no sense to me. At the very least I would have moved it to the 64 bit platform by now and expanded flash so that it would more effectively replaced the classic. However Apple apparently can't do this and would rather see a premature death.
By the way I'm not denying that the MP3 player market is slowly dying. However the market isn't dead completely and The Touch is far more than an MP3 player.
- yes this one is very important and frankly I'm not sure what is taking so long. This means that we need a small form factor iPhones that is 64 bit.
- hopefully that will happen also.
- actually I thought that was the point for getting rid of the A5. In any event the 64 bit transition should have been faster. There would be nothing better for developers than to not have any 32 bit devices to support in 2 years time.
- well yes and no. The problem is corporate sales are sometimes dependent on low end hardware. Crazy as it may seem to some, the limited ability to store data directly on the phone is considered an advantage. As a compromise I'd rather see a much larger jump in storage capacities for each markup in price
- actually this could apply to both Max OS and IOS plus any number of Apps Apple releases. There is no doubt imps my mind that quality control has suffered at Apple. It is something they need to address.
The problem is the hit to margins is largely overblown anyways. In some cases modernization might actually lead to higher volumes for old form factors. I'd love a 64 bit iPhone in a iPhone 4 sized package for example.By the way if margins where so important we wouldn't have seen some of the incredible discounts on iOS hardware this Black Friday. Sometimes sales can be more important than margins.
Don't forget the case;
From a device management point of view you need to call it something else. In the end the little bit of extra hardware means a different OS build and maybe even different apps. The Mini 3 May not be perfect but it helps to distinguish it for the Mini 2. Considering the lackluster update calling the Mini 2T might have been a better move.
Given this move of Apples I do believe that they have shot themselves in the foot. My big concern is that they will see the Mini (due to bad sales) as being a product line in decline. This could easily result in long drawn out upgrades in the future and even no updates at all. The sad reality is that Apple does more to screw sales than they realize. If the Minis sales where bad, no updates to the platform wouldn't make them better.
By the way I don't like the idea that the Mini should be a scaled down Air with no major differences. It needs to be its own platform! However no material updates will kill the machine in the marketplace.
Never mind that there are a number of accessories that perform the function of the kickstand at a reasonable price (and a few that are outrageously priced, but never mind). Also ignore that building in a kickstand makes the construction of the unit more complicated, and would play havoc with Jony Ive's design aesthetic.
While I don't agree with the other poster completely I do believe that it is time for Apple to overhaul its pricing structure with respect to the iPads. Apple went for years doing nothing to improve the value equation in these devices even while the prices on components fell like a rock. Seriously look at the cost of flash today and tell me that Apple is justified in keeping the same price structure on its machines. This after a modest correction this year to at least bring some reason to the pricing on the higher end model
Apples pricing structure might have made sense if they only expected to sell five million a year but they are doing around ten million a quarter now and as such it is much harder to justify the high prices in ones mind. They got away with it when iPad was the only game in town, it isn't anymore and as such they need to afresh the value equation in general and be more aggressive in pricing. That doesn't mean giving up all margins, but it does mean making sure that they stress what most of their customers value the most in an iPad.
In the end I spent a lot of time looking at Nokia solutions back then and came away with two impressions that caused me to stay away. One was that they didn't have a clue about hardware design for this market. The other was that their software sucked and they clearly demonstrated that they had no ability to improve it. It was immediately apparent that Nokias PDA at the time was dead in the water the minute the iPhine came out, iPod Touch just finished it off completely.
I was a bit frustrated by the whole thing actually as they had some good ideas as to size of the device and an open nature but they obviously had nobody in management driving or commited to the project. I've only become aware of Jolla recently, as such I haven't been able to develop a definitive opinion of the device yet. Given that I do hope that the team has somebody driving the program in the right direction and a focus on getting high quality core apps out the door with the first release. Core apps here being a good web browser, E-Mail, a media player and a good PDF/E-Book reader. If Jolla doesn't ship with those in good order they will end up having a tough time in the marketplace. It certainly is interesting. At the point it would take a lot to get me to give up an iPad, however it might have uses as a secondary machine. In your hand a rose would look pale trying to compete with your glow! I will need to spend more time reading up on it. One thing that caught my eye was the small battery size. That is never a good sign.
The thing was the concept was excellent and apparently Apple recognized the potential in the machine. By repositioning it in the marketplace as a Mac Book replacement they effectively cut the price almost in half and generated a big success story for the laptop line. At this point Apple is very price sensitive with the Air and has continued to lower the price to keep it competitive in the marketplace. Competitive does not mean giving up on margins though. All tablet sales are declining, it is simply the market stabilizing after a rather hot debut. Apple is still selling about twice as many iPads as it is Macs so there is no reason for alarm. That can be seen as pure greed on Apples part if you ask me. Nothing about that upgraded Mini justified a $70 increase in price.
That is a good question. Right now I'd find it hard to give up an iPad, but I've also put off upgrading my iPad 3 for two years now waiting for Apple to materially improve the hardware to deliver a significantly better experience. With the latest Air release they seem to begrudgingly released an update that is acceptable. Now with respect to the Mini, I wouldn't take an IPad 3 if Cook tried to give it to me personally. Why? Because the release is a bit of an insult to users expecting more.
Tim Cook needs somebody besides finance and marketing driving product decisions. Right now we have a combination of finance proping up margins and marketing pushing upsell nonsense and that's where you get an iPad mini 3 and 16 > 64 storage bump when Apple could easily afford to make 32GB the base storage. By going 16 > 64 Phil "upsell" Schiller can say "you get 4x the storage for only $100 more" and then Luca can report higher ASPs on the quarterly earnings calls.
At the end of FY 2014 Apple had over $155B in cash/marketable securities. They generated almost $60B in cash from operations in FY 2014. Apple can certainly afford to rethink some of their pricing structures. Isn't technology supposed to get cheaper over time?
People say Apple has no problem cannibalizing it it's own products but I don't think that's always true. It seems to me Apple does whatever it can to ensure that iPhone sales are never cannibalized by anything else. And I think the iPad mini pricing is set so it doesn't cannibalize iPad Air or iPhone sales. There's no way I would recommend a mini 3 to anyone. Touch ID is not worth $100 premium. I can only imagine what Steve Jobs would say if he saw the current iPad line up.
Now why they failed is an open question. Was it a capacity problem? Who knows, the reality is that Apple did not meet the reasonable expectations of its customers.
For the most part I'd say yes. Of course there are exceptions and frankly anybody doing lots of online transaction might benefit from the Touch ID feature. Most users though would be better off saving a $100 and buying last years machine.
You know how these guys are, anything that Apple has failed to implement is by definition crap. On the other hand the extensive use of cases with iPads really means that there is little opportunity for Apple here.
Rethinking is certainly the order of the day for tablets. The market has matured and they are selling more than they imagined but sales are weakening. All I'm really saying is keep iPad margins consistent with laptop margins. They milked the early adopters, now is the time to put on a more aggressive sales posture.
Agreed. But I still think 32GB should be base storage for all consumer iOS devices.
Having landscape speakers means that the sound won't be lopsided, and you'll actually notice stereo sound, with certain sounds coming from the left and others from the right.
You would have to have your nose pressed against the screen to detect stereo separation.
The only reason the Mini 3 exists is to support Touch ID. That was critical due to the need to get Apple Pay well supported at launch. This should be pretty obvious to many out there, Mini 3 wasn't so much an upgrade as it was a modification directly aimed at the Apple Pay launch.
So why didn't Apple just add Touch ID silently to the Mini 2 like they upgrade MacBook CPUs regularly (Mini 2 "Late 2014").
Marketing it as a 'new' model (and raising the price here in Australia) was just cynical.
:???: TouchID has become a valuable selling point so why would they do a silent update the way the did with the iPad 2 from 45nm to 32nm ceteris paribus.
You would have to have your nose pressed against the screen to detect stereo separation.
We're talking about close to a foot of separation on the iPad Pro/Plus/whatever, so I think that stereo material will be very easy to detect.
It seems to me that the distance between the speakers isn’t the actual issue here.
Rather that the angle formed between the speakers and the listener (and, on a small enough scale, the quadrilateral formed involving both ears) is important.