My theory is ... Apple is doing their best to find the mole/leak coming from their high profile meetings.
For example ... Tim Cook privately setup `Meeting One` for 20 people. Cook mentioned "iPad Mini" to 'em. Tim Cook also setup `Meeting Two` for 20 more different people. He mentioned "iPad Midget" to 'em.
So whoever leaked "iPad Midget" coming from his profile meeting then he knows that Meeting Two is responsible, not the other. He will hammer 'em down till the last one who was the responsible for it.
Hope this make sense.
What you are describing is called a "canary trap".
They had one on Game of Thrones earlier this season. The canary got what he deserved.
I already bought a sub 250$ 7" iPad in the Galaxy Tab 2 7" and it came with a universal remote app that also works with IR devices natively. It's all I've ever wanted out of the iPad, and it's something the iPad will never have. Apple can kiss it.
The lack of IR was something that I really missed on the iPhone. I'm not sure why Apple neglected that feature.
Although I'm convinced that Apple will release a smaller iPad 7.85" (2/3 screen area rather than 7" 1/2 area), I'm not convinced by this rumour.
8Gb is not enough now even for a basic model. Making their Apps hi-res for compatibility has caused a bloat in some App sizes. 8Gb just isn't enough even if it used to be. Apple will want room for you to buy Apps & Content.
Actually a small bezel plus the same ipad1 resolution will make a 8' ipad work. iPad app icons wont be that small that they are unusable IMHO...
If they do have a 350$ Mini ipad android tablets are dead forever, win 8 will be the only competitor because they will sell to enterprice and buisness in mass...
IOS is already resolution independent so everything drawn to the screen will be the same size. Or maybe I should say should be the same size. ICons and bit maps could be a problem though. You might get some strange clipping however the same basic apps could run fine with many requiring no rework at all.
Interestingly I've been hearing rumors that the LCD manufactures have had success integrating the touch screen sensing wires right into the LCD panel. If this has indeed happened Apple could lower the overall cost of the screen and increase the quality of the touch screen behavior. Oh and they can make things thinner yet again. I can easily see this rumored tablet introducing even more technology into the market. Sometimes technology cost you money sometimes it saves you money.
As to Win 8 there is no assurance it will be successful in enterprise. At least not in the sense of tablet OS's. Win 8 effectively has some of the same issues as iOS in that complete rewrite of apps is required.
This is much like all the other rumors of iPad mini 7" device, it doesn't make sense because Apple does not do response product creating just because other makers have a device in that form-factor... does not mean they will also want to do so. They're able to offer the updated iPad2 for 399, at micro-center and other places you can pick up an iPad 2 Wifi for 359 which is far better value than a $199 Kindle Fire..
Next year you'll be able to buy the iPad 2 for $199, iPad (3rd gen) for $399, and iPad 4th gen for $499. Effectively using the manufacturing strategy without wasting additional machining materials to create a different form-factor device at 7"/7.85"
That's all I've got so far.
I don't think the iPad 2 gets much cheaper over time. The iP4 hasn't (only dropped $100 in its unsub price and its BOM hasn't crashed just because there are 120M out there already). The problem with component pricing is that generally volume makes them cheaper, not age. Look at memory - the cheapest memory is almost always close to the newest, fastest, best chips since those are the ones with massive volumes. PC-1066 is cheaper than PC-8500 which is cheaper than PC-5300. Apple could probably engineer a 7.85" 1024x768, 8GB tablet at $279 and still make Apple money. It's economies of scale in Al milling, batteries, NAND, etc. gives it a huge advantage. They could also guarantee Sharp or whoever 5M sales which no other OEM could to get a deal on the screens.
Looking at the iPod Touch 8GB and drawing conclusions is not a good since we don't know it's margins. We know they use cheaper components that the iPhone equivalent (lower cost/quality retina display, etc.) Still really good and thoroughly fit for purpose, but engineered to a price. The iPad 2 and the iPhone 4S base models have very similar estimated BOM costs (hence the iPhone drives much higher margins). A correctly engineered iPad Mini (8" is much more useful than 7" BTW) could be the iPod Mini or Nano that really takes the middle ground away from the competition and leaves nothing but $120 craplets available to OEMs. At the same time solidifying the ecosystem as the king of tablets.
Overall, I expect the iPad to follow a path more akin to the iPod than the iPhone. Stronger model coverage makes more sense if you wish to dominate a market rather than just skim/cherry pick profits in a market where the carriers still control many major decisions on pricing, availability , etc.
I was hoping this would have been addressed in this years iPad. You are right though Flash upgrades in the iPads are grossly overpriced. Not just a little bit but by a great deal. The chips Apple is using don't cost a whole hell of a lot and we are on our second process shrink with no size increases from Apple.
Apple really needs to think a little harder about the value equations for the top end iPads. More hardware to justify the price should be considered or just give us better performance. It would be very nice to see a 128GB iPad come with an additional 500MHZ of performance as a justification for the high price. If not that an SD port or FM radio or a USB port would be nice.
If there is one thing Apple doesn't do, it's listen to nerds (no offense, I too would be happy with any/all of those things). We've always said that Apple doesn't sell specs and overall is the better for it. However, as individual nerds, we always want more GBs, more Ghzs etc. It is a dichotomy that won't be closed in our favor.
None of your suggestions are likely to ever happen because the vast majority of Apple users don't care for them. USB - you want it for host mode...most don't care (use the cloud), SD - for storage, Apple will never give you part of their profit margins, for input, buy the camera adapter, and FM radio - in an iPad... 1936 called... wants its tech back ;-)
There are also trade-offs for all of these minority demands... most involve either less room for the enormous battery or more drain on the battery - both of which we would complain about. Can't have your cake, eat it, then get lots of other slices and rub them all over your body with wanton abandon.
There is no evidence from the market or consumers that people think that the current prices and features create a poor value equation. Adding any of your features would barely move any more iPads. Anyone holding out for those features either doesn't like Apple anyway (Droid-er) or doesn't really want a tablet, but more of a laptops sans keyboard.
You can either afford it or you can't - that is the value equation that matters to Apple. The iPad mini would be the answer if there was adequate profit to be found in the market that answers "No" to the affordability question.
Decimate is probably too kind - it only means to kill 1 in 10. Apple appears to have killed 1 in 3 or 4 Fires.
To be honest, Amazon did most of the killing - the Fire just wasn't good enough... no camera, missing sensors, average battery life, average quality, weak app market, Amazon shilling everywhere to buy their content. Not so pleasant compared to the iPad. Word of Mouth counts.
Technically current iPad apps will run but it'll be a horrible experience. iPad apps have buttons designed for a 10.1" screen. They'll be too small on a 7" screen.
I can't believe for a second that Apple would allow current iPad apps to run on a 7" mini-iPad device without modification.
A lot of UI buttons in my apps are about the same size as the iPhone buttons. I think you'd be surprised how well an 8" tablet would work out at 1024x768. 8" is 25% more screen than 7" (which does feel too small).
I already bought a sub 250$ 7" iPad in the Galaxy Tab 2 7" and it came with a universal remote app that also works with IR devices natively. It's all I've ever wanted out of the iPad, and it's something the iPad will never have. Apple can kiss it.
Why on earth would you embarrass yourself by coming on here and making such a comment. The iPad as brought into the world by Apple is the most successful electronics product ever conceived. The device hit the ground running and seems to have a ton of growth potential. No product before it has been embraced by consumers virtually instantaneously.
Simply, Apple has nailed it unlike any company has ever done. This is so obvious and it makes your comment seem overtly obtuse.
I already bought a sub 250$ 7" iPad in the Galaxy Tab 2 7" and it came with a universal remote app that also works with IR devices natively. It's all I've ever wanted out of the iPad, and it's something the iPad will never have. Apple can kiss it.
Sheesh.
How interesting to find an individual that is willing to spend so much on a remote control!
Are you aware that an iPad will change the channel for you if you throw it 'just right'?
To me the (near) perfect product line up for non-iPhone iOS devices would be: (right now and for a year or 3 more)
1. iPod touch - 3.5-4" Retina $149 (8GB) and up - 100g - for kids $199 32GB model to be best seller - $149/199/279 - 8/32/64GB
2. iPad Mini - 7.85-8" XGA $279 (8GB) and up - 300-400g $329 16GB model to be best seller - $279/$329/399 - 8/16/32GB + $120 for 4G on top model
3. iPad - 9.7-10.1" 2xXGA $399 (16GB last version) and up 550-650g $599 32GB model to be best seller $399/499/599/699 (Wifi) 16/32/64GB + $130 for 4G
Touch becomes an entry-level device to get kids hooked on the ecosystem (and let them amortize their parents' purchases)
Mini - covers large number of people who just find the iPad too big and heavy (lots of them exist: readers, gamers, kids, travellers - even for me a 3hr gaming session puts some strain on the wrists - gaming, I said, just gaming ;-) Minor trade-offs on battery life and screen DPI (~260 vs. 316)
iPad - full resolutionary experience with max power, life, features
Obviously the GBs would rise over time, as would resolutions.
When I say perfect line up, I don't mean what I personally want (iPad3/128GB/4G = $599)but what would make most sense for Apple in terms of maximizing profit, then revenue, then unit sales.
These segments offer several key things:
1) attractive initial price points - Touch (untouchable), iPad Mini (close to Fire, kills GTab 7), iPad 3 (Rules)
2) strong upgrade pricing/margins (25% for base, 40% for mid, 50% for high-end)
3) worthwhile trade-offs at the range overlaps - 64GB Touch vs. 8GB iPad Mini, 32GB Mini vs. 16GB iPad2, 32GB+4G iPad Mini vs. 16-32GB iPad 3 Wifi.
Car companies do this well already - maxed out 1-series vs. mid-level 3-series BMW, 2-seat sports car vs. 4-seat coupe, etc. all at similar price points. People who do that well maximize profit at each segment. e.g. BMW sell more 3-series than 1 even though they are more expensive, but sell very high-margin, loaded 1M models to the sub-M3 crowd rather than get them into a lower margin 335i or similar. Apple already did this very well in iPods - Classic vs. Touch, Nano vs. Touch, all had price overlaps but segmented on form-factor and fulfilling a job to be done - All your music vs mobile computer vs. work-out buddy, etc. I think these models would work similarly. We know Apple is great at getting buyers to generally buy mid-range models, not the base and sell more high-end models than any gadget brand has any right to. I would presume the mid-range units with the stronger margins would still be the best sellers in these models too.
The market has already spoken that 8GB seems to be enough for a low-end touch as is 16GB for an iPad (not that I could live with those storage levels). 8GB enough for the iPad Mini? - don't know.
I think this gives Apple almost total market coverage and I bet this would all be achievable at Apple's preferred margins - 25-50% depending on model. Entry models may only have 25% GM but they won't be the big sellers.
The missing parts are the iPad Mini (and the cheaper Touch). If and when the Touch gets an upgrade to the rumored iPhone 4" screen, it could probably handle a $30 bump in price. ($50 if they add more NAND).
The BOM/build for the iPad Mini 8GB could be $200 and still make 30-40% margins. Add $10 of NAND to get to 16GB and the margin is >50%
Before you all go mental about costs... for reference, the estimated BOM for the 16GB Wifi iPad 2 is $236 + $8 to manufacture it. This has more material, bigger screen, battery, etc. so $200 or $210 is not out of the question.
I would expect a minimum price of $350. Yet why do it? Apple already has great products and making a smaller form factor would lower sales of the more profitable higher value parts.
50% of $500 is a lot more than 50% of $350. Moving that way means a business shift to money from content, not money from hardware as we have today.
There are people like me. I have an iPad 2 and would buy a 7" for $300 on day one. So 50% of $800 is more than 50% of $500. It's just- are there enough "mes" around?
To me the (near) perfect product line up for non-iPhone iOS devices would be: (right now and for a year or 3 more)
1. iPod touch - 3.5-4" Retina $149 (8GB) and up - 100g - for kids $199 32GB model to be best seller - $149/199/279 - 8/32/64GB
2. iPad Mini - 7.85-8" XGA $279 (8GB) and up - 300-400g $329 16GB model to be best seller - $279/$329/399 - 8/16/32GB + $120 for 4G on top model
3. iPad - 9.7-10.1" 2xXGA $399 (16GB last version) and up 550-650g $599 32GB model to be best seller $399/499/599/699 (Wifi) 16/32/64GB + $130 for 4G
Touch becomes an entry-level device to get kids hooked on the ecosystem (and let them amortize their parents' purchases)
Mini - covers large number of people who just find the iPad too big and heavy (lots of them exist: readers, gamers, kids, travellers - even for me a 3hr gaming session puts some strain on the wrists - gaming, I said, just gaming ;-) Minor trade-offs on battery life and screen DPI (~260 vs. 316)
iPad - full resolutionary experience with max power, life, features Obviously the GBs would rise over time, as would resolutions.
When I say perfect line up, I don't mean what I personally want (iPad3/128GB/4G = $599)but what would make most sense for Apple in terms of maximizing profit, then revenue, then unit sales.
These segments offer several key things:
1) attractive initial price points - Touch (untouchable), iPad Mini (close to Fire, kills GTab 7), iPad 3 (Rules)
2) strong upgrade pricing/margins (25% for base, 40% for mid, 50% for high-end)
3) worthwhile trade-offs at the range overlaps - 64GB Touch vs. 8GB iPad Mini, 32GB Mini vs. 16GB iPad2, 32GB+4G iPad Mini vs. 16-32GB iPad 3 Wifi.
Car companies do this well already - maxed out 1-series vs. mid-level 3-series BMW, 2-seat sports car vs. 4-seat coupe, etc. all at similar price points. People who do that well maximize profit at each segment. e.g. BMW sell more 3-series than 1 even though they are more expensive, but sell very high-margin, loaded 1M models to the sub-M3 crowd rather than get them into a lower margin 335i or similar. Apple already did this very well in iPods - Classic vs. Touch, Nano vs. Touch, all had price overlaps but segmented on form-factor and fulfilling a job to be done - All your music vs mobile computer vs. work-out buddy, etc. I think these models would work similarly. We know Apple is great at getting buyers to generally buy mid-range models, not the base and sell more high-end models than any gadget brand has any right to. I would presume the mid-range units with the stronger margins would still be the best sellers in these models too.
The market has already spoken that 8GB seems to be enough for a low-end touch as is 16GB for an iPad (not that I could live with those storage levels). 8GB enough for the iPad Mini? - don't know.
I think this gives Apple almost total market coverage and I bet this would all be achievable at Apple's preferred margins - 25-50% depending on model. Entry models may only have 25% GM but they won't be the big sellers.
The missing parts are the iPad Mini (and the cheaper Touch). If and when the Touch gets an upgrade to the rumored iPhone 4" screen, it could probably handle a $30 bump in price. ($50 if they add more NAND).
The BOM/build for the iPad Mini 8GB could be $200 and still make 30-40% margins. Add $10 of NAND to get to 16GB and the margin is >50%
Before you all go mental about costs... for reference, the estimated BOM for the 16GB Wifi iPad 2 is $236 + $8 to manufacture it. This has more material, bigger screen, battery, etc. so $200 or $210 is not out of the question.
If and when they get around to integrating stylus input into iOS devices, I think it's a rather obvious move to go bigger as well as smaller. As an artist myself, I would kill for an 18 or 20 inch iPad that allowed for using a proper stylus. Such a device would rule the market in it's category and be better than anything Wacom ever envisioned in their wildest dreams.
I'd be very nervous if I were you. Steve Jobs may just rise up out of his grave and git you for even using the word stylus and iPad in the same sentence.
There are some use cases where the smaller form factor makes a lot of sense. When I try to mount my iPad in my car, I realize it takes up too much space. Possibly blocking other important dials or buttons.
A smaller iPad would be perfect in a car. Likewise, there are other use cases where the smaller iPad makes more sense. Also, when people talk of margins and that Apple will never release a product that impacts their margins, I hope they realize that the company has change. It is. Is run by Tim Cook.
The pricing of the new iPad is a clear indicator to me, that Apple is willing to look at lower margins to price the competition totally out of the market.
I see quite a lot of sense to launch such a product for $250. Even if it hurts margins. Because it makes it harder for the competition to sell their product. If iPad mini is $250, who would buy the Fire for $200!
Yesterday on the subway, within 5 feet of me, I saw one iPad, one Playbook and 3 e-readers (1 Kindle, 1 Sony and 1 that I didn't recognize). I never thought of my iPad as being large. But when I saw these individuals doing what they were doing on the devices, the advantages of a smaller device, particularly for reading, became apparent.
For their reading pleasure, many may prefer for a 6 or 7-incher. I believe such a market is likely to be dominated by women, who can also keep such a device in their purses.
But over 70% of everyone already is fine with paying $500. Apple caters to the middle ground, not fringe cases.
You miss the entire point of the post. It's not about price points. It's about size form and varied uses. Just like some people need a 17" Macbook and others need a 13", iOS users do not all need the same size device. There are many people for whom carrying around the full size iPad is not practical. It may be too big, too heavy, take up too much space, require additional cases/bags to carry etc. Those people would benefit from a smaller form factor.
Once has only to travel mass transit to see the far superior numbers of smaller e-devices that people can put in a jacket or coat pocket or slip into the side pocket of their case etc.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDCragg
Quote:
Originally Posted by supremedesigner
My theory is ... Apple is doing their best to find the mole/leak coming from their high profile meetings.
For example ... Tim Cook privately setup `Meeting One` for 20 people. Cook mentioned "iPad Mini" to 'em. Tim Cook also setup `Meeting Two` for 20 more different people. He mentioned "iPad Midget" to 'em.
So whoever leaked "iPad Midget" coming from his profile meeting then he knows that Meeting Two is responsible, not the other. He will hammer 'em down till the last one who was the responsible for it.
Hope this make sense.
What you are describing is called a "canary trap".
They had one on Game of Thrones earlier this season. The canary got what he deserved.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
I already bought a sub 250$ 7" iPad in the Galaxy Tab 2 7" and it came with a universal remote app that also works with IR devices natively. It's all I've ever wanted out of the iPad, and it's something the iPad will never have. Apple can kiss it.
The lack of IR was something that I really missed on the iPhone. I'm not sure why Apple neglected that feature.
Although I'm convinced that Apple will release a smaller iPad 7.85" (2/3 screen area rather than 7" 1/2 area), I'm not convinced by this rumour.
8Gb is not enough now even for a basic model. Making their Apps hi-res for compatibility has caused a bloat in some App sizes. 8Gb just isn't enough even if it used to be. Apple will want room for you to buy Apps & Content.
The price is also too low.
IOS is already resolution independent so everything drawn to the screen will be the same size. Or maybe I should say should be the same size. ICons and bit maps could be a problem though. You might get some strange clipping however the same basic apps could run fine with many requiring no rework at all.
Interestingly I've been hearing rumors that the LCD manufactures have had success integrating the touch screen sensing wires right into the LCD panel. If this has indeed happened Apple could lower the overall cost of the screen and increase the quality of the touch screen behavior. Oh and they can make things thinner yet again. I can easily see this rumored tablet introducing even more technology into the market. Sometimes technology cost you money sometimes it saves you money.
As to Win 8 there is no assurance it will be successful in enterprise. At least not in the sense of tablet OS's. Win 8 effectively has some of the same issues as iOS in that complete rewrite of apps is required.
Quote:
Originally Posted by superjunaid
This is much like all the other rumors of iPad mini 7" device, it doesn't make sense because Apple does not do response product creating just because other makers have a device in that form-factor... does not mean they will also want to do so. They're able to offer the updated iPad2 for 399, at micro-center and other places you can pick up an iPad 2 Wifi for 359 which is far better value than a $199 Kindle Fire..
Next year you'll be able to buy the iPad 2 for $199, iPad (3rd gen) for $399, and iPad 4th gen for $499. Effectively using the manufacturing strategy without wasting additional machining materials to create a different form-factor device at 7"/7.85"
That's all I've got so far.
I don't think the iPad 2 gets much cheaper over time. The iP4 hasn't (only dropped $100 in its unsub price and its BOM hasn't crashed just because there are 120M out there already). The problem with component pricing is that generally volume makes them cheaper, not age. Look at memory - the cheapest memory is almost always close to the newest, fastest, best chips since those are the ones with massive volumes. PC-1066 is cheaper than PC-8500 which is cheaper than PC-5300. Apple could probably engineer a 7.85" 1024x768, 8GB tablet at $279 and still make Apple money. It's economies of scale in Al milling, batteries, NAND, etc. gives it a huge advantage. They could also guarantee Sharp or whoever 5M sales which no other OEM could to get a deal on the screens.
Looking at the iPod Touch 8GB and drawing conclusions is not a good since we don't know it's margins. We know they use cheaper components that the iPhone equivalent (lower cost/quality retina display, etc.) Still really good and thoroughly fit for purpose, but engineered to a price. The iPad 2 and the iPhone 4S base models have very similar estimated BOM costs (hence the iPhone drives much higher margins). A correctly engineered iPad Mini (8" is much more useful than 7" BTW) could be the iPod Mini or Nano that really takes the middle ground away from the competition and leaves nothing but $120 craplets available to OEMs. At the same time solidifying the ecosystem as the king of tablets.
Overall, I expect the iPad to follow a path more akin to the iPod than the iPhone. Stronger model coverage makes more sense if you wish to dominate a market rather than just skim/cherry pick profits in a market where the carriers still control many major decisions on pricing, availability , etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I was hoping this would have been addressed in this years iPad. You are right though Flash upgrades in the iPads are grossly overpriced. Not just a little bit but by a great deal. The chips Apple is using don't cost a whole hell of a lot and we are on our second process shrink with no size increases from Apple.
Apple really needs to think a little harder about the value equations for the top end iPads. More hardware to justify the price should be considered or just give us better performance. It would be very nice to see a 128GB iPad come with an additional 500MHZ of performance as a justification for the high price. If not that an SD port or FM radio or a USB port would be nice.
If there is one thing Apple doesn't do, it's listen to nerds (no offense, I too would be happy with any/all of those things). We've always said that Apple doesn't sell specs and overall is the better for it. However, as individual nerds, we always want more GBs, more Ghzs etc. It is a dichotomy that won't be closed in our favor.
None of your suggestions are likely to ever happen because the vast majority of Apple users don't care for them. USB - you want it for host mode...most don't care (use the cloud), SD - for storage, Apple will never give you part of their profit margins, for input, buy the camera adapter, and FM radio - in an iPad... 1936 called... wants its tech back ;-)
There are also trade-offs for all of these minority demands... most involve either less room for the enormous battery or more drain on the battery - both of which we would complain about. Can't have your cake, eat it, then get lots of other slices and rub them all over your body with wanton abandon.
There is no evidence from the market or consumers that people think that the current prices and features create a poor value equation. Adding any of your features would barely move any more iPads. Anyone holding out for those features either doesn't like Apple anyway (Droid-er) or doesn't really want a tablet, but more of a laptops sans keyboard.
You can either afford it or you can't - that is the value equation that matters to Apple. The iPad mini would be the answer if there was adequate profit to be found in the market that answers "No" to the affordability question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwlaw99
True. Maybe decimate is a better word.
Decimate is probably too kind - it only means to kill 1 in 10. Apple appears to have killed 1 in 3 or 4 Fires.
To be honest, Amazon did most of the killing - the Fire just wasn't good enough... no camera, missing sensors, average battery life, average quality, weak app market, Amazon shilling everywhere to buy their content. Not so pleasant compared to the iPad. Word of Mouth counts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Technically current iPad apps will run but it'll be a horrible experience. iPad apps have buttons designed for a 10.1" screen. They'll be too small on a 7" screen.
I can't believe for a second that Apple would allow current iPad apps to run on a 7" mini-iPad device without modification.
A lot of UI buttons in my apps are about the same size as the iPhone buttons. I think you'd be surprised how well an 8" tablet would work out at 1024x768. 8" is 25% more screen than 7" (which does feel too small).
Why on earth would you embarrass yourself by coming on here and making such a comment. The iPad as brought into the world by Apple is the most successful electronics product ever conceived. The device hit the ground running and seems to have a ton of growth potential. No product before it has been embraced by consumers virtually instantaneously.
Simply, Apple has nailed it unlike any company has ever done. This is so obvious and it makes your comment seem overtly obtuse.
[img]http://img.scoop.it/ZlzpJRGkCFA-9lEGJrGzLzl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVaiQDB_Rd1H6kmuBWtceBJ[/img]
My Opinion, Consolidation, New Touch or Goodbye Touch, hello iPad/TouchPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
I already bought a sub 250$ 7" iPad in the Galaxy Tab 2 7" and it came with a universal remote app that also works with IR devices natively. It's all I've ever wanted out of the iPad, and it's something the iPad will never have. Apple can kiss it.
Sheesh.
How interesting to find an individual that is willing to spend so much on a remote control!
Are you aware that an iPad will change the channel for you if you throw it 'just right'?
To me the (near) perfect product line up for non-iPhone iOS devices would be: (right now and for a year or 3 more)
1. iPod touch - 3.5-4" Retina $149 (8GB) and up - 100g - for kids $199 32GB model to be best seller - $149/199/279 - 8/32/64GB
2. iPad Mini - 7.85-8" XGA $279 (8GB) and up - 300-400g $329 16GB model to be best seller - $279/$329/399 - 8/16/32GB + $120 for 4G on top model
3. iPad - 9.7-10.1" 2xXGA $399 (16GB last version) and up 550-650g $599 32GB model to be best seller $399/499/599/699 (Wifi) 16/32/64GB + $130 for 4G
Touch becomes an entry-level device to get kids hooked on the ecosystem (and let them amortize their parents' purchases)
Mini - covers large number of people who just find the iPad too big and heavy (lots of them exist: readers, gamers, kids, travellers - even for me a 3hr gaming session puts some strain on the wrists - gaming, I said, just gaming ;-) Minor trade-offs on battery life and screen DPI (~260 vs. 316)
iPad - full resolutionary experience with max power, life, features
Obviously the GBs would rise over time, as would resolutions.
When I say perfect line up, I don't mean what I personally want (iPad3/128GB/4G = $599)but what would make most sense for Apple in terms of maximizing profit, then revenue, then unit sales.
These segments offer several key things:
1) attractive initial price points - Touch (untouchable), iPad Mini (close to Fire, kills GTab 7), iPad 3 (Rules)
2) strong upgrade pricing/margins (25% for base, 40% for mid, 50% for high-end)
3) worthwhile trade-offs at the range overlaps - 64GB Touch vs. 8GB iPad Mini, 32GB Mini vs. 16GB iPad2, 32GB+4G iPad Mini vs. 16-32GB iPad 3 Wifi.
Car companies do this well already - maxed out 1-series vs. mid-level 3-series BMW, 2-seat sports car vs. 4-seat coupe, etc. all at similar price points. People who do that well maximize profit at each segment. e.g. BMW sell more 3-series than 1 even though they are more expensive, but sell very high-margin, loaded 1M models to the sub-M3 crowd rather than get them into a lower margin 335i or similar. Apple already did this very well in iPods - Classic vs. Touch, Nano vs. Touch, all had price overlaps but segmented on form-factor and fulfilling a job to be done - All your music vs mobile computer vs. work-out buddy, etc. I think these models would work similarly. We know Apple is great at getting buyers to generally buy mid-range models, not the base and sell more high-end models than any gadget brand has any right to. I would presume the mid-range units with the stronger margins would still be the best sellers in these models too.
The market has already spoken that 8GB seems to be enough for a low-end touch as is 16GB for an iPad (not that I could live with those storage levels). 8GB enough for the iPad Mini? - don't know.
I think this gives Apple almost total market coverage and I bet this would all be achievable at Apple's preferred margins - 25-50% depending on model. Entry models may only have 25% GM but they won't be the big sellers.
The missing parts are the iPad Mini (and the cheaper Touch). If and when the Touch gets an upgrade to the rumored iPhone 4" screen, it could probably handle a $30 bump in price. ($50 if they add more NAND).
The BOM/build for the iPad Mini 8GB could be $200 and still make 30-40% margins. Add $10 of NAND to get to 16GB and the margin is >50%
Before you all go mental about costs... for reference, the estimated BOM for the 16GB Wifi iPad 2 is $236 + $8 to manufacture it. This has more material, bigger screen, battery, etc. so $200 or $210 is not out of the question.
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4238216/New-iPad-has-higher-BOM-than-iPad-2--says-IHS
I do not call BS on this rumor. If I were Apple, I would be doing everything I could to make this come true. iPad = iPod FTW!!
There are people like me. I have an iPad 2 and would buy a 7" for $300 on day one. So 50% of $800 is more than 50% of $500. It's just- are there enough "mes" around?
Awesome post btw. Well thought out and well said
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capnbob
To me the (near) perfect product line up for non-iPhone iOS devices would be: (right now and for a year or 3 more)
1. iPod touch - 3.5-4" Retina $149 (8GB) and up - 100g - for kids $199 32GB model to be best seller - $149/199/279 - 8/32/64GB
2. iPad Mini - 7.85-8" XGA $279 (8GB) and up - 300-400g $329 16GB model to be best seller - $279/$329/399 - 8/16/32GB + $120 for 4G on top model
3. iPad - 9.7-10.1" 2xXGA $399 (16GB last version) and up 550-650g $599 32GB model to be best seller $399/499/599/699 (Wifi) 16/32/64GB + $130 for 4G
etc...
Agree with the awesome post thing.
And well communicated.
I see they didn't make you a Capt. for nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
If and when they get around to integrating stylus input into iOS devices, I think it's a rather obvious move to go bigger as well as smaller. As an artist myself, I would kill for an 18 or 20 inch iPad that allowed for using a proper stylus. Such a device would rule the market in it's category and be better than anything Wacom ever envisioned in their wildest dreams.
I'd be very nervous if I were you. Steve Jobs may just rise up out of his grave and git you for even using the word stylus and iPad in the same sentence.
A smaller iPad would be perfect in a car. Likewise, there are other use cases where the smaller iPad makes more sense. Also, when people talk of margins and that Apple will never release a product that impacts their margins, I hope they realize that the company has change. It is. Is run by Tim Cook.
The pricing of the new iPad is a clear indicator to me, that Apple is willing to look at lower margins to price the competition totally out of the market.
I see quite a lot of sense to launch such a product for $250. Even if it hurts margins. Because it makes it harder for the competition to sell their product. If iPad mini is $250, who would buy the Fire for $200!
Yesterday on the subway, within 5 feet of me, I saw one iPad, one Playbook and 3 e-readers (1 Kindle, 1 Sony and 1 that I didn't recognize). I never thought of my iPad as being large. But when I saw these individuals doing what they were doing on the devices, the advantages of a smaller device, particularly for reading, became apparent.
For their reading pleasure, many may prefer for a 6 or 7-incher. I believe such a market is likely to be dominated by women, who can also keep such a device in their purses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So what's the point?
But over 70% of everyone already is fine with paying $500. Apple caters to the middle ground, not fringe cases.
You miss the entire point of the post. It's not about price points. It's about size form and varied uses. Just like some people need a 17" Macbook and others need a 13", iOS users do not all need the same size device. There are many people for whom carrying around the full size iPad is not practical. It may be too big, too heavy, take up too much space, require additional cases/bags to carry etc. Those people would benefit from a smaller form factor.
Once has only to travel mass transit to see the far superior numbers of smaller e-devices that people can put in a jacket or coat pocket or slip into the side pocket of their case etc.