The market will be much smaller, nowhere near the 55M - 60M that the iPad currently has annually. Or it will cannibalize the hugely successful current version (which still has no competition), with lower margins.
It will compete for the cheap-o market segment.
Not worth it for Apple, since it needs BIG wins at its current scale.
Yeah, $3 B a year isn't worth pursuing.
10 M of these tablets at $300 is $3 B - not counting any other benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Beige
Highly unlikely as there isn't much of a market for a 7" or 'mini" tablet and I don't see Apple wasting resources to create the market.
Amazon has sold a lot of Kindles in that size - and that's where most of the other tablets are focusing since they can't compete with Apple on a 10" tablet.
Apple would have to weigh the following:
- Revenues from iPad mini ($3 B a year if they sell 10 M at $300)
- Any cannibalization of regular iPads would reduce the value
- Value of blocking competition. There's a concern that if Apple lets the competitors get established with 7" tablets that it will make it easier for them to get a foothold on 10" tablets later.
Personally, I wouldn't have any use for an iPad Mini, but some people obviously do. Apple has the opportunity to own another market just like they do with the MP3 player market, so there would be some real value to offering a product in this range - especially since they could keep competitors out.
My concern is whether they save enough money to bring the price down to the estimates. AFAICT, $250 is pretty much out of the question. $300 would probably pinch the margins quite a bit.
Seems to me that the key is having a device that you can easily pocket yet uses the largest screen possible while maintaining that first attribute.
Being as the resolution of the current Touch is so high, if the revised Touch had let's say a 4.75-inch screen, you could easily retain the current Touch screen resolution yet still have a decent calibre of screen.
Apple could easily justify about $50 more for such a device if it included a dramatically better camera. In addition Apple could make the Nano a tad larger to not lose any segment.
This makes far more sense than an 8-inch iPad.
Besides, the Touch hasn't been significantly revised for quite some time so it adds up.
Those Windows tablets are the only things with the potential to pose a real competitive threat to the iPad. Apple should pre-empt them with overwhelming competitive force. In fact, that is exactly what Apple has been doing. Apple has accepted much lower margins on the iPad (relative to the iPhone) and has been very aggressive with the hardware specs. An iPad mini at a lower price point would be consistent with the aggressive competitiveness that Apple has already shown. It would also put incredible pressure on the profit margins of competitors. It is getting harder all the time to profitably compete with Apple in tablets.
I would definitely buy one (or more) of these for my kids. They currently use the iPod Touch but want/need more screen space to browse internet and play games. If it were $100 less than the iPad 2 and priced at $299, I really feel it would be a huge hit.
This would be Apples most popular iPad if they would release one. You nay sayers are really under estimating this market. Howeve it probably won't happen as the margains are to small. Plus it would be nice if Apple leaves this market alone, let the other manufactures have it.
Unless the UI is completely revamped, it will have to ship with sandpaper so that users can convert their fingertips into bloody little nubs.
The current iPad 2 UI was designed for a 10 inch tablet. It will NOT WORK WELL on a 7 inch tablet.
The current UI was designed for a tiny 3.5" display. It would work just fine on a 7.8" tablet. Anyone who can operate a iPhone with its small screen will have no problem.
I see this as "iNewton" and a new category that is positioned for messaging, note taking, and other small tasks.
Why limit it to doing just a few tasks, I use my Galaxy 7.7" much more then my iPad because it fits in my purse perfectly. I have every app that I use on my iPad and it runs them just fine. Its the perfect size for a tablet maybe even the best.
There is no pair of pants in the world that can properly be called "dress pants," that has a back pocket big enough for a kindle.
That was my first thought. My second though was that it was a dress, made into pants with extra fabric used to make an uncomfortable 190 mm (7.5 in) x 120 mm (4.7 in) pocket to envelope a Kindle Fire.
Comments
The market will be much smaller, nowhere near the 55M - 60M that the iPad currently has annually. Or it will cannibalize the hugely successful current version (which still has no competition), with lower margins.
It will compete for the cheap-o market segment.
Not worth it for Apple, since it needs BIG wins at its current scale.
Yeah, $3 B a year isn't worth pursuing.
10 M of these tablets at $300 is $3 B - not counting any other benefits.
Highly unlikely as there isn't much of a market for a 7" or 'mini" tablet and I don't see Apple wasting resources to create the market.
Amazon has sold a lot of Kindles in that size - and that's where most of the other tablets are focusing since they can't compete with Apple on a 10" tablet.
Apple would have to weigh the following:
- Revenues from iPad mini ($3 B a year if they sell 10 M at $300)
- Any cannibalization of regular iPads would reduce the value
- Value of blocking competition. There's a concern that if Apple lets the competitors get established with 7" tablets that it will make it easier for them to get a foothold on 10" tablets later.
Personally, I wouldn't have any use for an iPad Mini, but some people obviously do. Apple has the opportunity to own another market just like they do with the MP3 player market, so there would be some real value to offering a product in this range - especially since they could keep competitors out.
My concern is whether they save enough money to bring the price down to the estimates. AFAICT, $250 is pretty much out of the question. $300 would probably pinch the margins quite a bit.
Being as the resolution of the current Touch is so high, if the revised Touch had let's say a 4.75-inch screen, you could easily retain the current Touch screen resolution yet still have a decent calibre of screen.
Apple could easily justify about $50 more for such a device if it included a dramatically better camera. In addition Apple could make the Nano a tad larger to not lose any segment.
This makes far more sense than an 8-inch iPad.
Besides, the Touch hasn't been significantly revised for quite some time so it adds up.
That said I'd never try to predict what Apple is thinking here. If I was them I wouldn't bother, but I am not them.
Those Windows tablets are the only things with the potential to pose a real competitive threat to the iPad. Apple should pre-empt them with overwhelming competitive force. In fact, that is exactly what Apple has been doing. Apple has accepted much lower margins on the iPad (relative to the iPhone) and has been very aggressive with the hardware specs. An iPad mini at a lower price point would be consistent with the aggressive competitiveness that Apple has already shown. It would also put incredible pressure on the profit margins of competitors. It is getting harder all the time to profitably compete with Apple in tablets.
Take a screenshot of your iPad and then open Photos and rotate your iPad and giggle. It's laughably bad. I don't get or understand it.
That's if you assume they will shoehorn the i9.7" Pad UI into a display about half its size. We know from experience that they won't ever do that.
Exactly:
1) 7" fits into pockets; always there.
2) Should have phone capabilities (why all iPads don't have that is beyond me).
3) Should appear as a disk in the Mac Finder; free space to be usable as a thumb drive.
As far as I'm concerned, it could cost a lot more as long as it's pocket size.
Unless Apple releases a smaller tablet in 16:9 format how does it fit into your pocket?
Why is everyone always so negative.
I think this will happen and it will be the star of the show at this year?s iPod media event.
Unless the UI is completely revamped, it will have to ship with sandpaper so that users can convert their fingertips into bloody little nubs.
The current iPad 2 UI was designed for a 10 inch tablet. It will NOT WORK WELL on a 7 inch tablet.
Unless the UI is completely revamped, it will have to ship with sandpaper so that users can convert their fingertips into bloody little nubs.
The current iPad 2 UI was designed for a 10 inch tablet. It will NOT WORK WELL on a 7 inch tablet.
The current UI was designed for a tiny 3.5" display. It would work just fine on a 7.8" tablet. Anyone who can operate a iPhone with its small screen will have no problem.
7.85..
the iPod is killing consoles..
249$..
a5x on it = awesomeness and huge potential.
it has the potential to be a good idea.
I see this as "iNewton" and a new category that is positioned for messaging, note taking, and other small tasks.
Why limit it to doing just a few tasks, I use my Galaxy 7.7" much more then my iPad because it fits in my purse perfectly. I have every app that I use on my iPad and it runs them just fine. Its the perfect size for a tablet maybe even the best.
I see this as "iNewton" and a new category that is positioned for messaging, note taking, and other small tasks.
With a stylus? Har! The best stylus in the whole world is your fingertip!
I carry my Kindle Fire in my back pocket of my Dockers dress pants all the time.
There is no pair of pants in the world that can properly be called "dress pants," that has a back pocket big enough for a kindle.
With a stylus? Har! The best stylus in the whole world is your fingertip!
Not for drawing or writing notes it's not.
There is no pair of pants in the world that can properly be called "dress pants," that has a back pocket big enough for a kindle.
That was my first thought. My second though was that it was a dress, made into pants with extra fabric used to make an uncomfortable 190 mm (7.5 in) x 120 mm (4.7 in) pocket to envelope a Kindle Fire.