Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Rumors Of Smaller IPad Which Jobs Detested  
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1883 times:

Interesting article: http://news.yahoo.com/rumors-swirl-s...s-detested-195907061--finance.html

Quote:

Rumors of a smaller iPad, or "iPad mini" have percolated ever since the first iPad was launched two years ago. This time around, they're fed by media reports from South Korea, China and Taiwan, saying Apple has ordered Samsung screens that are 7.86 inches measured on the diagonal. That would make the screen about two-thirds the size of the current iPad, which has a diagonal measurement of 9.7 inches.

...

Apple's late CEO made a rare appearance on an October 2010 earnings conference call to launch a tirade against the 7-inch tablet Samsung Electronics Inc. was set to launch as the first major challenger to the iPad.

"The reason we wouldn't make a 7-inch tablet isn't because we don't want to hit a price point, it's because we don't think you can make a great tablet with a 7-inch screen," Jobs said. "The 7-inch tablets are tweeners, too big to compete with a smartphone and too small to compete with an iPad."

He said the resolution of the display could be increased to make up for the smaller size, but that would be "meaningless, unless your tablet also includes sandpaper, so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one quarter of the present size."

"There are clear limits of how close you can physically place elements on a touch screen before users cannot reliably tap, flick or pinch them. This is one of the key reasons we think the 10-inch screen size is the minimum size required to create great tablet apps," he said.

Jobs failed to mention Apple's success developing apps that use taps, flicks and pinches on the iPhone, with its 3.5-inch screen.

So we have:

$199 Apple iPod Touch, 3.5 in 960×640 px 326 PPI
$199 Kindle Fire, 7 in, 1024×600 px 169 ppi
$329-$349 (?) Rumored "iPad mini", 7.86 in
$399 Apple iPad G2, 9.7 in, 1024×768 px 132 PPI
$499 Apple iPad G3, 9.7 in, 2048×1536 px 264 PPI

Interesting to see that while the iPad is a great product, you can get two and a half Kindle Fires for the price of one iPad G3, so I can see where their concern is coming from.

It'll be interesting to see if AAPL chooses to bypass Jobs's obvious distaste for a smaller iPad to try to get to a lower price point.


Inspiration, move me brightly!
35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7656 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1867 times:

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
It'll be interesting to see if AAPL chooses to bypass Jobs's obvious distaste for a smaller iPad to try to get to a lower price point.

The iPad is already the biggest selling pad type device, people are prepared to pay for it, so why cannibalise you're existing market by producing a smaller one.


User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 4049 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1851 times:

The Yahoo article is a bit off, because previous mini-iPad rumours have also been fuelled by claims that Apple has placed orders for mini cases or screens...

Also, I had to refresh this page 21 times before I got a thread which had content - how usual is that on here these days? I was getting a page, just no post content (the structure of the parent post was there, just no title, poster or body).


User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1845 times:

As an owner of a tablet with a 7" screen (BlackBerry PlayBook), the smaller size to me just feels right. To me, the iPad is a bit bulky in comparison. Interestingly enough, there have been on and off rumors of a larger BlackBerry PlayBook (10.1" screen) to better compete with the larger tablets. If there was a smaller iPad that is similar in size to the PlayBook, Fire, Nook, I might be interested in it.

Apple would be making a mistake to not offer an iOS device that fits in between the iPod Touch and the iPad. Companies like Acer, Samsung, Lenovo, and ASUS offer their tablets in two different sizes. Then you have the Kindle Fire and Barnes & Noble Nook, which are souped up versions of their e-reader devices (prior to their latest devices, one could root the Nook and Kindle to turn them into tablets). While Apple is the clear leader in the tablet segment, there are enough competitors out there that could cherry pick potential customers away from the iPad.


User currently offlineAirPacific747 From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2450 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1834 times:

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
Interesting to see that while the iPad is a great product, you can get two and a half Kindle Fires for the price of one iPad G3, so I can see where their concern is coming from.

Honestly, I don't think Apple is concerned about the Kindle Fire at all.. it is a whole different product.. the experience is not nearly as good as with an iPad.. my dad ordered one, and sorry to say so, but it was crap. The display sucks and it's a plastic device.. it doesn't feel premium at all.. The good thing about the Kindle Fire though is, that you get access to all of Amazons media in one device at an affordable price.
But it's not a direct competitor with an iPad.


User currently offlineCadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9085 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1823 times:

So let's see. There's the iPod touch, The iPad and now a slightly smaller iPad. So really a medium sized iPod touch considering the iPad is really just an over hyped iPod with a big screen.  


Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 26017 posts, RR: 50
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1811 times:

If they offer a smaller (and more affordable) 7 inch tablet, kudos to them.

In the family we have a Kindle Fire, and frankly its form factor is just perfect in my view. Its a great size to go anywhere (even in a coat pocket), easy enough to read on, check websites, or utilize all android apps. Also to me a $200 price point is the sweet spot. I simply don't see the need for, or price justification for a much larger device.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21495 posts, RR: 53
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1808 times:

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 5):
So let's see. There's the iPod touch, The iPad and now a slightly smaller iPad. So really a medium sized iPod touch considering the iPad is really just an over hyped iPod with a big screen.

Nope. iPhone and iPod Touch are almost identical software-wise. The iPad is related, but still noticeably different in the way the user interface is handled. When one is actually using both classes of devices with the respective apps this is quite obvious.


User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5729 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1794 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 1):
The iPad is already the biggest selling pad type device, people are prepared to pay for it, so why cannibalise you're existing market by producing a smaller one.

Basically because they want entry level buyers to go to them and not to the Kindle Fire or some other device. Should Toyota not make the Corolla since the Camry dominates it's market space (or use Honda or MB or whomever).

As household with these devices, I would not jump from an iPod to a iPad for my kids. Its just too much, so instead I would get something like a Fire and then there you go, you just lost a customer, a key customer, to the Android world since they will suddenly start getting everything Android and become established in that universe and not the Apple universe.

I still think they need four categories:
Phone/Pod - least expensive, maximum portability

"Mini iPad" - inexpensive (so you are not in fear of losing or damaging), still very portable, usable, easily/comfortably watchable

iPad - medium expensive, notebook size, relatively portable and excellent all around usability, can throw it in a purse or overnight bag, whatever

"Home/Coffee Table edition" - fairly pricey, significantly larger than 10", can dock in either orientation, for use really only in/around the home, can be used as a TV, fully integrated with home systems (of course the iPad is too) fully replaces where the laptop currently exists in a home, "lives" on the table or lap not your hands.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1723 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 1):
The iPad is already the biggest selling pad type device, people are prepared to pay for it, so why cannibalise you're existing market by producing a smaller one.

Some reasons that come to mind:

1) The competitors will find room in the gap between iPod Touch and iPad, so Apple may have to "eat its young"

2) Wall Street is a "what have you done for me lately" crowd and Apple probably is looking for a way to find a new market segment

3) How many more people are out there who have $499 and up for an iPad? ($499 is for the wifi iPad with 8GB flash, prices go up from there).

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
In the family we have a Kindle Fire, and frankly its form factor is just perfect in my view. Its a great size to go anywhere (even in a coat pocket), easy enough to read on, check websites, or utilize all android apps. Also to me a $200 price point is the sweet spot. I simply don't see the need for, or price justification for a much larger device.

I'm tablet free, but am somewhat tempted by the 7in size / $199 price point of Kindle.

I read you can get a refurb from Amazon for $30 less.

Quoting tugger (Reply 8):
Tugg

Great post.

It still begs the question if the smaller iPad would cannibalize the current one, and if Apple could sell the smaller iPad at a low enough price point to gain traction yet still make good money selling them.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4037 posts, RR: 28
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1690 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 1):
The iPad is already the biggest selling pad type device, people are prepared to pay for it, so why cannibalise you're existing market by producing a smaller one.

They will not cannibalize anything. The same mindleass Apple fanboys that line up for days every time Apple launches a product will rush to their nearest Apple store for a chance to own something that fits right between their iPods and their iPads (an iPed, maybe?).



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlineswissy From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 1734 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1659 times:

Why not? there is a market for 7" tablets.. I got a BB and love it for its size, fits in my back pocket. My wife's IPad is not  

I would get the IPad "S" version  , love the Apple integration between all the devices... We have 2 IPhones and an IPad and they all work very well together. My BB Torch and Playbook also work without any issues.

Cheerios,


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1637 times:

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 10):
The same mindleass Apple fanboys that line up for days every time Apple launches a product will rush to their nearest Apple store for a chance to own something that fits right between their iPods and their iPads (an iPed, maybe?).



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinenighthawk From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 5178 posts, RR: 33
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1520 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 3):
As an owner of a tablet with a 7" screen (BlackBerry PlayBook), the smaller size to me just feels right.

Each to their own - I have a PlayBook too, and find the screen to be a bit small. Have you tried reading a book or newspaper on the device, or in fact a website? The logical way to hold it would be in portrait mode, but then the text is so small you cannot read it. You need to switch to landscape to make it readable, but then you need to scroll up and down on each page. I personally would prefer a bigger screen. I believe Blackberry's plan was to launch a 10" screen, but due to the poor sales of the Playbook I think this was put on hold.

I think there is definitely a market for a smaller iPad, everyone has different preferences, so why not make a smaller one to cater for those who want something more portable?



That'll teach you
User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 4049 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1438 times:

I don't think Apple has anything to fear about leaving a perceived gap between products, because the alternatives are not Apple products - and thats a bigger factor than people think.

With my iPhone and iPad, I have access to most of the same applications on both - buy it once, and its available on pretty much all devices I have authed on my account. Rent a movie and its available on both devices. I can stream to AppleTV. Etc etc etc.

Stick an Android tablet in between the two and I suddenly have to deal with another ecosystem - find the same apps and pay for them again, or find similar apps to replace those which aren't there. Can't view my rented movies on it. Etc etc etc.

The ecosystem is a huge factor in decisions - and most people are more than willing to take the ecosystem over the device which doesn't 100% fit their criteria, which means they end up buying either the iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad.

Apples iPad sales isn't exactly hurting them either - its not as if they have a huge stock sitting around and not shifting. Could they sell more by selling a cheaper smaller device? Perhaps, but at what cost to the original market?

A similar thing is currently happening to Dropbox.com, but I won't go into that on this thread - if you are interested, let me know and I will start a new thread - but the economics are practically identical.


User currently offlinebhill From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1009 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1309 times:

I'm pretty sure that bus has already left for Apple and this segment of the market. Why would I pay near $250 - $300 when there are already products that will meet the needs of 99% of the market for $200 or much less? Like the article state, Apple is not going to do anything..again..that will lose money.


Carpe Pices
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26709 posts, RR: 75
Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1304 times:

I'm no Apple fan boy, but I don't really see why they would need to go with this segment. The 7" size is more for an eReader on steroids, which is what the Kindle Fire is. The 10" tablets are more for competition with netbooks and notebook substitution (not replacement, because it just doesn't work).

Quoting srbmod (Reply 3):
As an owner of a tablet with a 7" screen (BlackBerry PlayBook)

You and like 3 other people  



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2843 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1290 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 3):
As an owner of a tablet with a 7" screen (BlackBerry PlayBook), the smaller size to me just feels right. To me, the iPad is a bit bulky in comparison. Interestingly enough, there have been on and off rumors of a larger BlackBerry PlayBook (10.1" screen) to better compete with the larger tablets. If there was a smaller iPad that is similar in size to the PlayBook, Fire, Nook, I might be interested in it.

As I mentioned up thread, we have an iPad and I have a Kindle. For day to day use, I'm completely happy with the Fire. If my kid wants to play an app on it, he can. If I want to watch a movie I can. Sure you can probably only reasonably store around 5-6 movies on its internal memory, but that's what cloud storage is for. I don't mind the 7'' screen at all and it doesn't seem like a "cheep product" to me. Less expensive yes, but given what my wife uses her iPad for it does everything it does just with a smaller screen and price tag. And, it's small enough to travel well in my coat pocket.

Quoting AirPacific747 (Reply 4):
Honestly, I don't think Apple is concerned about the Kindle Fire at all.. it is a whole different product.. the experience is not nearly as good as with an iPad.. my dad ordered one, and sorry to say so, but it was crap. The display sucks and it's a plastic device.. it doesn't feel premium at all..

I think they are somewhat concerned about the Kindle Fire. It is eroding their future market. I'd argue it isn't crap, but agree that the interface isn't as smooth as an iPad. But, I can live with that for the much reduced price tag. Tugger's post is spot on. There is a market for this device and not everyone who spends the extra $300+ for an iPad needs what extra it gives you.

BTW, I've never had a problem reading newspapers in full screen on the Kindle Fire and frequently post here on a-net using it. It's fine.



The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21495 posts, RR: 53
Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1266 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 17):
There is a market for this device and not everyone who spends the extra $300+ for an iPad needs what extra it gives you.

The iPad starts at only $200 above the Kindle, which is not surprising since Amazon is selling the Kindle at a loss (you're paying the difference through content) while for Apple the iPad is the actual product you buy (Apple sells apps and content effectively at cost).

The iPad at that price also has double the storage, runs longer, is a lot faster, has a better screen with much more area (about double) and has much better software and accessory support.

Another $100 gets you an even better display and/or $130 gives you 3G or 4G, and then storage capacity can be doubled or quadrupled again.

So the gap is really large more on the capability side, not so much on the price side.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 17):
BTW, I've never had a problem reading newspapers in full screen on the Kindle Fire and frequently post here on a-net using it. It's fine.

It is not full screen mode that's the issue here, since with the very small size and low resolution of the Kindle you will definitely need the entire screen for pretty much anything.

It is full page mode that makes all the difference on the iPad, since it is large enough, it has a higher resolution (much higher with the 3gen) and a suitable format to view and read entire pages of magazines or documents without needing to zoom and scroll all the time (particularly on the 3gen).

that is the primary advantage – and since 7" tablets can't reasonably display entire pages anyway, they are effectively on the level of smartphones usage-wise. Just minus the pocket-sized portability, which afflicts them with both the disadvantages of smartphones and tablets without having the advantages of either.

I can see that some people don't mind, but for me that "in between" size is pointless and impractical.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26709 posts, RR: 75
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1253 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
The iPad starts at only $200 above the Kindle

LOL. Only because they still have the old model on the market. Who knows how long Apple will even support that properly.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
So the gap is really large more on the capability side, not so much on the price side.

Uh, its definitely on the price side.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1247 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
The iPad starts at only $200 above the Kindle

... which means you can get two Kindles for the price of one iPad.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
So the gap is really large more on the capability side, not so much on the price side.

Would one even use the word "gap" when talking about a difference of 100%?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently onlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6646 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1241 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 19):

LOL. Only because they still have the old model on the market. Who knows how long Apple will even support that properly.

And they dont have too.. have you seen their profits this quarter?!! Holy Smokes!!

67 Million iPads...

Not to shabby for an over-priced, slow, expensive, useless piece of garbage  



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21495 posts, RR: 53
Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1231 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 19):
LOL. Only because they still have the old model on the market. Who knows how long Apple will even support that properly.

The iPad 1 is still fully supported to this day.

The iPad 2 will obviously run at least until next spring and most likely get update support for at least another year, with another year of critical security fixes after that. Sure, the new model will be supported even longer again, but Apple's update support for their devices is really not a weak point.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 20):
Would one even use the word "gap" when talking about a difference of 100%?

The gap is much larger on the capability side, particularly since many people do already have a smartphone, so the Fire effectively doesn't offer much if any additional benefit. The next jump in actual capability is full-page use, and that pretty much starts at the size of the iPad.


User currently offlinecanoecarrier From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2843 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1217 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
The iPad starts at only $200 above the Kindle

As others have said, the last generation iPad (that we already have) goes for $200 the low end of the next generation which goes for $300 above what the Fire is sold for.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
which is not surprising since Amazon is selling the Kindle at a loss (you're paying the difference through content)

I'm not sure what your point is. I'd rather pay for a tablet where the manufacturer takes a loss to get me to use it in their software market than pay a premium for one (as people do for Apple products) so I can pay the exact same price for music, movies or any other products through either store.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
The iPad at that price also has double the storage,

Who cares about internal memory? On a plane trip I can store 5-6 movies on the Fire already. I've had a Fire for half a year and memory has never been an issue. I'll remember that statement next time you mention Cloud storage.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
runs longer

Not much longer. Negligible at best. We've traveled with both and at best the iPad lasts maybe an hour or two longer than the Kindle Fire.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
is a lot faster

Not $300 faster.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
has a better screen with much more area (about double)

True, but you pay for it and as I have mentioned the 7'' screen isn't exactly horrible. I've watched full length movies on the Fire and hands down it's better than watching them on a iPod Touch.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 18):
and has much better software and accessory support

Here's where Apple shines. It does out perform the Android platform. Although I'm not convinced the accessory support through Apple is better but the software is now. The iPad is very, very easy to use. I don't open Safari on an iPad and have some dozen tabs from a search days ago pop up and after I close them they still show up the next day like I do on my Fire. But, it's not worth the $300 to me to get rid of that problem.

As an Amazon Prime member, the Fire is just as easy to use as my wife's iPad is through the Apple store. In fact, it might be easier.

[Edited 2012-04-24 21:52:28]


The beatings will continue until morale improves
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7851 posts, RR: 19
Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1199 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 12):

holy crap now I'm hungry!


if they make an iPad that's smaller.......isn't that called the iPod touch?   



我思うゆえに我あり。(Jap. 'I think, therefore I am.')
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21495 posts, RR: 53
Reply 25, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 1153 times:

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 23):
As others have said, the last generation iPad (that we already have) goes for $200 the low end of the next generation which goes for $300 above what the Fire is sold for.

The Kindle Fire is $199.
The iPad 2 is $399.

The difference is $200, not $300.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 23):
I'm not sure what your point is. I'd rather pay for a tablet where the manufacturer takes a loss to get me to use it in their software market than pay a premium for one (as people do for Apple products) so I can pay the exact same price for music, movies or any other products through either store.

Amazon was forced to lower their prices in many cases when Apple entered the ebook market and broke up their near-monopoly. We'll see whether they can still afford the subsidies in the long run. Apple doesn't need any, so they don't have that problem.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 23):
Who cares about internal memory? On a plane trip I can store 5-6 movies on the Fire already. I've had a Fire for half a year and memory has never been an issue. I'll remember that statement next time you mention Cloud storage.

On my iPad the 64GB are barely enough to hold all my music, some videos, documents and lots of apps.

If I had omnipresent online access with unlimited bandwidth and unlimited trust in cloud providers, actual storage in my devices might not matter. But I have neither of those things, so it still does, very much.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 23):
Not much longer. Negligible at best. We've traveled with both and at best the iPad lasts maybe an hour or two longer than the Kindle Fire.

Two hours or more are "negligible"? I'd disagree on that.

Quoting canoecarrier (Reply 23):
Not $300 faster.

That is certainly a matter of individual preference. But when looking at neutral product value vs. price, the Kindle isn't necessarily a better bargain – it's just less value for less money. Which is a valid option by itself (particularly when one actually prefers the smaller display), but it would be nonsensical to claim that both were basically the same. They aren't – not even vs. the older iPad 2, let alone the iPad 3gen.

You still get what you pay for, either way.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 26, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1143 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 25):
Amazon was forced to lower their prices in many cases when Apple entered the ebook market and broke up their near-monopoly. We'll see whether they can still afford the subsidies in the long run. Apple doesn't need any, so they don't have that problem.

It seems that Apple tried to break up Amazon's near-monopoly by starting an actual monopoly!

Quoting Klaus (Reply 25):

That is certainly a matter of individual preference. But when looking at neutral product value vs. price, the Kindle isn't necessarily a better bargain – it's just less value for less money. Which is a valid option by itself (particularly when one actually prefers the smaller display), but it would be nonsensical to claim that both were basically the same. They aren't – not even vs. the older iPad 2, let alone the iPad 3gen.

Yes, but price points matter. There are certainly some people who can/will spend $199 to get a "good enough" solution vs others who can't/won't spend $399 or $499 for a "better" solution. The real question is will Apple under the new CEO try to hit that price point, or will he maintain the Jobs line that iPod Touch is the "good enough" answer?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21495 posts, RR: 53
Reply 27, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1139 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 26):
It seems that Apple tried to break up Amazon's near-monopoly by starting an actual monopoly!

What monopoly would that be? They're not excluding any other distributors from the market – they even provide their platform for Amazon and others to use as well if they want (see the Kindle and other e-reader apps on iOS).

Quoting Revelation (Reply 26):
Yes, but price points matter. There are certainly some people who can/will spend $199 to get a "good enough" solution vs others who can't/won't spend $399 or $499 for a "better" solution. The real question is will Apple under the new CEO try to hit that price point, or will he maintain the Jobs line that iPod Touch is the "good enough" answer?

Yes, price points do matter.

But "new Apple" has never moved into a segment just for the sake of gaining market share.

From what we've seen we can conclude that they may do that if the following is satisfied:

• They can produce a new device that works well and will provide a satisfying user experience (right now that would by necessity require it to work well with the existing iOS apps out of the gate).

• They can still make a healthy margin selling their devices.

In that order.

It's certainly not impossible to meet those requirements, so they may actually go there in time.

I personally see little attraction in such an in-between format, but Apple has such a firm grip on the tablet market and they are expanding sales so rapidly that a low-risk and low-cost niche project such as this could still be profitable by now.


User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 4049 posts, RR: 4
Reply 28, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 27):
What monopoly would that be? They're not excluding any other distributors from the market – they even provide their platform for Amazon and others to use as well if they want (see the Kindle and other e-reader apps on iOS).

Yes, they are trying to exclude other distributors from the market - the clause in their iBooks distribution agreements which says "thou shalt not distribute this ebook for a lesser price anywhere else, on pain of exclusion from the iBooks Book Store" ring a bell?

So you cannot have your ebook on special at Amazon while also having the ebook on iBooks Book Store.

You also cannot have your ebook featured on any store where you do not explicitly set the pricing policies, lest the store price it lower than iBooks Book Store.

Apple are trying to control the price of the goods elsewhere, and remove the ability for other stores to set independent pricing.

Oh, and the "you cannot distribute the output of this program on any store other than the iBooks Book Store" clause included with the iBooks author software released recently?

And before anyone tries to paint me as anti-Apple, I own an iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro and various other things dotted around. I don't sit all that much in OSX these days (I'm a .Net developer, and so sit in Windows 7 or Windows 8), but I do buy a lot of stuff from iBooks, iTunes, AppStore etc and consider Apple hardware to be some of the best in the industry.

And yet I still see downsides in what Apple does from time to time.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 29, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

Quoting Klaus (Reply 27):
What monopoly would that be?

I was referring to the complaint that the US Government filed against Apple re: the topics in #28.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 27):
Yes, price points do matter.

But "new Apple" has never moved into a segment just for the sake of gaining market share.

Agreed.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 27):

From what we've seen we can conclude that they may do that if the following is satisfied:

• They can produce a new device that works well and will provide a satisfying user experience (right now that would by necessity require it to work well with the existing iOS apps out of the gate).

The interesting question is will their standards be as high now that Jobs has left us?

Quoting Klaus (Reply 27):
• They can still make a healthy margin selling their devices.

Well, certainly they have the money to develop the 'tweener' and can then decide to not put it on the market if it costs too much to manufacture or if it undermines their full sized pads, and then drop it on the market if/when the pad stops selling and/or manufacturing costs drop and they want to tap the low end of the market.

They can start the development process any time they want by releasing an iOS to developers that only uses 7" dia of the full-sized iPad's screen.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 27):
I personally see little attraction in such an in-between format,

I get your point that the full sized pad is great for full sided documents and/or presentations and/or hi res video, but I can see room for something that's a step down in size to use to read e-books and low-res videos, where the smaller size will be easier to tote around.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinemdavies06 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2009, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 946 times:

I would have loved to own an ipad which is smaller. I have an android tablet which is 7 inch and it is perfect for everything in a general usage sense (movie, pictures, web browsing etc). But i would have loved it more if it is 6 inch. Call it iphone, ipad or whatever. This will allow apple to compete with Samsung Note which has a 5+ inch screen and the slightly larger screen that has is much welcomed versus the iphone.

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 31, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 878 times:

Interesting article: http://www.thestreet.com/story/11502...ownfall-coming.html?obref=obinsite

Quote:

He's seems like a nice guy so I hate to say it, but Apple's downfall will come courtesy of Tim Cook. With Jobs gone, Cook has already made a mockery of his legacy. First, a dividend and a buyback. And now rumors of something Jobs detested -- a mini iPad.

Next, Cook will travel off to China and smile for the cameras like a politician. Wait. He already did that. In many ways, he is the anti-Steve Jobs. And, while it might look like that's good for business, it's not. It's very bad for business.

His main point seems to be:

Quote:

AAPL bulls have made a profound error: After rightly heaping praise on Steve Jobs for Apple's enormous success, many of them now discount his contribution, claiming that mere mortals can run the show without missing a beat. That's wishful thinking at best, a good way to crush your retirement fund at worst.

And indeed the dichotomy is puzzling.

Pretty interesting read.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 4049 posts, RR: 4
Reply 32, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 874 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 31):

Yet another "Apple is doomed" article without much substance - its pretty much a hit job on Cook, while at the same time saying "Its not Cooks fault hes like this".

An insult is an insult, regardless of whether you prefix or suffix it with "no offence!"

Seriously, what do they expect Apple to do? Jobs is dead, theres not much they can change about that. Cook is in charge, and his first quarter is stunning. Hes doing some things Jobs never did, thats fine - but the article doesn't explain *why* a stock buy back and dividend is bad, it just says it is.

Its a fluff article.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12840 posts, RR: 25
Reply 33, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 854 times:

Quoting moo (Reply 32):
Seriously, what do they expect Apple to do?

The article isn't saying that Apple did something wrong, it says "Apple bulls" are wrong to value the company as strongly as they do now that Jobs is gone.

Quoting moo (Reply 32):
the article doesn't explain *why* a stock buy back and dividend is bad, it just says it is.

It says:

Quote:

The shareholders wanted and expected a dividend or a buyback. Tim Cook gave them both. Spend about 30 seconds reading about Jobs and you'll discover that he considered shareholders pests...

Which to me says what is wrong with it is that Cook is doing what the stockholders feel is best instead of what Jobs would do, which is to ignore the stockholders.

I'm not a huge market watcher, but paying dividends and/or doing buybacks is traditionally a sign of a company transitioning from being an innovator to being mature, like a bank or an electric company. It's a sign the company doesn't know what to invest the money on now or in the future, or at least is willing to be seen as such.

I'm not sure I agree with the article, but to me it certainly is thought provoking.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 4049 posts, RR: 4
Reply 34, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 849 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 33):
The article isn't saying that Apple did something wrong, it says "Apple bulls" are wrong to value the company as strongly as they do now that Jobs is gone.

The *entire* part you quoted in your original post shouts "Apple are doing wrong now Steve Jobs is dead!"

Quoting Revelation (Reply 33):
Which to me says what is wrong with it is that Cook is doing what the stockholders feel is best instead of what Jobs would do, which is to ignore the stockholders.

That still doesn't explain why doing that is wrong. It just says Jobs didn't do it and didn't like shareholders.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 33):
I'm not a huge market watcher, but paying dividends and/or doing buybacks is traditionally a sign of a company transitioning from being an innovator to being mature, like a bank or an electric company. It's a sign the company doesn't know what to invest the money on now or in the future, or at least is willing to be seen as such.

And building up a $100Billion warchest of cash doesn't equally shout that?


User currently offlineJetBlueGuy2006 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1663 posts, RR: 1
Reply 35, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 845 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6):
we have a Kindle Fire, and frankly its form factor is just perfect in my view

The one problem I seem to have with a kindle fire is some apps that I would like (and have on my Android phone) are not optimized for the Kindle Fire. Politico is the only app that I have on my phone that I have on my kindle. Maybe it is just me not searching right, but it would be nice to have some news organizations try and optimize the apps for the 7" screen



Home Airport: Capital Region International Airport (KLAN)
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Family Trip To NH Spark Rumors Of Presidential Bid posted Wed Jan 24 2007 20:39:38 by Superfly
Woman Denies Rumors Of Kerry Affair posted Mon Feb 16 2004 20:40:35 by MidnightMike
Obama Calls India Creator-not Poacher- Of USA Jobs posted Sat Nov 6 2010 21:14:14 by stasisLAX
Gates: Pentagon To Cut Thousands Of Jobs posted Mon Aug 9 2010 15:02:01 by Ken777
Cost Of IPad In The UK posted Sat May 8 2010 01:58:04 by RussianJet
Steve Jobs To Take Medical Leave Of Absence posted Wed Jan 14 2009 14:32:01 by JoseMEX
Nine Types Of Drinker -Which Are You?! posted Wed Sep 17 2008 01:02:31 by Cumulus
Bad String Of Jobs Or Is It Just Me? (long) posted Fri Jul 25 2008 07:14:06 by KLM672
Length Of Training For Entry Level Jobs posted Sun Apr 8 2007 06:28:43 by MCOflyer
Final Hours Of Trade Deadline: Rumors And Deals posted Sat Jul 29 2006 07:30:48 by Yanksn4