Any school district that spends money to equip kids with out of date textbooks that will only get more out of date in the 5-6 years they agree to use them, not to mention write in, torn up etc (and not replaced) is wasting our taxes. Ask any educator who's not a paid shill for the publishing companies. Especially those that aren't technophobe FUD spreaders about how they are going to be replaced by machines etc.
You really think textbooks are the key to effective teaching? And even if they are, you really think with iPad, the textbook publishers will for some inexplicable reason, decide to charge less and thus the cost of textbooks using an iPad will be less than using dead trees?
I never said the iPad is ineffective. I said if a school district is going to purchase one for each student, then that's not the best use of a school district's funds. Even though as an AAPL stockholder, it would be a good thing for me. The issue isn't effectiveness, it's economics. (And how clever of you, you deleted the phrase 'each kid' and replaced it with 'kids' when you attacked your straw man.)
It makes more sense to look at what they have done in the past and ask the question will they follow that same logic again in the future.
And in the past, they did not make an iPhone nano, despite doing so following your logic.
Quote:
Personally I don't think they will stop with an iPad Nano, in a year or two when they can make it we will see a larger iPad as well.
And just like they DIDN'T make a smaller iPhone but are (assumed to be) making a larger one, so too will they not make a smaller iPad but quite probably make a larger one.
In particular, White believes that schools under budget constraints who cannot afford the current entry-level $399 iPad 2 might show interest in a smaller iPad.
Maybe so. But the education market buying season is in the spring. A September release is fine for the consumer market since the big buying season is the holiday quarter. Especially for a lower-priced iPad mini. But that's far too late for the 2012-2013 school year for institutional buyers.
And in the past, they did not make an iPhone nano, despite doing so following your logic.
And just like they DIDN'T make a smaller iPhone but are (assumed to be) making a larger one, so too will they not make a smaller iPad but quite probably make a larger one.
Jesus Christ! You just don't get it do you. It has nothing to do with size. It's about market segmentation. Having a product option that meets everyone's needs. Look through Apple's product catalogue - in just about every respect they have a entry level model, mid range mass market model and an expensive high end model. Again something for everyone. It's basic level marketing / product management.
They don't need to bring out an iPhone Nano coz they already have a cheaper iPhone - the 3GS and 4.
But they don't have a product to satisfy the market segment between the 3.5" iPod and the 10" iPad. An iPad Mini would open a whole new market segment for Apple to sell into.
Is there really a market for 7" tablets? The low sales of existing 7" tablets says otherwise.
That's because the current ones on the market are shit. The low sales of any tablets before iPad would have suggested there wasn't a market for tablets at all, but the iPad proved otherwise. People don't know what they want until you show them it.
Personally, if they release a 7" iPad, I'll buy one. My wife has an iPad 3, and while I like it, for reading it's hopeless in comparison to the Kindle. I know the Kindle is a single use device and hence should be better at that one thing than the iPad, but I find the iPad 3 too heavy for reading and in truth it's form factor is just uncomfortable to hold for a long period of time (if I support it from the bottom, because the edge of it is quite pointed, the pressure isn't nice).
I'd love to see Apple come out with something that is able to do more than Kindle, but can be comfortably held in one hand for a long period of time.
They don't need to bring out an iPhone Nano coz they already have a cheaper iPhone - the 3GS and 4.
They don't need to bring out an iPad mini, because they already have a cheaper iPad. The iPad 2. And next year, who knows? The iPad 2 could be $299, iPad 3 $399, and iPad 4 $499.
Quote:
But they don't have a product to satisfy the market segment between the 3.5" iPod and the 10" iPad. An iPad Mini would open a whole new market segment for Apple to sell into.
For reference, do you also assume that Apple will be creating an xMac? What about a netbook? A standalone eReader? Should Apple make a digital cash register? Perhaps a television (HERE we go… ). Maybe Apple should just make a DVR instead.
Apple owns the tablet market. That is a market segment.
Quote:
List
The Mac Mini and iMac aren't the same market as the Mac Pro. So say some. And you've preemptively acknowledged that I've disproven your point by pointing out the iPad 2 alongside the iPad 3.
Quote:
I've got a headache now.
Trying to create an argument where there isn't one has been known to do that.
They don't need to bring out an iPad mini, because they already have a cheaper iPad. The iPad 2. And next year, who knows? The iPad 2 could be $299, iPad 3 $399, and iPad 4 $499.
For reference, do you also assume that Apple will be creating an xMac? What about a netbook? A standalone eReader? Should Apple make a digital cash register? Perhaps a television (HERE we go… ). Maybe Apple should just make a DVR instead.
Apple owns the tablet market. That is a market segment.
The Mac Mini and iMac aren't the same market as the Mac Pro. So say some. And you've preemptively acknowledged that I've disproven your point by pointing out the iPad 2 alongside the iPad 3.
Trying to create an argument where there isn't one has been known to do that.
For a mod you really do seem to manage to get into a spectacular number of arguments.
Still human, with all the opinions and thoughts contained therein.
Do you trust a machine to moderate? I wouldn't trust Defensio, that's for sure.
I'm more on the side of ED209.
Joking aside, I do think you need to let it go sometimes. Ultimately Shaun just had a different opinion to you, which is really what discussion boards should be about. You end up coming across as someone who wants to "win" by using a war of attrition with endless replies getting into somewhat ridiculous detail when all that has happened is two people think different things. You were doing the same with Slurpy a couple of weeks ago. I personally think it lowers the tone of the whole board.
And lots of those items in your list aren't really low-, mid- and high-end. The Mac Pro is a workstation that isn't even in a viable option for most consumers and the MBA cost more money for a given performance than the MBP which makes it a special case for a specific needs. The only honest way to measure low-, mid- and high-end is within a specific model type. For example, the low end 15" MBP has a 2.2GHz CPU, the mid range has a 2.4GHz CPU, and the high end ha a 2.5GHz GPU, along with some other clear base changes between the low and mid-range the ability to customize it even more. I haven't seen anything that suggests that MBA is a midrange machine. In fact Apple has been marketing the 11" model as their entry level notebook for awhile now. The 13' MB is now just for education.
They don't need to bring out an iPad mini, because they already have a cheaper iPad. The iPad 2. And next year, who knows? The iPad 2 could be $299, iPad 3 $399, and iPad 4 $499.
iPad 4 won't be out for 9 more months, in all likelihood. Meanwhile, the current lineup is:
iPad 2 $399, iPad 3 $499.
That leaves room for an iPad Mini at $299. Furthermore, some people would actually prefer the Mini because of its size, so it opens a new segment of the market as well as takes the wind out of the sales of the competitors in a way that the $399 iPad 2 can't.
Of course. And as this is a discussion board, discussing opinions and their validity is what we do.
Extrapolation based on past knowledge is 'ridiculous detail'?
Breaking out what someone has said line by line and attempting to deconstruct their every point is a frankly needless attempt to demonstrate mastery over someone, and is somewhat childish.
Breaking out what someone has said line by line and attempting to deconstruct their every argument is a frankly needless attempt to demonstrate mastery over someone, and is somewhat childish.
Interpret it as you will; that's not my intention. Things become unclear if posts are not broken up. Context is lost and responses can be misconstrued. I'm simply preventing that from happening.
OK well, we will have to agree to disagree. I know loads of people who have weighed up the pro's and cons of buying an iPad over (or as well as) buying a kindle (in-fact I discussed it with my mother-in-law only an hour ago), and for many people, the kindle is the better choice, even for those with a disposable income.
I might even buy a kindle myself, and I would buy one for the main reason everyone else I know buys one, which is so they can sit next to the pool or on a beach and read whilst not having to worry about battery drain.
Apple doesn't really need to enter every market at every price point. The current Kindle crop starts at $79. There's nearly zero profit in there and its sole reason for existence is to push Amazon's book sales. You'd have to be insane to try to compete for that market segment. Apple doesn't really feel threatened if an iPad buyer also spends $79 on a Kindle for poolside reading (we have several Kindles and iPads in my household, each functions well for its intended purpose).
So? A 7-8" iPad with the same resolution as the iPad 2 would be sharper than a 10" iPad 2 with the same resolution. They're still selling the 10" iPad 2, so why wouldn't they be able to sell a device with the same resolution (so 99% of developers wouldn't have to change their app) but is even sharper?
I'm not suggesting a greatly inferior product. I'm suggesting a product with essentially the same components as the iPad 2, but smaller. So it would have the same performance as the iPad to, but sharper screen.
Because many existing apps would violate the iOS HIG 44x44 point touch target size and many developers would have to change their apps to make them as usable as the guidelines recommend/require. The UX of many apps would be greatly diminished by this UI change and it would be a greatly inferior product.
This is what Jobs was talking about regarding filing down fingers with sandpaper. On the other hand a 4"-6" iPod touch at the same resolution has a larger touch target size than the existing touch. So apps designed under the iPhone UI guidelines will work well.
This is the basis of my contention that any 4-7" iOS device will be an upsized iPod Touch and not a downsized iPad. It will be the same UI target as the iPhone and not the iPad.
Interpret it as you will; that's not my intention. Things become unclear if posts are not broken up. Context is lost and responses can be misconstrued. I'm simply preventing that from happening.
I'm sorry but I think that is very much your intention. Over 11,600 posts in less that 2 years. Plus the fact that you post on just about every other Mac forum.
Your comments frequently attempt to belittle other peoples views and dissect their opinions in minute detail with phrases like "only an idiot would think..."
At the end of the day we are all just expressing an opinion. Non of us knows what is going to happen.
I think Apple will launch an iPad Mini. You think they won't. Ok we shall see what happens in Sept/Oct. I'll be the first to hold my hand up if I'm wrong and I hope you will do the same.
I'm sorry but I think that is very much your intention. Over 11,600 posts in less that 2 years. Plus the fact that you post on just about every other Mac forum.
Okay. As I've said, you're wrong, but you're welcome to that opinion.
Jesus Christ! You just don't get it do you. It has nothing to do with size. It's about market segmentation. Having a product option that meets everyone's needs. Look through Apple's product catalogue - in just about every respect they have a entry level model, mid range mass market model and an expensive high end model. Again something for everyone. It's basic level marketing / product management.
They don't need to bring out an iPhone Nano coz they already have a cheaper iPhone - the 3GS and 4.
But they don't have a product to satisfy the market segment between the 3.5" iPod and the 10" iPad. An iPad Mini would open a whole new market segment for Apple to sell into.
A 7" iPad Mini only makes sense if Apple moves from the "make your UI look good in these TWO resolution/aspect ratios" to "make your UI look good in ANY resolution/aspect ratio".
There's a very nice simplicity to knowing that my iPad layout is always 1024x768 and my iPhone layout is always 480x320. Points, not pixels.
This is in comparison to what I need to do in Android with layouts which does the latter above.
From a market segmentation perspective the $199 iPod Touch is a mere $200 below a new iPad 2 and only $120 less than a refurb iPad 2 @ $319.
In my mind the primary competitor for the iPod Touch is the PSP, 3DS and Kindle Fire. A 5" iPod Touch would neatly fill the gap between the iPod Touch and iPad without hurting the iPad brand. I'm really hoping that's what all those rumored 4" panels are for and that they are on the high end of 4" (like 4.75")
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Any school district that spends money to equip kids with out of date textbooks that will only get more out of date in the 5-6 years they agree to use them, not to mention write in, torn up etc (and not replaced) is wasting our taxes. Ask any educator who's not a paid shill for the publishing companies. Especially those that aren't technophobe FUD spreaders about how they are going to be replaced by machines etc.
You really think textbooks are the key to effective teaching? And even if they are, you really think with iPad, the textbook publishers will for some inexplicable reason, decide to charge less and thus the cost of textbooks using an iPad will be less than using dead trees?
I never said the iPad is ineffective. I said if a school district is going to purchase one for each student, then that's not the best use of a school district's funds. Even though as an AAPL stockholder, it would be a good thing for me. The issue isn't effectiveness, it's economics. (And how clever of you, you deleted the phrase 'each kid' and replaced it with 'kids' when you attacked your straw man.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
It makes more sense to look at what they have done in the past and ask the question will they follow that same logic again in the future.
And in the past, they did not make an iPhone nano, despite doing so following your logic.
Quote:
Personally I don't think they will stop with an iPad Nano, in a year or two when they can make it we will see a larger iPad as well.
And just like they DIDN'T make a smaller iPhone but are (assumed to be) making a larger one, so too will they not make a smaller iPad but quite probably make a larger one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
In particular, White believes that schools under budget constraints who cannot afford the current entry-level $399 iPad 2 might show interest in a smaller iPad.
Maybe so. But the education market buying season is in the spring. A September release is fine for the consumer market since the big buying season is the holiday quarter. Especially for a lower-priced iPad mini. But that's far too late for the 2012-2013 school year for institutional buyers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And in the past, they did not make an iPhone nano, despite doing so following your logic.
And just like they DIDN'T make a smaller iPhone but are (assumed to be) making a larger one, so too will they not make a smaller iPad but quite probably make a larger one.
Jesus Christ! You just don't get it do you. It has nothing to do with size. It's about market segmentation. Having a product option that meets everyone's needs. Look through Apple's product catalogue - in just about every respect they have a entry level model, mid range mass market model and an expensive high end model. Again something for everyone. It's basic level marketing / product management.
They don't need to bring out an iPhone Nano coz they already have a cheaper iPhone - the 3GS and 4.
But they don't have a product to satisfy the market segment between the 3.5" iPod and the 10" iPad. An iPad Mini would open a whole new market segment for Apple to sell into.
Entry - iPod Shuffle
Mid - iPod Nano
High - iPod Touch
Entry - iPhone 3GS
Mid - iPhone 4
High - iPhone 4S
Entry - iPad Mini
Mid - iPad 2
High - iPad 3
Entry - Mac Mini
Mid - iMac
High - Mac Pro
Entry - MB
Mid - MBA
High - MBP
Are you getting it yet?????????????????????????
I've got a headache now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov
Is there really a market for 7" tablets? The low sales of existing 7" tablets says otherwise.
That's because the current ones on the market are shit. The low sales of any tablets before iPad would have suggested there wasn't a market for tablets at all, but the iPad proved otherwise. People don't know what they want until you show them it.
Personally, if they release a 7" iPad, I'll buy one. My wife has an iPad 3, and while I like it, for reading it's hopeless in comparison to the Kindle. I know the Kindle is a single use device and hence should be better at that one thing than the iPad, but I find the iPad 3 too heavy for reading and in truth it's form factor is just uncomfortable to hold for a long period of time (if I support it from the bottom, because the edge of it is quite pointed, the pressure isn't nice).
I'd love to see Apple come out with something that is able to do more than Kindle, but can be comfortably held in one hand for a long period of time.
Says who?
The #2 tablet during the Christmas season was 7". As near as I can estimate, roughly half of all non-Apple tablets are 7".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Jesus Christ! You just don't get it do you.
No, you don't.
Quote:
They don't need to bring out an iPhone Nano coz they already have a cheaper iPhone - the 3GS and 4.
They don't need to bring out an iPad mini, because they already have a cheaper iPad. The iPad 2. And next year, who knows? The iPad 2 could be $299, iPad 3 $399, and iPad 4 $499.
Quote:
But they don't have a product to satisfy the market segment between the 3.5" iPod and the 10" iPad. An iPad Mini would open a whole new market segment for Apple to sell into.
For reference, do you also assume that Apple will be creating an xMac? What about a netbook? A standalone eReader? Should Apple make a digital cash register? Perhaps a television (HERE we go…
Apple owns the tablet market. That is a market segment.
Quote:
List
The Mac Mini and iMac aren't the same market as the Mac Pro. So say some. And you've preemptively acknowledged that I've disproven your point by pointing out the iPad 2 alongside the iPad 3.
Quote:
I've got a headache now.
Trying to create an argument where there isn't one has been known to do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, you don't.
They don't need to bring out an iPad mini, because they already have a cheaper iPad. The iPad 2. And next year, who knows? The iPad 2 could be $299, iPad 3 $399, and iPad 4 $499.
For reference, do you also assume that Apple will be creating an xMac? What about a netbook? A standalone eReader? Should Apple make a digital cash register? Perhaps a television (HERE we go…
Apple owns the tablet market. That is a market segment.
The Mac Mini and iMac aren't the same market as the Mac Pro. So say some. And you've preemptively acknowledged that I've disproven your point by pointing out the iPad 2 alongside the iPad 3.
Trying to create an argument where there isn't one has been known to do that.
For a mod you really do seem to manage to get into a spectacular number of arguments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson
For a mod you really do seem to manage to get into a spectacular number of arguments.
Still human, with all the opinions and thoughts contained therein.
Do you trust a machine to moderate? I wouldn't trust Defensio, that's for sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Still human, with all the opinions and thoughts contained therein.
Do you trust a machine to moderate? I wouldn't trust Defensio, that's for sure.
I'm more on the side of ED209.
Joking aside, I do think you need to let it go sometimes. Ultimately Shaun just had a different opinion to you, which is really what discussion boards should be about. You end up coming across as someone who wants to "win" by using a war of attrition with endless replies getting into somewhat ridiculous detail when all that has happened is two people think different things. You were doing the same with Slurpy a couple of weeks ago. I personally think it lowers the tone of the whole board.
¿Que?
And lots of those items in your list aren't really low-, mid- and high-end. The Mac Pro is a workstation that isn't even in a viable option for most consumers and the MBA cost more money for a given performance than the MBP which makes it a special case for a specific needs. The only honest way to measure low-, mid- and high-end is within a specific model type. For example, the low end 15" MBP has a 2.2GHz CPU, the mid range has a 2.4GHz CPU, and the high end ha a 2.5GHz GPU, along with some other clear base changes between the low and mid-range the ability to customize it even more. I haven't seen anything that suggests that MBA is a midrange machine. In fact Apple has been marketing the 11" model as their entry level notebook for awhile now. The 13' MB is now just for education.
iPad 4 won't be out for 9 more months, in all likelihood. Meanwhile, the current lineup is:
iPad 2 $399, iPad 3 $499.
That leaves room for an iPad Mini at $299. Furthermore, some people would actually prefer the Mini because of its size, so it opens a new segment of the market as well as takes the wind out of the sales of the competitors in a way that the $399 iPad 2 can't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson
Ultimately Shaun just had a different opinion to you, which is really what discussion boards should be about.
Of course. And as this is a discussion board, discussing opinions and their validity is what we do.
Quote:
…endless replies getting into somewhat ridiculous detail…
Extrapolation based on past knowledge is 'ridiculous detail'?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Of course. And as this is a discussion board, discussing opinions and their validity is what we do.
Extrapolation based on past knowledge is 'ridiculous detail'?
Breaking out what someone has said line by line and attempting to deconstruct their every point is a frankly needless attempt to demonstrate mastery over someone, and is somewhat childish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson
Breaking out what someone has said line by line and attempting to deconstruct their every argument is a frankly needless attempt to demonstrate mastery over someone, and is somewhat childish.
Interpret it as you will; that's not my intention. Things become unclear if posts are not broken up. Context is lost and responses can be misconstrued. I'm simply preventing that from happening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity
OK well, we will have to agree to disagree. I know loads of people who have weighed up the pro's and cons of buying an iPad over (or as well as) buying a kindle (in-fact I discussed it with my mother-in-law only an hour ago), and for many people, the kindle is the better choice, even for those with a disposable income.
I might even buy a kindle myself, and I would buy one for the main reason everyone else I know buys one, which is so they can sit next to the pool or on a beach and read whilst not having to worry about battery drain.
Apple doesn't really need to enter every market at every price point. The current Kindle crop starts at $79. There's nearly zero profit in there and its sole reason for existence is to push Amazon's book sales. You'd have to be insane to try to compete for that market segment. Apple doesn't really feel threatened if an iPad buyer also spends $79 on a Kindle for poolside reading (we have several Kindles and iPads in my household, each functions well for its intended purpose).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So? A 7-8" iPad with the same resolution as the iPad 2 would be sharper than a 10" iPad 2 with the same resolution. They're still selling the 10" iPad 2, so why wouldn't they be able to sell a device with the same resolution (so 99% of developers wouldn't have to change their app) but is even sharper?
I'm not suggesting a greatly inferior product. I'm suggesting a product with essentially the same components as the iPad 2, but smaller. So it would have the same performance as the iPad to, but sharper screen.
Because many existing apps would violate the iOS HIG 44x44 point touch target size and many developers would have to change their apps to make them as usable as the guidelines recommend/require. The UX of many apps would be greatly diminished by this UI change and it would be a greatly inferior product.
This is what Jobs was talking about regarding filing down fingers with sandpaper. On the other hand a 4"-6" iPod touch at the same resolution has a larger touch target size than the existing touch. So apps designed under the iPhone UI guidelines will work well.
This is the basis of my contention that any 4-7" iOS device will be an upsized iPod Touch and not a downsized iPad. It will be the same UI target as the iPhone and not the iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Interpret it as you will; that's not my intention. Things become unclear if posts are not broken up. Context is lost and responses can be misconstrued. I'm simply preventing that from happening.
I'm sorry but I think that is very much your intention. Over 11,600 posts in less that 2 years. Plus the fact that you post on just about every other Mac forum.
Your comments frequently attempt to belittle other peoples views and dissect their opinions in minute detail with phrases like "only an idiot would think..."
At the end of the day we are all just expressing an opinion. Non of us knows what is going to happen.
I think Apple will launch an iPad Mini. You think they won't. Ok we shall see what happens in Sept/Oct. I'll be the first to hold my hand up if I'm wrong and I hope you will do the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
I'm sorry but I think that is very much your intention. Over 11,600 posts in less that 2 years. Plus the fact that you post on just about every other Mac forum.
Okay. As I've said, you're wrong, but you're welcome to that opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Jesus Christ! You just don't get it do you. It has nothing to do with size. It's about market segmentation. Having a product option that meets everyone's needs. Look through Apple's product catalogue - in just about every respect they have a entry level model, mid range mass market model and an expensive high end model. Again something for everyone. It's basic level marketing / product management.
They don't need to bring out an iPhone Nano coz they already have a cheaper iPhone - the 3GS and 4.
But they don't have a product to satisfy the market segment between the 3.5" iPod and the 10" iPad. An iPad Mini would open a whole new market segment for Apple to sell into.
A 7" iPad Mini only makes sense if Apple moves from the "make your UI look good in these TWO resolution/aspect ratios" to "make your UI look good in ANY resolution/aspect ratio".
There's a very nice simplicity to knowing that my iPad layout is always 1024x768 and my iPhone layout is always 480x320. Points, not pixels.
This is in comparison to what I need to do in Android with layouts which does the latter above.
From a market segmentation perspective the $199 iPod Touch is a mere $200 below a new iPad 2 and only $120 less than a refurb iPad 2 @ $319.
In my mind the primary competitor for the iPod Touch is the PSP, 3DS and Kindle Fire. A 5" iPod Touch would neatly fill the gap between the iPod Touch and iPad without hurting the iPad brand. I'm really hoping that's what all those rumored 4" panels are for and that they are on the high end of 4" (like 4.75")