There is nothing "pro" about a product that cannot run any pro apps like Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. That's the bottom line. Apple's "pro" moniker is a distinction without a difference.
Who gets to decide what determines whether something is "pro" or not? Apple can't use the "pro" nomenclature unless the product runs x86 apps? Says who?
Think again, this has nothing to do with x86 apps (we should get rid of those as soon as possible) ...
I hold Apple to higher ideals than you do obviously. I expect more of them.
We've all heard the battery life and storage limit companints. I've nieces and nephews and cousins and it's all I ever here about. Apple as the best product company around needs to think of these issues as problems, and not one solved by comments like "just spend $100 or $200 more..." by snarky people such as yourself. No, Apple needs to protect its customers from buying products with these issues by not selling them.
If you listen to Ive he says Apple's goal is to not chase profits but to make the best products and the profits will come, but if you've been paying attention particularly in the past 4 years you'll see that while Ive may be sincere and believes what he's saying Apple's behaviour often tells a different story.
To cover your iPad mini 4 (for one example) front and rear now with Apple covers is €115. If the only argument against that is "you're not forced to buy Apple's cover" (and it is) then that's sad and speaks volumes about people such as yourself that defend this behaviour. Charging a healthy fair price is about business, but also ideals and dignity. Charging an extortionate amount for a case feels off. Apple speak about higher ideals, so it's important if they don't reach them that we hold a mirror up to them. Magic trackpad 2, Magic keyboard, have you seen those prices in the EU? Currency exchange? I'm not buying it. Greed is the motivation. Greed is the reason 16 GB iOS devices won't go away.
As a customer, you're the clueless one. You don't need to defend the richest company around, they won't go out of business if we're honest. It's fine to criticise them. They aren't a junk meaningless, vacuous, valueless company such as Samsung. They stand for certain things which is great. They just need to live up to them.
What are you talking about? Forget it, no need to reply. You're thinking lacks depth.
---
After so many posts here on AI, I think it's your thinking that lacks depth.
The iPhone price, with 64GB of storage is $749 (I'm using U.S. currency, you're mileage by vary, but the argument I'm making remains the same). For that you get a 64GB model of the iPhone 6S, a more capable, faster handset than you got a year earlier at the same price, and larger and faster than you got two years ago at the same price. That's the first part of the bargain Apple has with its customers. For years, the price of the product remains unchanged while what you get becomes more capable. That's the bargain everyone gets in the technology space across all vendors. Oh, and for customers who don't need as much storage, because maybe they use the cloud, there's a $100 discount off that price for a 16GB model, a phone with all the same performance and features of the 64GB model.
How quickly some have forgotten how many stand-alone products a smartphone replaces. Single-function cell phone, video camera, still-photo camera, portable video playback system/television, computer, radio, alarm clock, calculator, the list goes on and on. Now how much would you pay?
These same people throw out an argument that Apple's handsets are so much more expensive than others, ignoring the fact that other vendors (Samsung, LG, HTC, etc) also sell premium handsets at similar prices. Apple happens to sell only premium handsets; they don't also sell cheaper models like those other companies do.
And the same people conveniently forget the resale value retained by Apple's handsets, and the usable lifespan, both of which reduce the total cost of ownership. Apple should be able to charge premium prices across its entire line of handsets because they are the only ones on earth that can readily take an OS upgrade three or four years in-a-row after they have been introduced. An OS that offers better security than rivals, is more tightly integrated and therefore allows better performance while sipping less juice. Apple takes the higher ground in the form of engineering its products to be more power efficient per unit of computing performance, allowing the company to deliver decent time between charges, comparable to its competition, with a smaller battery. That translates to less aggregate volume [mass] of batteries ending up in landfills or needing to be recycled years down the road per million phones versus the competition, and fewer tons of coal burned (or whatever fuel is used in the power plants that provide electricity to the homes of Apple's customers where iPhones are being charged during their useable life).
All of the above applies equally to Apple's iPad line.
Tell us again whose thinking lacks depth.
Couldn't have said it better. A true voice of reason about Apple and how they are one of the the most valuable and respected companies in the world. A high value product with a profit allows Apple to continue to provide products people want that care about these things. Low cost consumers also have a choice and that's what's great about competition. Unfortunately the companies that make them are in a precarious position because they have volume but no profit. The computer industry graveyard is full of such companies. I'll stay with my iPhone and iPad which I've had models since the very beginning. I'm amazed at what I can do with my iPad Air and iPhone 6plus. I'm waiting for the 7plus.
Pro pads without pro apps are worthless. Final cut pro X, Logic Pro X, Xcode, terminal and all desktop class programs from Adobe etc. are missing. Hiking the price again is of course also deadly.
You can run Photoshop, Illustrator and Xcode on a MacBook and even a MacBook Air. Those are "desktop" apps. You can run very capable apps that do similar things on iPads too (except for Xcode)
What Apple is doing is what it has done for a long time. They've split a product line. The MacBook developed a premium line called the MacBook Pro. Then developed the MacBook Air. Apple targets mobility and lower cost on one end, and features, performance and professional users on the other end. By doing this, they maintain a flagship status but with different entry points. The Mac Mini is a perfect example a lower cost desktop option that brings the user into more profitable price points as their needs increase.
What I suspect will happen is the iPad Pro will become the premium product and the iPad Air will become he portable version. The latter will be reduced in price. The iPad may continue as a budget minded option although I think Apple would rather keep the Air/Pro and use older generation models as the budget model.
I hold Apple to higher ideals than you do obviously. I expect more of them.
We've all heard the battery life and storage limit companints. I've nieces and nephews and cousins and it's all I ever here about. Apple as the best product company around needs to think of these issues as problems, and not one solved by comments like "just spend $100 or $200 more..." by snarky people such as yourself. No, Apple needs to protect its customers from buying products with these issues by not selling them.
If you listen to Ive he says Apple's goal is to not chase profits but to make the best products and the profits will come, but if you've been paying attention particularly in the past 4 years you'll see that while Ive may be sincere and believes what he's saying Apple's behaviour often tells a different story.
To cover your iPad mini 4 (for one example) front and rear now with Apple covers is €115. If the only argument against that is "you're not forced to buy Apple's cover" (and it is) then that's sad and speaks volumes about people such as yourself that defend this behaviour. Charging a healthy fair price is about business, but also ideals and dignity. Charging an extortionate amount for a case feels off. Apple speak about higher ideals, so it's important if they don't reach them that we hold a mirror up to them. Magic trackpad 2, Magic keyboard, have you seen those prices in the EU? Currency exchange? I'm not buying it. Greed is the motivation. Greed is the reason 16 GB iOS devices won't go away.
As a customer, you're the clueless one. You don't need to defend the richest company around, they won't go out of business if we're honest. It's fine to criticise them. They aren't a junk meaningless, vacuous, valueless company such as Samsung. They stand for certain things which is great. They just need to live up to them.
What are you talking about? Forget it, no need to reply. You're thinking lacks depth.
No amount of battery or flash storage can ever quell the grumbles of anyone between the ages of 8-21 years old. There is a finite time you can spend on social media apps and a finite amount of space your phone can hold the 100's of selfies in one day.
If any 8-21 year olds complain about space or battery, take it with a pinch of salt.
If any 8-21 year olds complain about space or battery, take it with a pinch of salt.
Amen. Doesn't matter what device, whether Apple or Samsung, all our grandkids show up at our house with their devices' battery charges on their last legs.
"Grandpa! Help!"
Ask them when they last hooked them up to charge, they can't even remember! What works for my wife and me - we keep charging cords on our nightstands and plug our devices in before going to sleep. Nothing hard about that if people keep themselves organized, but kids are kids.
I think Apple need to go bigger picture and sell iPad Air 2 at 32 GB for $399, iPad Pro (this one) at 64 GB for $499, 128 GB for $629, 256 GB for $749. iPad mini 4 at minus-$100 for same store sizes.
If they simply must have a budget iPad make it iPad mini 4 16 GB at $299.
And kill every other iPad.
Yes it brings down profit per unit but it makes the product lineup so much better. So much more future-proofed and shows their customers some respect. If Apple are about making the best products in the world and not simply a greedy money making machine as so many companies are then they are going to have to prove it. Their arrogant hunger for profit to the detriment of everything else is why iPhone and iPad sales are slowing. 16 GB flagship iPhones should have been EOL 3 years ago. iPhone should start at 64 GB (complaints I here the whole time from people I know are battery life and storage max) with a $129 premium for the 128 GB model. And perhaps a 256 GB model also.
Why? because you want it that way, sorry but any CEO that can sell its product for say $599, and still sell all the scheduled production, but choose to sell it for $200 less must be fired immediately, because he's unqualified to run a company. All companies must maximize its profits, thats their primary target. The companies that sell for less is simply because they can't do it for more. We can argue if Apple could not be capable of selling more iPads if they lowered the price, but if the profit margin is lower than the added sales figures, they are losing money, the same way if they rise the price and the sales figures resent less than the resulting added price per unit adds to the bottom line. They are optimizing their resources and their product line. Even if we felt screwed in the process.
What I think is that as what we expect is a 9,7" iPad we assume it is an iPad Air 2 replacement, when what they are making is a smaller screen iPad Pro. We naturally accept that a 13" screen MacBook Air is not a 13" MacBook Pro, they weren't the same thing even when they both got no-retina displays. So its the same this time. Sad, because I wanted to upgrade, but on the other hand I bet that this 9,7" iPad Pro will be heavier than the Air. And what I want is the lightest 9,7" I can buy. I would have to wait a year to the A9x migrate to the Air, so is well tome, even if it means that I would have to be a whole year without an iPad.
After so many posts here on AI, I think it's your thinking that lacks depth.
The iPhone price, with 64GB of storage is $749 (I'm using U.S. currency, you're mileage by vary, but the argument I'm making remains the same). For that you get a 64GB model of the iPhone 6S, a more capable, faster handset than you got a year earlier at the same price, and larger and faster than you got two years ago at the same price. That's the first part of the bargain Apple has with its customers. For years, the price of the product remains unchanged while what you get becomes more capable. That's the bargain everyone gets in the technology space across all vendors. Oh, and for customers who don't need as much storage, because maybe they use the cloud, there's a $100 discount off that price for a 16GB model, a phone with all the same performance and features of the 64GB model.
How quickly some have forgotten how many stand-alone products a smartphone replaces. Single-function cell phone, video camera, still-photo camera, portable video playback system/television, computer, radio, alarm clock, calculator, the list goes on and on. Now how much would you pay?
These same people throw out an argument that Apple's handsets are so much more expensive than others, ignoring the fact that other vendors (Samsung, LG, HTC, etc) also sell premium handsets at similar prices. Apple happens to sell only premium handsets; they don't also sell cheaper models like those other companies do.
And the same people conveniently forget the resale value retained by Apple's handsets, and the usable lifespan, both of which reduce the total cost of ownership. Apple should be able to charge premium prices across its entire line of handsets because they are the only ones on earth that can readily take an OS upgrade three or four years in-a-row after they have been introduced. An OS that offers better security than rivals, is more tightly integrated and therefore allows better performance while sipping less juice. Apple takes the higher ground in the form of engineering its products to be more power efficient per unit of computing performance, allowing the company to deliver decent time between charges, comparable to its competition, with a smaller battery. That translates to less aggregate volume [mass] of batteries ending up in landfills or needing to be recycled years down the road per million phones versus the competition, and fewer tons of coal burned (or whatever fuel is used in the power plants that provide electricity to the homes of Apple's customers where iPhones are being charged during their useable life).
All of the above applies equally to Apple's iPad line.
Tell us again whose thinking lacks depth.
You are. iPhones are extremely expensive, the iPhone 6s espessially, it costs €859 (64GB) in Europe, that's enough to buy 3 laptops from the competition. Sadly it's battery life is a major complaint and lasts only one day (my iPhone 5s lasts easily 2 days), the estimated production cost is about $200 and that's similar to the iPhone 3s, buts it's €150 more expensive to buy. Apple tries to maximize its profits but sadly burns (which is an insult to its customers) its profits and seems to have an eye for shareholders only. They should sell the top end phone for $350 or less..
No, you are wrong, they must sell their products at the higher price they can ask without hurting their sales, they, by now, are at full tilt or near full tilt in production capacity at this prices, and if they lower them to the range you give, even if they sell more, never would not sell as much more as to compensate for the lost profit per unit. I don't know if you run a company but if you do, you must quit right now or be fired, you are a bad businessman. And if you don't run a company, don't do it, you will go bankrupt for sure. Sorry I don't try to be rude, but your rationales is pointless.
I think Apple need to go bigger picture and sell iPad Air 2 at 32 GB for $399, iPad Pro (this one) at 64 GB for $499, 128 GB for $629, 256 GB for $749. iPad mini 4 at minus-$100 for same store sizes.
If they simply must have a budget iPad make it iPad mini 4 16 GB at $299.
And kill every other iPad.
Yes it brings down profit per unit but it makes the product lineup so much better. So much more future-proofed and shows their customers some respect. If Apple are about making the best products in the world and not simply a greedy money making machine as so many companies are then they are going to have to prove it. Their arrogant hunger for profit to the detriment of everything else is why iPhone and iPad sales are slowing. 16 GB flagship iPhones should have been EOL 3 years ago. iPhone should start at 64 GB (complaints I here the whole time from people I know are battery life and storage max) with a $129 premium for the 128 GB model. And perhaps a 256 GB model also.
Why? because you want it that way, sorry but any CEO that can sell its product for say $599, and still sell all the scheduled production, but choose to sell it for $200 less must be fired immediately, because he's unqualified to run a company. All companies must maximize its profits, thats their primary target. The companies that sell for less is simply because they can't do it for more. We can argue if Apple could not be capable of selling more iPads if they lowered the price, but if the profit margin is lower than the added sales figures, they are losing money, the same way if they rise the price and the sales figures resent less than the resulting added price per unit adds to the bottom line. They are optimizing their resources and their product line. Even if we felt screwed in the process.
What I think is that as what we expect is a 9,7" iPad we assume it is an iPad Air 2 replacement, when what they are making is a smaller screen iPad Pro. We naturally accept that a 13" screen MacBook Air is not a 13" MacBook Pro, they weren't the same thing even when they both got no-retina displays. So its the same this time. Sad, because I wanted to upgrade, but on the other hand I bet that this 9,7" iPad Pro will be heavier than the Air. And what I want is the lightest 9,7" I can buy. I would have to wait a year to the A9x migrate to the Air, so is well tome, even if it means that I would have to be a whole year without an iPad.
iPad sales are dropping. Getting a few more dollars by increasing the price of the new 9.7 inch iPad will continue to shrink sales and will not make up for lost profits. From a Fast Company article dated 1/26/16;
"Sales of iPads declined 25% during the last quarter, which included the holiday shopping season,... iPad sales, in fact, declined roughly 20% in each of the first three quarters of 2015." * Second, the 9.7 inch iPad Pro is the iPad Air 2 replacement. I can't see Apple ever releasing an iPad Air 3.
Just don't discontinue the iPad Pro in the 12.9" size. I want one. So it can replace my 13" Macbook. The laptop really isn't all that easy to hold and use in your hand. But I want the almost 13" of screen. (And the pencil, of course!) I just need to scratch together a bit more dough. Since it's a "want" and not a "need" some other things will have to come before it!
the iPhone is the best selling product in the history of mankind, earning billions and billions
Um, no, it's not.
So...you're refuting your own misquote? In this context, the distinction between "best selling" (your misquote), and "most successful", is not just a nitpick...
Now it seems the 9.7" iPad needs a stylus to rescue it.
Oh, the irony!
If it "Needs a stylus" it should be in the box not a $99 up sell. Thing is doesn't need the pencil but for people who draw that pencil sure feels like more than $99 worth of upgrade.
The larger Pro is just to big for me, 9.7 seems prefect for drawing/sketching and meetings. Pretty sure tomorrow by sun set tomorrow I'll be placing an order. Especially as Apple seem intent on me keeping my 5S for another year.
Now it seems the 9.7" iPad needs a stylus to rescue it.
Oh, the irony!
The "irony" is that your comment does not make much sense.
Before iOS, a complex mobile operating system like Windows Mobile needed a stylus to work. That was what Steve Jobs was talking about.
iOS introduced a complex finger touch mobile OS which does not need a stylus to work. That is true of the iPad Pro.
* As for the Apple Pencil, its purpose is for drawing. There has been a drawing stylus from 3rd parties for iOS for many years. Apple has just improved on that idea with the Pencil.
Now it seems the 9.7" iPad needs a stylus to rescue it.
Oh, the irony!
The "irony" is that your comment does not make much sense.
Before iOS, a complex mobile operating system like Windows Mobile needed a stylus to work. That was what Steve Jobs was talking about.
iOS introduced a complex finger touch mobile OS which does not need a stylus to work. That is true of the iPad Pro.
* As for the Apple Pencil, its purpose is for drawing. There has been a drawing stylus from 3rd parties for iOS for many years. Apple has just improved on that idea with the Pencil.
Exactly. My iPad Pro works wonderfully, especially with the Smart Keyboard. I hardly use the pencil, except when drawing. It's a great tool, but definitely not needed to use the iPad Pro at all.
Now it seems the 9.7" iPad needs a stylus to rescue it.
Oh, the irony!
If you think Pencil is a stylus, you don't deserve to use any tablet. Stylus was generally an input device for crippled touchscreen technology (no multitouch) and compared to human fingers, Stylus is ridiculously inferior. That's what Steve emphasized. Now , Pencil is NOT a regular input device, but IS dedicated for certain drawing applications ONLY. Pencil is NOT used for normal tablet input. You get that?
Firstly I'm all for a 9.7" iPad Pro, but, and here's the but....it should come in to replace the 18 month old iPad Air 2 and should be at the same price-point. iPad sales are declining and by bringing in a new model into the lineup that is a higher cost, won't make a difference.
Apple need to reduce the options available to the consumer and keep the price point at a decent yet not too expensive level.
I hope they introduce this new model at the 9.7" iPad Pro to sit alongside the 12.9" iPad Pro. They should have very similar specs and should both have the 32Gb and 128Gb models only. In addition to this, they should remove the iPad Air from the lineup and reduce the price of the Air 2 by $100 like they normally do every year. This will mean they need to reduce the cost of the Mini prices as well.
I hope it ends up looking like this: 12.9" iPad Pro starting at $799 9.7" iPad Pro starting at $499 9.7" iPad Air 2 starting at $399 7.9" iPad Mini 4 starting at $299 7.9" iPad Mini 2 starting at $229
If they don't do something like this and bring out the new 9.7" iPad Pro at $599 then at current prices, that the same price as the 64Gb 9.7" iPad Air 2.....I just don't see that working. People will continue to buy smaller iPads with the Mini 4 and Mini 2.
Comments
What Apple is doing is what it has done for a long time. They've split a product line. The MacBook developed a premium line called the MacBook Pro. Then developed the MacBook Air. Apple targets mobility and lower cost on one end, and features, performance and professional users on the other end. By doing this, they maintain a flagship status but with different entry points. The Mac Mini is a perfect example a lower cost desktop option that brings the user into more profitable price points as their needs increase.
What I suspect will happen is the iPad Pro will become the premium product and the iPad Air will become he portable version. The latter will be reduced in price. The iPad may continue as a budget minded option although I think Apple would rather keep the Air/Pro and use older generation models as the budget model.
If any 8-21 year olds complain about space or battery, take it with a pinch of salt.
"Grandpa! Help!"
Ask them when they last hooked them up to charge, they can't even remember! What works for my wife and me - we keep charging cords on our nightstands and plug our devices in before going to sleep. Nothing hard about that if people keep themselves organized, but kids are kids.
What I think is that as what we expect is a 9,7" iPad we assume it is an iPad Air 2 replacement, when what they are making is a smaller screen iPad Pro. We naturally accept that a 13" screen MacBook Air is not a 13" MacBook Pro, they weren't the same thing even when they both got no-retina displays. So its the same this time. Sad, because I wanted to upgrade, but on the other hand I bet that this 9,7" iPad Pro will be heavier than the Air. And what I want is the lightest 9,7" I can buy. I would have to wait a year to the A9x migrate to the Air, so is well tome, even if it means that I would have to be a whole year without an iPad.
No, you are wrong, they must sell their products at the higher price they can ask without hurting their sales, they, by now, are at full tilt or near full tilt in production capacity at this prices, and if they lower them to the range you give, even if they sell more, never would not sell as much more as to compensate for the lost profit per unit. I don't know if you run a company but if you do, you must quit right now or be fired, you are a bad businessman. And if you don't run a company, don't do it, you will go bankrupt for sure. Sorry I don't try to be rude, but your rationales is pointless.
In this context, the distinction between "best selling" (your misquote), and "most successful",
is not just a nitpick...
Thing is doesn't need the pencil but for people who draw that pencil sure feels like more than $99 worth of upgrade.
The larger Pro is just to big for me, 9.7 seems prefect for drawing/sketching and meetings. Pretty sure tomorrow by sun set tomorrow I'll be placing an order. Especially as Apple seem intent on me keeping my 5S for another year.
Stylus was generally an input device for crippled touchscreen technology (no multitouch) and compared to human fingers, Stylus is ridiculously inferior. That's what Steve emphasized. Now , Pencil is NOT a regular input device, but IS dedicated for certain drawing applications ONLY. Pencil is NOT used for normal tablet input. You get that?
Apple need to reduce the options available to the consumer and keep the price point at a decent yet not too expensive level.
I hope they introduce this new model at the 9.7" iPad Pro to sit alongside the 12.9" iPad Pro. They should have very similar specs and should both have the 32Gb and 128Gb models only. In addition to this, they should remove the iPad Air from the lineup and reduce the price of the Air 2 by $100 like they normally do every year. This will mean they need to reduce the cost of the Mini prices as well.
I hope it ends up looking like this:
12.9" iPad Pro starting at $799
9.7" iPad Pro starting at $499
9.7" iPad Air 2 starting at $399
7.9" iPad Mini 4 starting at $299
7.9" iPad Mini 2 starting at $229
If they don't do something like this and bring out the new 9.7" iPad Pro at $599 then at current prices, that the same price as the 64Gb 9.7" iPad Air 2.....I just don't see that working. People will continue to buy smaller iPads with the Mini 4 and Mini 2.