If they put the phone app on the mini, I too would drop the iPhone like yesterday's news.
It is interesting that you said that. I have heard many people say that the Mini is for the beginner type user or for a newby, but I find the opposite to be true.
All of the true "power tablet users" I know have either switch to the mini or plan to (many waiting on retina display). The people I know who have bought an iPad after the Mini was released tend to be the home user who mainly use it for content consumption and playing games.
IMHO: Keep margins up and still sell just as many????
That's what I mean; they obviously kept the same launch-to-launch margins for the iPad, otherwise they would have raised the price when it went retina.
That's what I mean; they obviously kept the same launch-to-launch margins for the iPad, otherwise they would have raised the price when it went retina.
Apple's usual M.O. is to start out high, then add more features each year, while keeping the same price. That way, everyone is happy.
As you said, they usually try to do this within a budget that keeps the same profit margin. However, the iPads are unusual in that each new model reportedly ramped up the cost by about $40 over the previous one... leading to lower profit margins each time.
Apple's usual M.O. is to start out high, then add more features each year, while keeping the same price. That way, everyone is happy.
As you said, they usually try to do this within a budget that keeps the same profit margin. However, the iPads are unusual in that each new model reportedly ramped up the cost by about $40 over the previous one... leading to lower profit margins each time.
That's very interesting.
I don't think Apple is going to release the Retina Mini anytime soon, but if they were to release it later this year for the same $329 price, would they drop the price of Mini 1 to $229? That would be an aggressive way to fight Android head on.
Apple's usual M.O. is to start out high, then add more features each year, while keeping the same price. That way, everyone is happy.
As you said, they usually try to do this within a budget that keeps the same profit margin. However, the iPads are unusual in that each new model reportedly ramped up the cost by about $40 over the previous one... leading to lower profit margins each time.
Apparently, Apple couldn't think of any key features to add beyond the Retina Display.
I still don't understand why the larger model update wasn't called the iPad 3S.
There is clearly going to be an update for the iPad 4 to the Mini's more compact form factor.
And unless they wait until the summer or so, they can't call it the 5, can they?
Sharp, LG and Samsung provide screens for the iPad. Sharp supply the fewest units compared to the others and were the 3rd supplier to be chosen by Apple. Stands to reason that now the holidays have passed they are no longer required for production volume.
Or one of the other suppliers is able to up their volume at a better price. Smells of stock manipulation to me. Maybe SEC should investigate the sources of these rumours and their trading history.
Apparently, Apple couldn't think of any key features to add beyond the Retina Display.
I still don't understand why the larger model update wasn't called the iPad 3S.
There is clearly going to be an update for the iPad 4 to the Mini's more compact form factor.
And unless they wait until the summer or so, they can't call it the 5, can they?
It technically was called the "New iPad 4th generation" but I agree it's not really a 4th generation.
But they made enough improvements that calling it 4th generation makes more sense than "iPad with lightning connector" or "iPad with A6X"
If things really don't pick up for Apple this year, I'm afraid that in a few more there won't be an Apple. Google and Samsung more than any others have really screwed it over, in that their products are nearly as good (in some cases better) just as 'cool', more affordable and far more widely used nowadays. Apple is starting to feel like a dinosaur by comparison, and I really don't want to be saying that, or that it was just Steve's baby and RIP Apple! I've been a fan of the company since 1983 when I first started to learn Basic on an Apple II - hence my user name. 30 years trumpeting the cause! Ha ha.
You're right... Android has the most market share and Samsung has the most unit sales. There's no doubt about that.
So that puts Apple in 2nd place. However... they are still a billion dollar company with plenty of customers.
You realize that if a company has a product and people buy it... and they make money on that product... that's exactly what keeps the company away from bankruptcy?
And that's before considering the mountain of cash Apple already has.
If you're so doom and gloom about Apple... what are your thoughts on the 3rd place company?
In my opinion, anything put out by Reuters from East Asia, especially written by Miyoung Kim, should be treated with great caution, if no dismissed out of hand. Ms. Kim in the past has larded her articles with praise seemingly right out of the Samsung PR handbook (e.g. "building on its supremacy with sleek designs"). Why these days anyone trusts and bothers to reprint rumors out of Asia concerning Apple is a mystery to me.
Comments
Originally Posted by sranger
My guess is that Apple will release a Mini with a retnia display, but at a higher cost.....
They didn't with the iPad proper; why would they there?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
The iPad mini is more of a "pro" device.
If they put the phone app on the mini, I too would drop the iPhone like yesterday's news.
It is interesting that you said that. I have heard many people say that the Mini is for the beginner type user or for a newby, but I find the opposite to be true.
All of the true "power tablet users" I know have either switch to the mini or plan to (many waiting on retina display). The people I know who have bought an iPad after the Mini was released tend to be the home user who mainly use it for content consumption and playing games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
They didn't with the iPad proper; why would they there?
IMHO: Keep margins up and still sell just as many????
Originally Posted by sranger
IMHO: Keep margins up and still sell just as many????
That's what I mean; they obviously kept the same launch-to-launch margins for the iPad, otherwise they would have raised the price when it went retina.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's what I mean; they obviously kept the same launch-to-launch margins for the iPad, otherwise they would have raised the price when it went retina.
Apple's usual M.O. is to start out high, then add more features each year, while keeping the same price. That way, everyone is happy.
As you said, they usually try to do this within a budget that keeps the same profit margin. However, the iPads are unusual in that each new model reportedly ramped up the cost by about $40 over the previous one... leading to lower profit margins each time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Apple's usual M.O. is to start out high, then add more features each year, while keeping the same price. That way, everyone is happy.
As you said, they usually try to do this within a budget that keeps the same profit margin. However, the iPads are unusual in that each new model reportedly ramped up the cost by about $40 over the previous one... leading to lower profit margins each time.
That's very interesting.
I don't think Apple is going to release the Retina Mini anytime soon, but if they were to release it later this year for the same $329 price, would they drop the price of Mini 1 to $229? That would be an aggressive way to fight Android head on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Apple's usual M.O. is to start out high, then add more features each year, while keeping the same price. That way, everyone is happy.
As you said, they usually try to do this within a budget that keeps the same profit margin. However, the iPads are unusual in that each new model reportedly ramped up the cost by about $40 over the previous one... leading to lower profit margins each time.
Apparently, Apple couldn't think of any key features to add beyond the Retina Display.
I still don't understand why the larger model update wasn't called the iPad 3S.
There is clearly going to be an update for the iPad 4 to the Mini's more compact form factor.
And unless they wait until the summer or so, they can't call it the 5, can they?
Or one of the other suppliers is able to up their volume at a better price. Smells of stock manipulation to me. Maybe SEC should investigate the sources of these rumours and their trading history.
It technically was called the "New iPad 4th generation" but I agree it's not really a 4th generation.
But they made enough improvements that calling it 4th generation makes more sense than "iPad with lightning connector" or "iPad with A6X"
You're right... Android has the most market share and Samsung has the most unit sales. There's no doubt about that.
So that puts Apple in 2nd place. However... they are still a billion dollar company with plenty of customers.
You realize that if a company has a product and people buy it... and they make money on that product... that's exactly what keeps the company away from bankruptcy?
And that's before considering the mountain of cash Apple already has.
If you're so doom and gloom about Apple... what are your thoughts on the 3rd place company?