Jobs referred (alluded) to 7" tablets of that time. That is what was o nthe market and clearly the devices her had referred to. The iPad mini has a display that is 40% larger in area than typical 7" diagonal 16:9 aspect ratio tablet displays. LOL
I guess some people never know when they've lost the argument.
Talk to me in a year when the early adopter rush for the 's' has passed and the 'c' has had a full year to establish itself as a bit of a cost saver for people who don't need the specific features of the 's'
'The plural of "anecdote" is not "data"'.
If I were to imagine the 5'c' will be 99c in a year. It will be selling like hotcakes as the late adopters children get their phones.
the 6 and 6c will be released (6'c' = 5s capabilities + ? . 6? who know?)
and with it's lower manufacturing margins, one can assume it's off-contract price will erode faster (once the manufacturing costs have depreciated) than the 4 and 4s, so it may be even more of a cost saver. In the end, you're right, but less about a 'cost saver' and more about retail and manufacturing margins.
My other guess is that China Mobile has run into a stumbling block in it's LTE roll-out (likely Apple's back pressure requirement to state that the xx% of China Mobile's geography is supported by LTE… in no way can Apple have the 'fastest phone' 5s look slow), and projected 5c sales will be dampened until CM meets it's end of the release agreement.
..."though there are concerns about supply constraints leading into the holiday shopping season."
When have there ever NOT been concerns about supply constraints? This meme seems to have become standard FUD lately. Apple is doomed because, while it makes great products that people love, it can't make enough of them so... doomed.
Based on what? What is it about iPad mini's sales that qualifies you to make such a ridiculous statement?
You're wrong, of course, based on both data and logic.
The fact is people expect one or both of these things:
Technology to get cheaper over time
Technology to get better over time
So if Apple keeps the mini the same as it is consumers will expect the price to drop. And if the make it better by adding retina display, touch id, etc. consumers i think will be willing to pay a bit more for those features.
The other aspect is competiton. Competitor tablets are getting better. You may think they're garbage because they don't run iOS or have the iOS ecosystem but in terms of hardware they're competitive and in some cases better than the mini. Why would Apple let the competiton catch up? Your arguement wreaks to me of arrogance, of Apple thinking as long as something has an apple logo on it people will buy it.
Good grief. Do you people honestly believe that this would be the same if the iPad and iPad mini were the same price?
Good grief. Do you not get that some people prefer the SMALLER FORM FACTOR? iPad mini is a better reading device and is much more portable. It's not all about price.
I'm in. My local Apple Store Genius Bar (by straw poll) is all in.
If they introduce this, they will have monster sales and it will be back-ordered weeks.
A year ago I held-off buying an iPhone 5 because I really wanted an iPad mini, but no Retina, so no deal. Now I'm really glad I waited. First, iPad mini. Then, new battery for my iP4S as I wait another year for iP6.
This. If we don't see a retina mini this year I will tell friends and family not to buy one. Because we know Apple won't go a whole 12 months without releasing one.
Based on what? What is it about iPad mini's sales that qualifies you to make such a ridiculous statement?
You're wrong, of course, based on both data and logic.
The fact is people expect one or both of these things:
Technology to get cheaper over time
Technology to get better over time
So if Apple keeps the mini the same as it is consumers will expect the price to drop. And if the make it better by adding retina display, touch id, etc. consumers i think will be willing to pay a bit more for those features.
The other aspect is competiton. Competitor tablets are getting better. You may think they're garbage because they don't run iOS or have the iOS ecosystem but in terms of hardware they're competitive and in some cases better than the mini. Why would Apple let the competiton catch up? Your arguement wreaks to me of arrogance, of Apple thinking as long as something has an apple logo on it people will buy it.
Here's an interesting review supporting your argument that other tablets are competitive:
The Amazon Kindle HDX is a powerful, capable device with one of the best displays we’ve ever seen. Amazon has produced a top-tier device whose only condition is adoption of its services. If you’re a longtime Amazon Video and MP3 customer, that's great news.
The Good
Through calibration, this is now the best screen on an Android tablet
Performance that bests almost everything we've seen
A focused interface that gives you easy access to the content you want
Free tech support through Mayday
Fantastic battery life
The Bad
No Google means the company's communication services aren't there
The solid body is marred by the shiny plastic piece on the back and mushy buttons
If you're used to the stock Android experience, you might have trouble finding what you want
Accessing files outside of Amazon's ecosystem is a challenge
This. If we don't see a retina mini this year I will tell friends and family not to buy one. Because we know Apple won't go a whole 12 months without releasing one.
I think it depends on a many technological and cost challenges. 4x as many pixels will be easier now but will it be enough to allow for a not too much thicker, not too much heavier, and not too much more expensive iPad Mini? These are variables that we can only hope and guess at.
The 'proper' iPad is by my definition the one that is selling best. Therefore the answer is yes, by definition. According to Gartner, the Mini achieved 60% of combined sales in 1Q and subsequent data is showing the trend towards 7/8" tablets is increasing. The 'improper' tablets seem to be losing favour Analysts are able to get approximations of this based on the ASP provided by Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz
No, it is not. By most accounts it is either equal or less overall units than iPad mini.
This is not the least bit surprising. The overwhelming majority of people would rather pay $329 than $499. This is the deciding factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz
Thats an interesting perspective, but it still falls short because it has nothing to do with a 7.9" tablet being more desirable in any way than 9.7"
The factor is Price, and nothing more.
I disagree to a degree. If it were price, the Mini would have flopped in the market it came into, and the iPad 4 would not have sold at all against the iPad2.
The factor is 'need' at the time. 'need' has many dimensions: portability, app performance, battery life, visual presentation, app sphere, build quality etc. And the Uber need: What qualities of the device best meet my individual job requirements for this device.
The Mini was competing in a space with the iPad3, and a whole slew of 'cheap' 6 and 7" tablets that were taking share purely on size and cost. How much was Apple willing to remove from 'features' from the iPad3, to make the Mini compete on capability.
In the end, the Mini was released, but to further differentiate the Mini from the larger dimension, they parked an A6X into the iPad4. at the same price. They kept the '2' primarily as it was no cost to them (it was the same UI as the Mini), and kept the value chain differential appropriate.
for the last year, those that needed a smaller size had a previously unavailable option… We spent last year backfilling.
Next year, with 2 years of Minis, my guess is the sales will be less dramatic. Those that need retina will their choice at the mini level and it will be a hot item. Next year, we'll be more on a level field, and that's the ripe time for a new device (a retina 12"), to replace the 1024x768 factor retired with the iPad2 and the MiniOriginal, to spur sales and to start the 10" retirement party.
So no, it's not price… it's about individual value.
So my guess is that Apple has correctly determined that $329 is the value point for a 'top end' 8" device. $499 for a 10" device. And they won't waver… just stuff more capability into that price point, and allow less 'value' to be sold for less (a $250 MiniOriginal, a $399 iPad(-1)
..."though there are concerns about supply constraints leading into the holiday shopping season."
When have there ever NOT been concerns about supply constraints? This meme seems to have become standard FUD lately. Apple is doomed because, while it makes great products that people love, it can't make enough of them so... doomed.
The issue is that the glass will have to be different than just about any other glass made for Apple. That's more risk (unproven capacity). This is not moving from a 4 to a 4s sort move. this is like moving from the 4's' to a 5, which had both supply constraints and manufacturing constraints (new assembly technologies).
Retina mini will be a major demand (those waiting to move down from a iPad 2/3, and those who have a Mini now and demand a better experience) in the short term. Hence the perfect storm of pent up demand, normal seasonal spike, and a risk of supply constraint.
Just sitting here reminiscing…where are all the naysayers who a little over a year ago insisted that Apple would never release a smaller iPad? The 9.7” size was the perfect size, Steve Jobs said so. You’d have to include a file to whittle down your finger to use anything smaller than the [regular sized] iPad. It would be too complicated for developers to have to support different screen sizes. Etc, etc.
What a difference a year makes... LOL
Steve Jobs was referring to 7" tablets being to small. The iPad mini is 7.9" and has a much larger screen area compared to a 7" android tablet.
Steve Jobs was referring to 7" tablets being to small. The iPad mini is 7.9" and has a much larger screen area compared to a 7" android tablet.
Those 7" tablets also have a much narrower/widescreen aspect ratio which reduces the area even if the iPad Mini had only been 7". The iPad Mini has nearly 50% more display area which really doesn't put it into the same league as those much smaller and less functional tablets.
From the latest on rumors of the iPad Mini - the 2013 iPad Mini 2 is only going to get a minor refresh - an upgraded A5X. No Retina version until 2014!
Those 7" tablets also have a much narrower/widescreen aspect ratio which reduces the area even if the iPad Mini had only been 7". The iPad Mini has nearly 50% more display area which really doesn't put it into the same league as those much smaller and less functional tablets.
.....with the exception being its screen resolution. The discontinued Nook even has a better screen.
Bring on the Retina!
I'm looking at the iPad and the rumoured retina mini and can afford either one. I'm getting the mini because of it's form factor. To say "the factor is Price, and nothing more" makes you sound a little full of yourself.
This is the type of decision I would expect from someone, in this market segment, that finds their way to and posts on a website like AI. Put simply, you're the (rare) type that is in the position to make that decision based on anything but price.
It is not at all the decision I would expect from 90% of the iPad mini market, who do not fit your qualification.
So while you're technically correct about price being "a" factor and not 'the only' factor...it is statistically significant enough to say, 'the only factor that matters', hence my decisiveness.
This is the type of decision I would expect from someone, in this market segment, that finds their way to and posts on a website like AI. Put simply, you're the (rare) type that is in the position to make that decision based on anything but price.
It is not at all the decision I would expect from 90% of the iPad mini market, who do not fit your qualification.
So while you're technically correct about price being "a" factor and not 'the only' factor...it is statistically significant enough to say, 'the only factor that matters', hence my decisiveness.
Except you're wrong and putting way too much emphasis on price. If that were the case, the iPhone 5c sales would be blowing the iPhone 5s out of the water.
I don't think so; there's a good chance that the iPad mini will replace the iPad 2 at the $399 price point and that the iPad 2 may very well be discontinued this year. It's easier to see the iPad 2 being retired rather than bumping its processor specs-too much fragmentation at this point.
This is something that I had not considered...that an iPad mini w/ Retina Display could "replace" the iPad 2 at the price point.
So let's consider it. No way the iPad 2 gets a spec bump at this stage. Like you said, too much fragmentation. But they kept it last year for a reason. With the iPad 4 being a very small update over the iPad 3, they couldn't keep the iPad 3 around at $399....they'd lose money. There would have been nil margin on iPad 3 at $399, and people wouldn't see a dramatic difference between 3 & 4 and just opt for the cheaper 3. iPad 4 sales would have suffered more than they did with iPad 2 as the $399 option. Moral: More than enough performance differentiation for the $100 gap.
Meanwhile, the iPad mini came in at $329. 'Performance' wise, the only distinction between the mini & the 2 was screen size, and the newer cellular radios. Arguably, not quite $100 worth of difference. Therefore, not. Obviously there are other factors as to why the mini is $329 and not $299...but this is one Apple wouldn't overlook when deciding to keep the iPad 2 or not. The mini is good, and not quite "$100 worse than iPad 2", if that makes any sense.
So, Fast forward to this year where we have a major new iPad 5 to launch. Redesign, A7 64-bit, Touch ID. Same allure as iPhone 5S, and probably same insane crazy demand. This product is $499 and up. They now have to properly address their established $399 price point and ensure that it is appropriately "$100 worse" in perceived value. If they were to keep the iPad 2 at this point, I think they'd be too far behind, as iPad 2 would be perceived as at least "$150 worse" or more, and see as a bad purchase. So, does it stand then that maybe they could keep the iPad 4 at $399? Would there be the appropriate price distinction, and does it make sense for manufacturing & cost? Well, the iPad 4 has an A6X chip & Retina Display vs. iPad 5 with an A7 64-bit chip & Retina Display. iPad 4 is older/clunkier/heavier, iPad 5 is newer/sleeker/lighter. iPad 5 also has Touch ID, and the new colors, and minimal improvements to camera & wireless. Seems doable to me, but let's look at your idea...
Compare that to an iPad mini route. iPad 2 and 4 get discontinued on the same day and are no longer options. Apple introduces a new iPad mini 2 w/ A6X chip & Retina Display. Other minimal improvements to camera & wireless, probably along the same vein as iPad 5. But that's it. And then, without justifying it at all, RAISE the price of the mini by $70 (deal breaker for most) from $329 to $399.
Then after the boos die down, Apple says we're also keep the first generation iPad mini in our lineup, (and I'll give you this one), lowering price point to $299. Same mini as yesterday, lower price by $30.....All the while, the only significant differences between mini 1 & mini 2 are a chip and Retina Display. Compare this hypothetical event to the launch of iPad 3....and tell me how well that would have gone if Apple came out and said Yes iPad 3 has a Retina Display, and is now $100 more than iPad 2.
Understand there is big difference between lowering the price of an old model and keeping it around, and raising the price of the new model and keeping the old around at the same, or even lowering it. This is crazy erratic behavior.
The only time in recent memory that Apple has something like is with the release of the Retina MacBookPro's, but there are different factors at play there, and it hasn't turned out to have the impact Apple was hoping for (they sold less than they thought they would, because the prices increases over non-rMBP were seen as premiums & unrealistic).
Comments
Jobs referred (alluded) to 7" tablets of that time. That is what was o nthe market and clearly the devices her had referred to. The iPad mini has a display that is 40% larger in area than typical 7" diagonal 16:9 aspect ratio tablet displays. LOL
I guess some people never know when they've lost the argument.
LOL!
Talk to me in a year when the early adopter rush for the 's' has passed and the 'c' has had a full year to establish itself as a bit of a cost saver for people who don't need the specific features of the 's'
'The plural of "anecdote" is not "data"'.
If I were to imagine the 5'c' will be 99c in a year. It will be selling like hotcakes as the late adopters children get their phones.
the 6 and 6c will be released (6'c' = 5s capabilities + ? . 6? who know?)
and with it's lower manufacturing margins, one can assume it's off-contract price will erode faster (once the manufacturing costs have depreciated) than the 4 and 4s, so it may be even more of a cost saver. In the end, you're right, but less about a 'cost saver' and more about retail and manufacturing margins.
My other guess is that China Mobile has run into a stumbling block in it's LTE roll-out (likely Apple's back pressure requirement to state that the xx% of China Mobile's geography is supported by LTE… in no way can Apple have the 'fastest phone' 5s look slow), and projected 5c sales will be dampened until CM meets it's end of the release agreement.
..."though there are concerns about supply constraints leading into the holiday shopping season."
When have there ever NOT been concerns about supply constraints? This meme seems to have become standard FUD lately. Apple is doomed because, while it makes great products that people love, it can't make enough of them so... doomed.
Still doesn't address the [B][I]big[/I][/B] question:
Why is it: when Milie Cyrus gets naked and licks a hammer it's called art -- when I do it, I get wasted and asked to leave Home Depot?
By selling a model of every screen size that can physically exist.
“Sir, please don’t lick the hammers.”
“No, sir, we do not have a wrecking ball on-site.”
“Sir, please put your clothes back on.”
The fact is people expect one or both of these things:
Technology to get cheaper over time
Technology to get better over time
So if Apple keeps the mini the same as it is consumers will expect the price to drop. And if the make it better by adding retina display, touch id, etc. consumers i think will be willing to pay a bit more for those features.
The other aspect is competiton. Competitor tablets are getting better. You may think they're garbage because they don't run iOS or have the iOS ecosystem but in terms of hardware they're competitive and in some cases better than the mini. Why would Apple let the competiton catch up? Your arguement wreaks to me of arrogance, of Apple thinking as long as something has an apple logo on it people will buy it.
Good grief. Do you not get that some people prefer the SMALLER FORM FACTOR? iPad mini is a better reading device and is much more portable. It's not all about price.
This. If we don't see a retina mini this year I will tell friends and family not to buy one. Because we know Apple won't go a whole 12 months without releasing one.
Here's an interesting review supporting your argument that other tablets are competitive:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/the-amazon-kindle-fire-hdx-a-tablet-apart/
I think it depends on a many technological and cost challenges. 4x as many pixels will be easier now but will it be enough to allow for a not too much thicker, not too much heavier, and not too much more expensive iPad Mini? These are variables that we can only hope and guess at.
The 'proper' iPad is by my definition the one that is selling best. Therefore the answer is yes, by definition. According to Gartner, the Mini achieved 60% of combined sales in 1Q and subsequent data is showing the trend towards 7/8" tablets is increasing. The 'improper' tablets seem to be losing favour
Analysts are able to get approximations of this based on the ASP provided by Apple.
No, it is not. By most accounts it is either equal or less overall units than iPad mini.
This is not the least bit surprising. The overwhelming majority of people would rather pay $329 than $499. This is the deciding factor.
Thats an interesting perspective, but it still falls short because it has nothing to do with a 7.9" tablet being more desirable in any way than 9.7"
The factor is Price, and nothing more.
I disagree to a degree. If it were price, the Mini would have flopped in the market it came into, and the iPad 4 would not have sold at all against the iPad2.
The factor is 'need' at the time. 'need' has many dimensions: portability, app performance, battery life, visual presentation, app sphere, build quality etc. And the Uber need: What qualities of the device best meet my individual job requirements for this device.
The Mini was competing in a space with the iPad3, and a whole slew of 'cheap' 6 and 7" tablets that were taking share purely on size and cost. How much was Apple willing to remove from 'features' from the iPad3, to make the Mini compete on capability.
In the end, the Mini was released, but to further differentiate the Mini from the larger dimension, they parked an A6X into the iPad4. at the same price. They kept the '2' primarily as it was no cost to them (it was the same UI as the Mini), and kept the value chain differential appropriate.
for the last year, those that needed a smaller size had a previously unavailable option… We spent last year backfilling.
Next year, with 2 years of Minis, my guess is the sales will be less dramatic. Those that need retina will their choice at the mini level and it will be a hot item. Next year, we'll be more on a level field, and that's the ripe time for a new device (a retina 12"), to replace the 1024x768 factor retired with the iPad2 and the MiniOriginal, to spur sales and to start the 10" retirement party.
So no, it's not price… it's about individual value.
So my guess is that Apple has correctly determined that $329 is the value point for a 'top end' 8" device. $499 for a 10" device. And they won't waver… just stuff more capability into that price point, and allow less 'value' to be sold for less (a $250 MiniOriginal, a $399 iPad(-1)
..."though there are concerns about supply constraints leading into the holiday shopping season."
When have there ever NOT been concerns about supply constraints? This meme seems to have become standard FUD lately. Apple is doomed because, while it makes great products that people love, it can't make enough of them so... doomed.
The issue is that the glass will have to be different than just about any other glass made for Apple. That's more risk (unproven capacity). This is not moving from a 4 to a 4s sort move. this is like moving from the 4's' to a 5, which had both supply constraints and manufacturing constraints (new assembly technologies).
Retina mini will be a major demand (those waiting to move down from a iPad 2/3, and those who have a Mini now and demand a better experience) in the short term. Hence the perfect storm of pent up demand, normal seasonal spike, and a risk of supply constraint.
Steve Jobs was referring to 7" tablets being to small. The iPad mini is 7.9" and has a much larger screen area compared to a 7" android tablet.
Those 7" tablets also have a much narrower/widescreen aspect ratio which reduces the area even if the iPad Mini had only been 7". The iPad Mini has nearly 50% more display area which really doesn't put it into the same league as those much smaller and less functional tablets.
.....with the exception being its screen resolution. The discontinued Nook even has a better screen.
Bring on the Retina!
I'm looking at the iPad and the rumoured retina mini and can afford either one. I'm getting the mini because of it's form factor. To say "the factor is Price, and nothing more" makes you sound a little full of yourself.
This is the type of decision I would expect from someone, in this market segment, that finds their way to and posts on a website like AI. Put simply, you're the (rare) type that is in the position to make that decision based on anything but price.
It is not at all the decision I would expect from 90% of the iPad mini market, who do not fit your qualification.
So while you're technically correct about price being "a" factor and not 'the only' factor...it is statistically significant enough to say, 'the only factor that matters', hence my decisiveness.
This is the type of decision I would expect from someone, in this market segment, that finds their way to and posts on a website like AI. Put simply, you're the (rare) type that is in the position to make that decision based on anything but price.
It is not at all the decision I would expect from 90% of the iPad mini market, who do not fit your qualification.
So while you're technically correct about price being "a" factor and not 'the only' factor...it is statistically significant enough to say, 'the only factor that matters', hence my decisiveness.
Except you're wrong and putting way too much emphasis on price. If that were the case, the iPhone 5c sales would be blowing the iPhone 5s out of the water.
It is not at all the decision I would expect from 90% of the iPad mini market, who do not fit your qualification.
Where did you get your statistics aside from your ass?
Oh ya... you have insider information to Apple's Marketing strategies, margins, and component costs... duh!
I don't think so; there's a good chance that the iPad mini will replace the iPad 2 at the $399 price point and that the iPad 2 may very well be discontinued this year. It's easier to see the iPad 2 being retired rather than bumping its processor specs-too much fragmentation at this point.
This is something that I had not considered...that an iPad mini w/ Retina Display could "replace" the iPad 2 at the price point.
So let's consider it. No way the iPad 2 gets a spec bump at this stage. Like you said, too much fragmentation. But they kept it last year for a reason. With the iPad 4 being a very small update over the iPad 3, they couldn't keep the iPad 3 around at $399....they'd lose money. There would have been nil margin on iPad 3 at $399, and people wouldn't see a dramatic difference between 3 & 4 and just opt for the cheaper 3. iPad 4 sales would have suffered more than they did with iPad 2 as the $399 option. Moral: More than enough performance differentiation for the $100 gap.
Meanwhile, the iPad mini came in at $329. 'Performance' wise, the only distinction between the mini & the 2 was screen size, and the newer cellular radios. Arguably, not quite $100 worth of difference. Therefore, not. Obviously there are other factors as to why the mini is $329 and not $299...but this is one Apple wouldn't overlook when deciding to keep the iPad 2 or not. The mini is good, and not quite "$100 worse than iPad 2", if that makes any sense.
So, Fast forward to this year where we have a major new iPad 5 to launch. Redesign, A7 64-bit, Touch ID. Same allure as iPhone 5S, and probably same insane crazy demand. This product is $499 and up. They now have to properly address their established $399 price point and ensure that it is appropriately "$100 worse" in perceived value. If they were to keep the iPad 2 at this point, I think they'd be too far behind, as iPad 2 would be perceived as at least "$150 worse" or more, and see as a bad purchase. So, does it stand then that maybe they could keep the iPad 4 at $399? Would there be the appropriate price distinction, and does it make sense for manufacturing & cost? Well, the iPad 4 has an A6X chip & Retina Display vs. iPad 5 with an A7 64-bit chip & Retina Display. iPad 4 is older/clunkier/heavier, iPad 5 is newer/sleeker/lighter. iPad 5 also has Touch ID, and the new colors, and minimal improvements to camera & wireless. Seems doable to me, but let's look at your idea...
Compare that to an iPad mini route. iPad 2 and 4 get discontinued on the same day and are no longer options. Apple introduces a new iPad mini 2 w/ A6X chip & Retina Display. Other minimal improvements to camera & wireless, probably along the same vein as iPad 5. But that's it. And then, without justifying it at all, RAISE the price of the mini by $70 (deal breaker for most) from $329 to $399.
Then after the boos die down, Apple says we're also keep the first generation iPad mini in our lineup, (and I'll give you this one), lowering price point to $299. Same mini as yesterday, lower price by $30.....All the while, the only significant differences between mini 1 & mini 2 are a chip and Retina Display. Compare this hypothetical event to the launch of iPad 3....and tell me how well that would have gone if Apple came out and said Yes iPad 3 has a Retina Display, and is now $100 more than iPad 2.
Understand there is big difference between lowering the price of an old model and keeping it around, and raising the price of the new model and keeping the old around at the same, or even lowering it. This is crazy erratic behavior.
The only time in recent memory that Apple has something like is with the release of the Retina MacBookPro's, but there are different factors at play there, and it hasn't turned out to have the impact Apple was hoping for (they sold less than they thought they would, because the prices increases over non-rMBP were seen as premiums & unrealistic).