A 3G radio can't be that expensive. Certainly not $130. It's probably more like $2.
The chip might only be an extra $2 (more like $5), but the IP licenses are more like $50-60. At retail, that gives you a $130 premium.
The iPad seems like a much better use of the integrated SIM than the iPhone. (Just add the phone features back in... or sell the phones unlocked for those that want them!) Hope it works with T-Mobile and Sprint as well though.
It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.
ATT is finally getting the MiFi device on their network, and have you seen their fees?
AppleInsider was just reporting the contents of a research note by an analyst. If this is evidence of someone not knowing squat, then you can blame the analyst.
Thompson
A real journalist would point out the discrepancy. It would be like saying the new MacBook Air ships with 2 megabytes of RAM because they read it somewhere else.
A real journalist would point out the discrepancy. It would be like saying the new MacBook Air ships with 2 megabytes of RAM because they read it somewhere else.
I know, I know.
Journalism is dead.
AppleInsider is reporting on a rumor, not a verifiable fact (such as what new MacBook Airs may be shipping with). As such, I find it appropriate that they simply passed along the information that they found elsewhere without taking it to task.
I absolutely agree. I still can't get over how ridiculous the extra $130 charge is.
How is it ridiculous? How much do the GSM, UMTS, and GPS cost in components cost? How much is the licensing? How much is the engineering and production? How much do others charge for adding cellular radios and GPS. I paid $350 not too many years ago for a ?3G? USB stick for my Mac from a carrier.
You say that $130 more is too much, but that would assume that the base price for the WiFi iPad is the ?ideal? price, when it?s possible (based on other tablet makers inability to compete with Apple) that the price is lower than Apple desired profit margin to attract more buyers, with the ?flagship option? picking up some of the slack to even out their margins. This isn?t some shady business practice, but how all smart companies operate. The entry level product is often designed to attract less affluent buyers and sell more by volume.
The only way it would be atypical is to expect a higher end feature that is only produced for a fraction of their product to scale in price in accordance with common features they produce for the entire product line.
If it gets a camera now I'm wondering how is it going to work if I don't hold it up like a steering wheel walking downtown like I'm reading the (paper) newspaper bumping into things causing a scene and not to mention car / pedestrian accidents.
the same way idiots are bumping into things now while trying to use an iPad [or reading a newspaper] while walking in downtown manhattan. they deserve to get run over. [i have to admit, i've been guilty of throwing a shoulder check at the guy walking down the street while reading his iPad, assuming it's everyone else's responsibility to get out of his way].
A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.
Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.
GSM/CDMA is an acceptable way of describing it. By your logic people should be clamoring for an EVDO iPhone (what is all this talk of 2G CDMA???). EVDO would be associated with CDMA, and HSPA+ with GSM.
These charges are for the iPad only, get your facts straight. If you just buy a standard MiFi you are looking at nearly identical pricing.
Nope, you are wrong. But thanks for playing. Instead of telling me to get my facts straight, perhaps you should head over to Verizon's web site and double-check for yourself. And perhaps you'll be a bit less cocky the next time.
The $20 plan isn't availble for the MiFi, but it is available of non-iPad tablets. And for the MiFi, $35 gets you 3 GB w/Verizon and only 200 MB with ATT. That is boardline criminal.
A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.
Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.
What about China? Don't they have a few large providers using CDMA? My guess would be that Apple is looking in this direction more than just for the US. Several hundred million customers is a hellavu lot more friendly than just 10's of millions.
What about China? Don't they have a few large providers using CDMA? My guess would be that Apple is looking in this direction more than just for the US. Several hundred million customers is a hellavu lot more friendly than just 10's of millions.
China Telecom?s CDMA ?2G? user base is relatively tiny. It?s less than AT&T or Verizon at about 85 million subscribers. Then figure out how many of those subscribers could or would be able to afford an iPhone and a data plan for it.
It?s China?s GSM ?2G? user base is huge with about about ¾ of a billion subscribers across their two largest carriers.
China Mobile, their largest carrier with about 575 million subscribers uses GSM for ?2G? and TD-SCDMA for ?3G?. This is the same GSM in the iPhone and their homegrown TD-SCDMA is not CDMA, but closer to the W-CDMA(UMTS) found in the iPhone. This makes working with China Mobile more important than working with China Telecom for many different reasons.
What would be cool is iPad getting a slot for the blade SSD modules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality
I think this points toward Apple's 'cloud' music service that we've been hearing rumors of. Basically, like Pandora on your iPad, only you can get a version that will be 3G for music only. This'd be awesome -- an iPad as your music server. I've always thought Apple needed something better audio-wise to compete against Logitech's Squeezebox and the Sonos system. It could make a great stand-alone music jukebox.
However I still see cloud based storage of music or video files as pretty stupid. Think about it, if everybody with an MP3 player running at this moment, at Apples standard bit rates, switched to the cloud we would have a network melt down. The bandwidth simply isn't there.
This is probably why you are looking for more Flash in the iPads and is frankly one of the reasons I'm waiting. Frankly though I see RAM as more important but I'm expecting a major update so that is not a problem.
Quote:
I haven't bought an iPad because I have a netbook running a Logitech Squeezebox of my music collection that consists of 90GB of .flac files. If and iPad would do something similar, I'd be all over that. I've already coverted my .flac's to .m4a's for the day when the iPad gets 128GB of memory.
In your case you need to save your money for 256GB of storage. Really 90 GB is awfully close to 128GB, since everyone loads an app or two on their machines you would be out of storage pretty quickly.
Don't forget the SIM tray costs. Additionally, these things have to be assembled, connected to other things, etc., increasing labor costs.
As someone above said, the person doesn't know the basics of pricing. Ultimately, it's a question of what the market will pay.
To some extent yes. However people mis a few things that adds a little bit to iPad 3Gs cost. You have a housing that requires signifactantly more machining to handle yhe antenna molding plus the cost of that molding and antenna array. It isn't just the 3G chip and it isn't just the hardware as IP has a price too.
Given all of this the 3G modem is still an expensive addition to the device. Yes it is due to what the market can bear but sadly this is a regulated market with minimal consummer influence. People feel like they are getting ripped of because in simple terms they are.
Quote:
Heaven forbid. What a horrendous business to get into. The stock will sink like a stone.
All the more reason for Apple to get in there and clean things up. If they can offer reasonable data rates it would promote even more device sales and provide for a steady stream of income. The big problem is finding a reasonably priced carrier with enough bandwidth. Lets face it niether Verizon nor AT&T really compete against each other unless you consider seeing who can gouge the consummer the most competition. The only reason iPhone and iPad have slightly better rates is that Apple is very aggressive in its contract negotiations.
Quote:
Moreover, what would be the point of buying just a US carrier!?
Frankly because it is the largest market out there without active competition. Apple couldn't reasonably improve the situation in many countries but in the US they could reasonably shake things up. It would take wads of cash though.
In some respects though to really fix the cellular industry in the US you would need to go after congress and change many of the laws governing the industry. Especially the ones at the local level that tend to regulate the industry based on ignorance or preferrential treatment of one company over another. AT&Ts problems if the SF bay region are not technical but rather a corrupt government. In this case a government corrupted by ignorance more than anything else.
"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."
Does this guy even know how the current iPad is constructed?
Obviously not.
Quote:
It is already a unibody construction, one piece of metal with no pins!!!
What the hell is he talking about?
That is a good question. Apple has a few patents from a couple of years ago that might shed some light on just what might be coming. The patent describes a process where parts of an electronic assembly are laminated together almost like plywood. Apples track pad may be the first example of such an assembly. This patent showed up on several of the Mac rumor sights some time ago.
As to this idiot, you ever get the feeling that Apple goes out and searches for the most clueless analyst they can possibly find to leak some of this info to? It is pretty much a given that these clueless "analyst" will butcher whatever info they are given. This keeps Apple in the spotlight without an obvious champaign to do so. Since the published comments are gibberish it gives the rumor community something to discuss.
Just a thought, this guy might simply be a pawn unkowningly playing his part.
It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.
Aren't they infamous too for crippling HW features in devices to force us to buy their crappy SW-based replacements ? They did with my first Razor handset.
And they had lousy if any concern for me at tech support.
Weird how this article is stated like this analyst is presenting confirmed facts, and not something he's heard.
Parts adding the most weight to the iPad I believe are the glass front, the metal back and the battery. If the next iPad is (according to this report) the same in these regards the weight will be more or less unaffected. Fingers crossed for a lighter disclosure. For hand held operations/ reading weight is the only issue left to adress. Perhaps with generation 3 they had the time to make some big changes?
Comments
A 3G radio can't be that expensive. Certainly not $130. It's probably more like $2.
The chip might only be an extra $2 (more like $5), but the IP licenses are more like $50-60. At retail, that gives you a $130 premium.
The iPad seems like a much better use of the integrated SIM than the iPhone. (Just add the phone features back in... or sell the phones unlocked for those that want them!) Hope it works with T-Mobile and Sprint as well though.
Should Apple buy Sprint..?
And Sprint and T-Mobile. The world is not just AT&T and Verizon you know.
It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.
ATT is finally getting the MiFi device on their network, and have you seen their fees?
$35 for 200MB
$60 for 5GB
http://www.macworld.com/article/1557.../att_mifi.html
And Verizon's prices for the same thing:
$20 for 1 GB
$35 for 3 GB
$50 for 5 GB
So exactly who's customers are getting raped by prices??
The chip might only be an extra $2 (more like $5), but the IP licenses are more like $50-60. At retail, that gives you a $130 premium.
Don't forget the SIM tray costs. Additionally, these things have to be assembled, connected to other things, etc., increasing labor costs.
As someone above said, the person doesn't know the basics of pricing. Ultimately, it's a question of what the market will pay.
Should Apple buy Sprint..?
Heaven forbid. What a horrendous business to get into. The stock will sink like a stone.
Moreover, what would be the point of buying just a US carrier!?
AppleInsider was just reporting the contents of a research note by an analyst. If this is evidence of someone not knowing squat, then you can blame the analyst.
Thompson
A real journalist would point out the discrepancy. It would be like saying the new MacBook Air ships with 2 megabytes of RAM because they read it somewhere else.
I know, I know.
Journalism is dead.
A real journalist would point out the discrepancy. It would be like saying the new MacBook Air ships with 2 megabytes of RAM because they read it somewhere else.
I know, I know.
Journalism is dead.
AppleInsider is reporting on a rumor, not a verifiable fact (such as what new MacBook Airs may be shipping with). As such, I find it appropriate that they simply passed along the information that they found elsewhere without taking it to task.
I think you're being too persnickety here.
Thompson
I absolutely agree. I still can't get over how ridiculous the extra $130 charge is.
How is it ridiculous? How much do the GSM, UMTS, and GPS cost in components cost? How much is the licensing? How much is the engineering and production? How much do others charge for adding cellular radios and GPS. I paid $350 not too many years ago for a ?3G? USB stick for my Mac from a carrier.
You say that $130 more is too much, but that would assume that the base price for the WiFi iPad is the ?ideal? price, when it?s possible (based on other tablet makers inability to compete with Apple) that the price is lower than Apple desired profit margin to attract more buyers, with the ?flagship option? picking up some of the slack to even out their margins. This isn?t some shady business practice, but how all smart companies operate. The entry level product is often designed to attract less affluent buyers and sell more by volume.
The only way it would be atypical is to expect a higher end feature that is only produced for a fraction of their product to scale in price in accordance with common features they produce for the entire product line.
If it gets a camera now I'm wondering how is it going to work if I don't hold it up like a steering wheel walking downtown like I'm reading the (paper) newspaper bumping into things causing a scene and not to mention car / pedestrian accidents.
the same way idiots are bumping into things now while trying to use an iPad [or reading a newspaper] while walking in downtown manhattan. they deserve to get run over. [i have to admit, i've been guilty of throwing a shoulder check at the guy walking down the street while reading his iPad, assuming it's everyone else's responsibility to get out of his way].
This report is highly suspect.
A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.
Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.
GSM/CDMA is an acceptable way of describing it. By your logic people should be clamoring for an EVDO iPhone (what is all this talk of 2G CDMA???). EVDO would be associated with CDMA, and HSPA+ with GSM.
ATT is finally getting the MiFi device on their network, and have you seen their fees?
$35 for 200MB
$60 for 5GB
http://www.macworld.com/article/1557.../att_mifi.html
And Verizon's prices for the same thing:
$20 for 1 GB
$35 for 3 GB
$50 for 5 GB
So exactly who's customers are getting raped by prices??
These charges are for the iPad only, get your facts straight. If you just buy a standard MiFi you are looking at nearly identical pricing.
These charges are for the iPad only, get your facts straight. If you just buy a standard MiFi you are looking at nearly identical pricing.
Nope, you are wrong. But thanks for playing. Instead of telling me to get my facts straight, perhaps you should head over to Verizon's web site and double-check for yourself. And perhaps you'll be a bit less cocky the next time.
Here, let me help you out: http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/m...nd/?page=plans
The $20 plan isn't availble for the MiFi, but it is available of non-iPad tablets. And for the MiFi, $35 gets you 3 GB w/Verizon and only 200 MB with ATT. That is boardline criminal.
This report is highly suspect.
A CDMA-GSM chip would be useless for the iPad. GSM is a 2G technology. What Apple would need would be a CDMA-HSPA (or HSPA+) multimode chip.
Either this rumor is B.S. or AppleInsider doesn't know squat about mobile telephony technology.
What about China? Don't they have a few large providers using CDMA? My guess would be that Apple is looking in this direction more than just for the US. Several hundred million customers is a hellavu lot more friendly than just 10's of millions.
What about China? Don't they have a few large providers using CDMA? My guess would be that Apple is looking in this direction more than just for the US. Several hundred million customers is a hellavu lot more friendly than just 10's of millions.
China Telecom?s CDMA ?2G? user base is relatively tiny. It?s less than AT&T or Verizon at about 85 million subscribers. Then figure out how many of those subscribers could or would be able to afford an iPhone and a data plan for it.
It?s China?s GSM ?2G? user base is huge with about about ¾ of a billion subscribers across their two largest carriers.
China Mobile, their largest carrier with about 575 million subscribers uses GSM for ?2G? and TD-SCDMA for ?3G?. This is the same GSM in the iPhone and their homegrown TD-SCDMA is not CDMA, but closer to the W-CDMA(UMTS) found in the iPhone. This makes working with China Mobile more important than working with China Telecom for many different reasons.
I think this points toward Apple's 'cloud' music service that we've been hearing rumors of. Basically, like Pandora on your iPad, only you can get a version that will be 3G for music only. This'd be awesome -- an iPad as your music server. I've always thought Apple needed something better audio-wise to compete against Logitech's Squeezebox and the Sonos system. It could make a great stand-alone music jukebox.
However I still see cloud based storage of music or video files as pretty stupid. Think about it, if everybody with an MP3 player running at this moment, at Apples standard bit rates, switched to the cloud we would have a network melt down. The bandwidth simply isn't there.
This is probably why you are looking for more Flash in the iPads and is frankly one of the reasons I'm waiting. Frankly though I see RAM as more important but I'm expecting a major update so that is not a problem.
I haven't bought an iPad because I have a netbook running a Logitech Squeezebox of my music collection that consists of 90GB of .flac files. If and iPad would do something similar, I'd be all over that. I've already coverted my .flac's to .m4a's for the day when the iPad gets 128GB of memory.
In your case you need to save your money for 256GB of storage. Really 90 GB is awfully close to 128GB, since everyone loads an app or two on their machines you would be out of storage pretty quickly.
Don't forget the SIM tray costs. Additionally, these things have to be assembled, connected to other things, etc., increasing labor costs.
As someone above said, the person doesn't know the basics of pricing. Ultimately, it's a question of what the market will pay.
To some extent yes. However people mis a few things that adds a little bit to iPad 3Gs cost. You have a housing that requires signifactantly more machining to handle yhe antenna molding plus the cost of that molding and antenna array. It isn't just the 3G chip and it isn't just the hardware as IP has a price too.
Given all of this the 3G modem is still an expensive addition to the device. Yes it is due to what the market can bear but sadly this is a regulated market with minimal consummer influence. People feel like they are getting ripped of because in simple terms they are.
Heaven forbid. What a horrendous business to get into. The stock will sink like a stone.
All the more reason for Apple to get in there and clean things up. If they can offer reasonable data rates it would promote even more device sales and provide for a steady stream of income. The big problem is finding a reasonably priced carrier with enough bandwidth. Lets face it niether Verizon nor AT&T really compete against each other unless you consider seeing who can gouge the consummer the most competition. The only reason iPhone and iPad have slightly better rates is that Apple is very aggressive in its contract negotiations.
Moreover, what would be the point of buying just a US carrier!?
Frankly because it is the largest market out there without active competition. Apple couldn't reasonably improve the situation in many countries but in the US they could reasonably shake things up. It would take wads of cash though.
In some respects though to really fix the cellular industry in the US you would need to go after congress and change many of the laws governing the industry. Especially the ones at the local level that tend to regulate the industry based on ignorance or preferrential treatment of one company over another. AT&Ts problems if the SF bay region are not technical but rather a corrupt government. In this case a government corrupted by ignorance more than anything else.
"The new iPad is thinner than the existing model and is essentially made from one piece of metal with no pins needed," Blair wrote. "We understand it requires a new type of manufacturing process as a result, similar to the company's unibody approach seen in MacBooks."
Does this guy even know how the current iPad is constructed?
Obviously not.
It is already a unibody construction, one piece of metal with no pins!!!
What the hell is he talking about?
That is a good question. Apple has a few patents from a couple of years ago that might shed some light on just what might be coming. The patent describes a process where parts of an electronic assembly are laminated together almost like plywood. Apples track pad may be the first example of such an assembly. This patent showed up on several of the Mac rumor sights some time ago.
As to this idiot, you ever get the feeling that Apple goes out and searches for the most clueless analyst they can possibly find to leak some of this info to? It is pretty much a given that these clueless "analyst" will butcher whatever info they are given. This keeps Apple in the spotlight without an obvious champaign to do so. Since the published comments are gibberish it gives the rumor community something to discuss.
Just a thought, this guy might simply be a pawn unkowningly playing his part.
Dave
What would be cool is iPad getting a slot for the blade SSD modules.
There's a reason this will never happen.
It would be pretty funny if all verizon got was the iPad. I'm telling you, if they get the iPhone....they are going to rape people on charges. They will get an even bigger case of The Big Head.
Aren't they infamous too for crippling HW features in devices to force us to buy their crappy SW-based replacements ? They did with my first Razor handset.
And they had lousy if any concern for me at tech support.
---h
Parts adding the most weight to the iPad I believe are the glass front, the metal back and the battery. If the next iPad is (according to this report) the same in these regards the weight will be more or less unaffected. Fingers crossed for a lighter disclosure. For hand held operations/ reading weight is the only issue left to adress. Perhaps with generation 3 they had the time to make some big changes?