Well no! Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if Apple priced the Mini the way they did because they new enhanced somewhat more expensive hardware was coming. The current price should cover the enhancements most want to see in the device.
wizard- So you think, in a year, they go from a $329 iPad Mini w/ an A5, 512mb Ram, and normal screen upgrades to an A7X, 1gb+ Ram, Retina, Fingerprint, and new colors- and stay the same price?
They went the previous processor for a reason last year. They will either do that again and add retina, go A7 and no retina, or raise the price if they go A7X and Retina. I don't see a scenario where they keep the price the same if they jump up specs THAT much. If they do- no one will be happier than me- but I highly, highly doubt it.
Siri is the beginnings of the Knowledge Navigator. Seriously, the only thing that could make Siri better is including it with Mavericks (or a future update).
Seriously, there are many things that could be done to improve Siri. Of course Siri on Mac OS should be at the top of the list. What Apple really needs to do is to transfer more of the voice processing and the AI to the local device. The idea being to speed up things significantly.
It would take a bit, but I just don't see how our Macs couldn't handle the processing power to make that a reality.
They can, this is why I agree with you to an extent. Siri would be very nice on a Mac with a little work.
First let's just all admit that Apple has limited pricing flexibility here. Due to much lower cost competition they don't have much of an upside option with pricing.
wizard- So you think, in a year, they go from a $329 iPad Mini w/ an A5, 512mb Ram, and normal screen upgrades to an A7X, 1gb+ Ram, Retina, Fingerprint, and new colors- and stay the same price?
I look at the original iPad as a model here. I saw that machine as a proof of concept that was vastly improved in follow on models. There wasn't a significant price shift with those improvements. Now that doesn't mean that an iPad Mini would get everything on the wish list. However performance of these machines is lacking so I see a processor upgrade as a high priority.
They went the previous processor for a reason last year. They will either do that again and add retina, go A7 and no retina, or raise the price if they go A7X and Retina.
Well again we don't know what A7X even is right now but if it is an enhanced GPU device why wouldn't Apple put it into an IPad Mini? Gaming is really important on the tablets.
There is another factor here though, that is getting the platform to 64 bit as fast as possible. For one it offers huge technical advantages which have already been discussed. But it would also be a huge marketing advantage if Apple could say that all of its tablets are 64 bit machines going into the shopping season. The marketing advantages may be the stronger drive to put an A7 or A7X in the machine.
I don't see a scenario where they keep the price the same if they jump up specs THAT much. If they do- no one will be happier than me- but I highly, highly doubt it.
Well the first thing here is that we know the A7 series likely cost Apple a bit more as foundry costs are very much related to die area. The question becomes how much, I'm thinking not more than $5.
Then you have the retina screen that has already infiltrated most of Apples iOS line up. Such a screen for the Mini is very doable and at this point mainstream tech. That Apple didn't go this route in the first place tells me that cost wasn't the original issue, I'm betting power usage was the problem. So Apple might very well switch to a new technology screen. This will cost more, new tech usually does, but I don't see Apple permitting more that a $10 bump.
RAM is another interesting product that needs a bump in all of the iPads, if they go to 2GB the price differential will hardly be noticeable. 4GB might cost them $20.
Flash memory however is where Apple has really been screwing us on the iOS devices. The price of flash has fallen so much that it could actually cover some of the costs above. Think about the other flash based products, everything from SD cards to Apples own SSD cards in the AIRs. The prices have fallen drastically yet the iPads have not shifted their internal storage. Effectively the price drops could balance most of the costs highlighted above. With a little design effort the rest of the iPads costs could be reduced a bit too. In the end I just don't see a problem for Apple in keeping the same price structure on all the iPads in place and doing so while offering real upgrades.
I'm fairly sure they can pull off an upgrade to A7(X), increase RAM and do retina at the same price. Bumping flash might make that more difficult. However an A7 variant and more RAM in a Mini would be one heck of an upgrade in and of itself.
Wishful thinking? Not really from my perspective, the biggest variable above is the retina screen where I could be off by a mile.
By the way, it looks like that there's not going to be any black iPad this year, which is what I was wanting, so I guess that I see a gold iPad 64 GB or 128 GB in my future! It'll be mine! My precious!
Haven't seen any leaks of a full-sized gold. You might be stuck with silver/white and space gray/black.
I think we'll see those 2 colors on the full-sized iPad- w/ a fingerprint scanner, A7X, 8mp camera, and 2 gb ram.
Unfortunately, I think we'll see all 3 colors on the iPad Mini- w/ a fingerprint scanner, A7X, 8mp camera 1 gb ram... and no Retina.
The pitch will be that it is substantially faster (would actually be over 4x faster) and get the new hardware to overshadow the no retina. Just my gut telling me.... so I'm basically thinking like an analyst.
Man I hope I'm wrong.....
We probably want see retina, either way it will more likely have a A6(or A6X) on it, and apple sorta keeps ram, graphics, and CPU in same category, so I think it will keep a 1gb ram on A7X (apple might keep same graphics on the a7 but put X as + 1 gb ram for all I know) the mini has to have a few more disadvantages Than you listed however because retina and 1 gb ram are not much compared to the current.
I wonder if next year apple will make the IPad mini have 5C color scheme, call it the IPad mini color?
First let's just all admit that Apple has limited pricing flexibility here. Due to much lower cost competition they don't have much of an upside option with pricing.
I look at the original iPad as a model here. I saw that machine as a proof of concept that was vastly improved in follow on models. There wasn't a significant price shift with those improvements. Now that doesn't mean that an iPad Mini would get everything on the wish list. However performance of these machines is lacking so I see a processor upgrade as a high priority.
Well again we don't know what A7X even is right now but if it is an enhanced GPU device why wouldn't Apple put it into an IPad Mini? Gaming is really important on the tablets.
There is another factor here though, that is getting the platform to 64 bit as fast as possible. For one it offers huge technical advantages which have already been discussed. But it would also be a huge marketing advantage if Apple could say that all of its tablets are 64 bit machines going into the shopping season. The marketing advantages may be the stronger drive to put an A7 or A7X in the machine.
Well the first thing here is that we know the A7 series likely cost Apple a bit more as foundry costs are very much related to die area. The question becomes how much, I'm thinking not more than $5.
Then you have the retina screen that has already infiltrated most of Apples iOS line up. Such a screen for the Mini is very doable and at this point mainstream tech. That Apple didn't go this route in the first place tells me that cost wasn't the original issue, I'm betting power usage was the problem. So Apple might very well switch to a new technology screen. This will cost more, new tech usually does, but I don't see Apple permitting more that a $10 bump.
RAM is another interesting product that needs a bump in all of the iPads, if they go to 2GB the price differential will hardly be noticeable. 4GB might cost them $20.
Flash memory however is where Apple has really been screwing us on the iOS devices. The price of flash has fallen so much that it could actually cover some of the costs above. Think about the other flash based products, everything from SD cards to Apples own SSD cards in the AIRs. The prices have fallen drastically yet the iPads have not shifted their internal storage. Effectively the price drops could balance most of the costs highlighted above. With a little design effort the rest of the iPads costs could be reduced a bit too. In the end I just don't see a problem for Apple in keeping the same price structure on all the iPads in place and doing so while offering real upgrades.
I'm fairly sure they can pull off an upgrade to A7(X), increase RAM and do retina at the same price. Bumping flash might make that more difficult. However an A7 variant and more RAM in a Mini would be one heck of an upgrade in and of itself.
Wishful thinking? Not really from my perspective, the biggest variable above is the retina screen where I could be off by a mile.
Cost isn't an issue with Flash- they could put 64gb in the base iPhone and still have insane margins. But they don't- and honestly, they shouldn't- because they'd lose out on their 750 and 850 variants that have substantially larger margins.
But knowing Apple like I've known them for the past decade- they don't do giant leaps like this without a cost. Granted, their incremental updates are incredible in their own right. But I do not see them doing the following:
A5 -> A7X
512mb Ram -> 2 gb Ram
Non-Retina -> Retina
No Fingerprint -> Fingerprint
$329 -> $329
I do see them wanting to go 64-bit on all their products, as they should. I also think, for public perspective, they should do Retina. But I think we see an A7, 1gb, Fingerprint, Non-Retina iPad Mini at $329. I also would think a retina would come in the spring of 2014. And I think people will be pissed there is no retina, but it'll still sell great. If we do see retina this fall, you'll see an increased price tag- and rightfully so- and people will be pissed about the price, but it'll still sell great.
First let's just all admit that Apple has limited pricing flexibility here. Due to much lower cost competition they don't have much of an upside option with pricing.
wizard- So you think, in a year, they go from a $329 iPad Mini w/ an A5, 512mb Ram, and normal screen upgrades to an A7X, 1gb+ Ram, Retina, Fingerprint, and new colors- and stay the same price?
I look at the original iPad as a model here. I saw that machine as a proof of concept that was vastly improved in follow on models. There wasn't a significant price shift with those improvements. Now that doesn't mean that an iPad Mini would get everything on the wish list. However performance of these machines is lacking so I see a processor upgrade as a high priority.
They went the previous processor for a reason last year. They will either do that again and add retina, go A7 and no retina, or raise the price if they go A7X and Retina.
Well again we don't know what A7X even is right now but if it is an enhanced GPU device why wouldn't Apple put it into an IPad Mini? Gaming is really important on the tablets.
There is another factor here though, that is getting the platform to 64 bit as fast as possible. For one it offers huge technical advantages which have already been discussed. But it would also be a huge marketing advantage if Apple could say that all of its tablets are 64 bit machines going into the shopping season. The marketing advantages may be the stronger drive to put an A7 or A7X in the machine.
I don't see a scenario where they keep the price the same if they jump up specs THAT much. If they do- no one will be happier than me- but I highly, highly doubt it.
Well the first thing here is that we know the A7 series likely cost Apple a bit more as foundry costs are very much related to die area. The question becomes how much, I'm thinking not more than $5.
Then you have the retina screen that has already infiltrated most of Apples iOS line up. Such a screen for the Mini is very doable and at this point mainstream tech. That Apple didn't go this route in the first place tells me that cost wasn't the original issue, I'm betting power usage was the problem. So Apple might very well switch to a new technology screen. This will cost more, new tech usually does, but I don't see Apple permitting more that a $10 bump.
RAM is another interesting product that needs a bump in all of the iPads, if they go to 2GB the price differential will hardly be noticeable. 4GB might cost them $20.
Flash memory however is where Apple has really been screwing us on the iOS devices. The price of flash has fallen so much that it could actually cover some of the costs above. Think about the other flash based products, everything from SD cards to Apples own SSD cards in the AIRs. The prices have fallen drastically yet the iPads have not shifted their internal storage. Effectively the price drops could balance most of the costs highlighted above. With a little design effort the rest of the iPads costs could be reduced a bit too. In the end I just don't see a problem for Apple in keeping the same price structure on all the iPads in place and doing so while offering real upgrades.
I'm fairly sure they can pull off an upgrade to A7(X), increase RAM and do retina at the same price. Bumping flash might make that more difficult. However an A7 variant and more RAM in a Mini would be one heck of an upgrade in and of itself.
Wishful thinking? Not really from my perspective, the biggest variable above is the retina screen where I could be off by a mile.
I think your analysis is sound and Apple will make all iPad models both Retina and A7X APU -- for the reasons you gave. And they will maintain the price points, even though it may reduce margins.
Apple is very flexible with margins when it gives them a competitive advantage:
Consider the iPad 1 was rumored to cost $1,100 before announcement -- and the $499 entry point left every competitor scrambling and killed the netbooks.
At $599 for the 32 GB model, the BOM for the iPad 1 and 2 was $275.95 and $323.25 -- while maintaining the price point:
And an all 64-bit APU iPad lineup would leave the competition in the dust, for maybe a year -- and then it may be too late because the developers would be already committed and the next iPad announcements will be looming!
Exactly what I was thinking! Free wide-scale publicity for a company venturing into the tablet space for the first time is probably quite helpful for Nokia.
I wonder if their tablet can make non-VoIP phonecalls.
"Nokia and Microsoft schedule Oct 22nd launch dates in anticipation of Apple's unannounced event in the hopes of gaining any tablet-related attention whatsoever."
Exactly what I was thinking! Free wide-scale publicity for a company venturing into the tablet space for the first time is probably quite helpful for Nokia.
Why would a Nokia tablet with Windows RT or Windows 8 do any better than a Microsoft Surface tablet which has been proven nobody wants to buy. Surface fanbois think a spec bump is what the people have been waiting for.
Brand recognition.
Microsoft is US company. Outside of US, Microsoft brand has less brand value - Europeans are quite proud of local brands (I'd expect everyone is, really).
If info above is accurate, Nokia is pushing their Lumia line (and Windows Phone) quite well in some European markets - Germany is almost equal between iOS and WP, and Euro average is well above US.
Windows 8 works fine on tablets, IMHO. ThinkPad Tablet 2 is my favourite tablet, and yes I did use/do use Asus Transformer and iPad. I'm not too demanding on apps so everything I need exists on Win Marketplace, and I get all the benefits of simply accessing files, printers, scanner... from my home network. I didn't really need Office so far on my tablet, but it is also there, should occasion arise. And browser experience is better than what I get on tablet, a real desktop experience in fact; I'm not even talking about Flash here, but every now and then some web sites will not render correctly on Arm tablets, for whatever reason.
So I'm thinking, Nokia might help pushing Windows tablets. It is not going to be runaway success for Nokia and MS, but I will be surprised if market share this time next year will not be significantly better (albeit still low compared to heavy hitters)..
Quite aside from setting themselves up for a fall in competing with an Apple announcement, what are Microsoft/Nokia thinking about in competing with each other?
No one had a clue when Apple was doing an announcement when those dates were set so they hardly set themselves up for anything.
And I'm rather hoping they announce on 22nd. Start preorders that night and sell on Friday. Preferably via online orders with in store pickup and monitoring for reseller crap. They could do like in China where you submit what you want to get and random ordering links go out with no walkins.
so, let me get this right. Microsoft, who have been struggling with sales of Surface are releasing another version of the same product at the same time as not only Apple, but Nokia, which is owned by Microsoft... even with two products against a new iPad release they will fail to draw much attention. Microsoft should have learnt by now that the first release of any product should be a good product, heck, they did well with the x-box, so why did they not learnt from this?
This could actually be a good thing for Nokia. Realistically outside of tech news how many other places were likely to report on Nokia announcing a tablet. Whereas Apple is guaranteed to get some publicity, and with Nokia announcing on the same day there's a good chance there tablet is going to get a mention in the same article.
As for Microsoft launching on the same date, seems fairly irrelevant to me. There aren't many Microsoft stores in the world so it's not like it's going on sale in many retail locations. The devices are already available to buy, so all that's happening is there sticking the orders in the post.
Comments
I knew I missed one! Or three.
Well no! Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if Apple priced the Mini the way they did because they new enhanced somewhat more expensive hardware was coming. The current price should cover the enhancements most want to see in the device.
wizard- So you think, in a year, they go from a $329 iPad Mini w/ an A5, 512mb Ram, and normal screen upgrades to an A7X, 1gb+ Ram, Retina, Fingerprint, and new colors- and stay the same price?
They went the previous processor for a reason last year. They will either do that again and add retina, go A7 and no retina, or raise the price if they go A7X and Retina. I don't see a scenario where they keep the price the same if they jump up specs THAT much. If they do- no one will be happier than me- but I highly, highly doubt it.
First let's just all admit that Apple has limited pricing flexibility here. Due to much lower cost competition they don't have much of an upside option with pricing.
I look at the original iPad as a model here. I saw that machine as a proof of concept that was vastly improved in follow on models. There wasn't a significant price shift with those improvements. Now that doesn't mean that an iPad Mini would get everything on the wish list. However performance of these machines is lacking so I see a processor upgrade as a high priority. Well again we don't know what A7X even is right now but if it is an enhanced GPU device why wouldn't Apple put it into an IPad Mini? Gaming is really important on the tablets.
There is another factor here though, that is getting the platform to 64 bit as fast as possible. For one it offers huge technical advantages which have already been discussed. But it would also be a huge marketing advantage if Apple could say that all of its tablets are 64 bit machines going into the shopping season. The marketing advantages may be the stronger drive to put an A7 or A7X in the machine.
Well the first thing here is that we know the A7 series likely cost Apple a bit more as foundry costs are very much related to die area. The question becomes how much, I'm thinking not more than $5.
Then you have the retina screen that has already infiltrated most of Apples iOS line up. Such a screen for the Mini is very doable and at this point mainstream tech. That Apple didn't go this route in the first place tells me that cost wasn't the original issue, I'm betting power usage was the problem. So Apple might very well switch to a new technology screen. This will cost more, new tech usually does, but I don't see Apple permitting more that a $10 bump.
RAM is another interesting product that needs a bump in all of the iPads, if they go to 2GB the price differential will hardly be noticeable. 4GB might cost them $20.
Flash memory however is where Apple has really been screwing us on the iOS devices. The price of flash has fallen so much that it could actually cover some of the costs above. Think about the other flash based products, everything from SD cards to Apples own SSD cards in the AIRs. The prices have fallen drastically yet the iPads have not shifted their internal storage. Effectively the price drops could balance most of the costs highlighted above. With a little design effort the rest of the iPads costs could be reduced a bit too. In the end I just don't see a problem for Apple in keeping the same price structure on all the iPads in place and doing so while offering real upgrades.
I'm fairly sure they can pull off an upgrade to A7(X), increase RAM and do retina at the same price. Bumping flash might make that more difficult. However an A7 variant and more RAM in a Mini would be one heck of an upgrade in and of itself.
Wishful thinking? Not really from my perspective, the biggest variable above is the retina screen where I could be off by a mile.
We probably want see retina, either way it will more likely have a A6(or A6X) on it, and apple sorta keeps ram, graphics, and CPU in same category, so I think it will keep a 1gb ram on A7X (apple might keep same graphics on the a7 but put X as + 1 gb ram for all I know) the mini has to have a few more disadvantages Than you listed however because retina and 1 gb ram are not much compared to the current.
I wonder if next year apple will make the IPad mini have 5C color scheme, call it the IPad mini color?
First let's just all admit that Apple has limited pricing flexibility here. Due to much lower cost competition they don't have much of an upside option with pricing.
I look at the original iPad as a model here. I saw that machine as a proof of concept that was vastly improved in follow on models. There wasn't a significant price shift with those improvements. Now that doesn't mean that an iPad Mini would get everything on the wish list. However performance of these machines is lacking so I see a processor upgrade as a high priority.
Well again we don't know what A7X even is right now but if it is an enhanced GPU device why wouldn't Apple put it into an IPad Mini? Gaming is really important on the tablets.
There is another factor here though, that is getting the platform to 64 bit as fast as possible. For one it offers huge technical advantages which have already been discussed. But it would also be a huge marketing advantage if Apple could say that all of its tablets are 64 bit machines going into the shopping season. The marketing advantages may be the stronger drive to put an A7 or A7X in the machine.
Well the first thing here is that we know the A7 series likely cost Apple a bit more as foundry costs are very much related to die area. The question becomes how much, I'm thinking not more than $5.
Then you have the retina screen that has already infiltrated most of Apples iOS line up. Such a screen for the Mini is very doable and at this point mainstream tech. That Apple didn't go this route in the first place tells me that cost wasn't the original issue, I'm betting power usage was the problem. So Apple might very well switch to a new technology screen. This will cost more, new tech usually does, but I don't see Apple permitting more that a $10 bump.
RAM is another interesting product that needs a bump in all of the iPads, if they go to 2GB the price differential will hardly be noticeable. 4GB might cost them $20.
Flash memory however is where Apple has really been screwing us on the iOS devices. The price of flash has fallen so much that it could actually cover some of the costs above. Think about the other flash based products, everything from SD cards to Apples own SSD cards in the AIRs. The prices have fallen drastically yet the iPads have not shifted their internal storage. Effectively the price drops could balance most of the costs highlighted above. With a little design effort the rest of the iPads costs could be reduced a bit too. In the end I just don't see a problem for Apple in keeping the same price structure on all the iPads in place and doing so while offering real upgrades.
I'm fairly sure they can pull off an upgrade to A7(X), increase RAM and do retina at the same price. Bumping flash might make that more difficult. However an A7 variant and more RAM in a Mini would be one heck of an upgrade in and of itself.
Wishful thinking? Not really from my perspective, the biggest variable above is the retina screen where I could be off by a mile.
Cost isn't an issue with Flash- they could put 64gb in the base iPhone and still have insane margins. But they don't- and honestly, they shouldn't- because they'd lose out on their 750 and 850 variants that have substantially larger margins.
But knowing Apple like I've known them for the past decade- they don't do giant leaps like this without a cost. Granted, their incremental updates are incredible in their own right. But I do not see them doing the following:
A5 -> A7X
512mb Ram -> 2 gb Ram
Non-Retina -> Retina
No Fingerprint -> Fingerprint
$329 -> $329
I do see them wanting to go 64-bit on all their products, as they should. I also think, for public perspective, they should do Retina. But I think we see an A7, 1gb, Fingerprint, Non-Retina iPad Mini at $329. I also would think a retina would come in the spring of 2014. And I think people will be pissed there is no retina, but it'll still sell great. If we do see retina this fall, you'll see an increased price tag- and rightfully so- and people will be pissed about the price, but it'll still sell great.
We shall see...
I think your analysis is sound and Apple will make all iPad models both Retina and A7X APU -- for the reasons you gave. And they will maintain the price points, even though it may reduce margins.
Apple is very flexible with margins when it gives them a competitive advantage:
Consider the iPad 1 was rumored to cost $1,100 before announcement -- and the $499 entry point left every competitor scrambling and killed the netbooks.
At $599 for the 32 GB model, the BOM for the iPad 1 and 2 was $275.95 and $323.25 -- while maintaining the price point:
http://techinsidr.com/apple-ipad-2-teardown-analysis/
My point is that Apple has done this before…
And an all 64-bit APU iPad lineup would leave the competition in the dust, for maybe a year -- and then it may be too late because the developers would be already committed and the next iPad announcements will be looming!
… Surface, we hardly knew ye...
I'm sure you have a point.
I wonder if their tablet can make non-VoIP phonecalls.
It would make more sense to put it on the Mini that the 9.7" one, because of its portability.
It will run out of power quicker than any other tablet ¿
Strange that the display became so much more expensive for them. But ok, it's from LG. Besides, the source was
Digitimes...LOL
I wonder if their are MS CEO candidates out their declining for the honor...
Uh, I think the reality is..
"Nokia and Microsoft schedule Oct 22nd launch dates in anticipation of Apple's unannounced event in the hopes of gaining any tablet-related attention whatsoever."
Nokia has sold tablets before
So you are trying to predicate something based on two data points?
Brand recognition.
Microsoft is US company. Outside of US, Microsoft brand has less brand value - Europeans are quite proud of local brands (I'd expect everyone is, really).
http://mynokiablog.com/2013/09/30/nokia-lumia-pushes-windows-phone-passed-9-in-europe-growth-at-expense-of-ios-and-bb-12-in-uk/
If info above is accurate, Nokia is pushing their Lumia line (and Windows Phone) quite well in some European markets - Germany is almost equal between iOS and WP, and Euro average is well above US.
Windows 8 works fine on tablets, IMHO. ThinkPad Tablet 2 is my favourite tablet, and yes I did use/do use Asus Transformer and iPad. I'm not too demanding on apps so everything I need exists on Win Marketplace, and I get all the benefits of simply accessing files, printers, scanner... from my home network. I didn't really need Office so far on my tablet, but it is also there, should occasion arise. And browser experience is better than what I get on tablet, a real desktop experience in fact; I'm not even talking about Flash here, but every now and then some web sites will not render correctly on Arm tablets, for whatever reason.
So I'm thinking, Nokia might help pushing Windows tablets. It is not going to be runaway success for Nokia and MS, but I will be surprised if market share this time next year will not be significantly better (albeit still low compared to heavy hitters)..
No one had a clue when Apple was doing an announcement when those dates were set so they hardly set themselves up for anything.
And I'm rather hoping they announce on 22nd. Start preorders that night and sell on Friday. Preferably via online orders with in store pickup and monitoring for reseller crap. They could do like in China where you submit what you want to get and random ordering links go out with no walkins.
Yahoo News article: "Apple Punks Microsoft, Again"
"Hey Steve, pull my finger...again!"
Sold or shipped?
Both actually, they sold me one, and shipped it to me
770
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/33127/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
N800
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/33128/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
N810 + WiMAX edition
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/33129/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
This could actually be a good thing for Nokia. Realistically outside of tech news how many other places were likely to report on Nokia announcing a tablet. Whereas Apple is guaranteed to get some publicity, and with Nokia announcing on the same day there's a good chance there tablet is going to get a mention in the same article.
As for Microsoft launching on the same date, seems fairly irrelevant to me. There aren't many Microsoft stores in the world so it's not like it's going on sale in many retail locations. The devices are already available to buy, so all that's happening is there sticking the orders in the post.