iPad mini/Air Central

  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 12:09 AM #91

    Thanks Drew!

    That guy’s illustration makes things so much easier to visualize.

    Signature

    The Summer of AAPL is here.  Enjoy it (responsibly) while it lasts.
    AFB Night Owl Teamâ„¢
    Thanks, Steve.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 02:27 AM #92

    The Whys, Wherefores and Whens of an iPad Mini

    A Mini, said Creative Strategies’ Ben Bajarin, would actually represent the evolution of the iPod. “If that’s the thinking, it makes sense to price it at a little more than the iPod now but below the iPad,” he said…“A seven-inch iPad is not going to be an ‘iPad’ even if they call it that,” he declared. “A 10-inch tablet is a general-purpose tablet—you can do a lot things with it,” he continued, “whereas a 7-inch tablet is really much more focused on pure media entertainment.

    http://www.macnewsworld.com/rsstory/75563.html

    Bob O’Donnell, IDC’s research vice president for clients and displays, also believes an iPad Mini is in the works…In some regions in the world, like Asia, he explained smaller tablets are more popular. “If you’re on a Tokyo subway, a 10-inch iPad is too big,” he said. “So a seven-inch product makes a lot more sense.”

    A smaller iPad also makes sense as a market strategy, he aded. “This will allow Apple to hit a lower price point and extend the range of people who can afford an iPad,” he explained.

    “There’s a tremendous opportunity for Apple to extend its reach, to extend its presence, to extend its domination in the tablet market by offering a seven-inch product,” he noted.

    While pricing would still be above competing seven-inch tablets—perhaps US$249 versus $199 for a Google Nexus 7 or Amazon Kindle Fire—the iPad Mini would have premium features its competitors don’t have, the analysts maintained.

    “An iPad Mini would have the incredible ecosystem that the full-sized iPad has, which the other seven-inch tablets don’t have,” O’Donnell observed.

    In addition, the Mini would likely have a Retina display. “That’s one of those things that lets you get away with pricing it higher than the Kindle Fire or the Nexus 7,” added Bajarin of Creative Strategies.

    Domination & Doom. (edit)

    Time to Admit It: A Smaller iPad Would Spell Doom for Everyone Else

    As a fan of competition and someone who generally enjoys Android?especially the latest version, Jelly Bean?I desperately want to be contrarian about this. I?ve been trying to think of ways in which a smaller iPad wouldn?t destroy Amazon?s Kindle Fire, Barnes & Noble?s Nook Tablet and Google?s upcoming Nexus 7, but so far, I?ve got nothing.

    Price alone won?t be fatal…Apple doesn?t work that way…a smaller iPad priced at $250 or $300 seems far more likely if Apple still wants to make a profit on hardware.

    But even at a higher price than other 7-inch tablets, Apple would do well against its competitors purely on the strength of its apps…

    If Apple can pitch a smaller iPad as a less expensive device for kids, or for women to fit in their purses, or for gamers who want something easier to grip with two hands, I think it?s a winner.

    At the moment, 7-inch screens are the only place where Apple?s competitors can start to build ecosystems of apps and media?ones that could potentially come back to haunt Apple. With its own smaller, cheaper tablet, Apple could snuff those ecosystems out.

    http://techland.time.com/2012/07/06/would-a-smaller-ipad-spell-doom-for-everyone-else/?

    [ Edited: 07 July 2012 02:36 AM by Drew Bear ]      
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 03:44 AM #93

    Drew Bear - 07 July 2012 05:27 AM

    The Whys, Wherefores and Whens of an iPad Mini

    A Mini, said Creative Strategies’ Ben Bajarin, would actually represent the evolution of the iPod. “If that’s the thinking, it makes sense to price it at a little more than the iPod now but below the iPad,” he said…“A seven-inch iPad is not going to be an ‘iPad’ even if they call it that,” he declared.

    Obviously I disagree with Ben Bajarin, since I said the exact opposite. I repeat, the rumored 7.85” device would be an iPad, even if they called it an iPod. I think the graphic Drew linked to earlier lends visual support to the case for a viable 4:3 aspect ratio 7.85” iPad Mini.

    I still contend that an iPod needs to be pocketable, which to me means not much bigger than a stack of 3x5 index cards, including bezels/buttons/etc. So up to a 5.6” display and the same 3:2 aspect ratio and pixel dimensions as the iPhone would be the limit of what I’d consider for an iPod.

    Maybe they’ll make both. Maybe they’ll introduce a whole new category of touch device between the two with its own aspect ratio and pixel dimensions. But I still want an iPad Mini!

    Signature

    The only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. — Steve Jobs

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 03:47 AM #94

    http://yfrog.com/h36j2np

    graphic link

    The graphic Drew linked to earlier lends visual support to the case for a viable 4:3 aspect ratio 7.85? iPad Mini.

    Another useful link for comparing different combinations of screen dimensions is this DPI/PPI Display Calculator: http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html.

    [ Edited: 07 July 2012 03:49 AM by Apple II+ ]

    Signature

    The only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. — Steve Jobs

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 08:14 AM #95

    Apple II+ - 07 July 2012 06:47 AM

    The graphic Drew linked to earlier lends visual support to the case for a viable 4:3 aspect ratio 7.85? iPad Mini.

    If the goal is to hit the lowest possible price point, then I agree that the rumored low resolution 7.85” iPad is more likely. But if the goal is to produce a device closer in size/portability to the Nexus 7 with a higher resolution screen, then a 7” Retina iPad with 3:2 aspect ratio (not shown in the above graphic) makes more sense.

    Even if the 7.85? iPad was priced at $250, I think many consumers (myself included) would still be attracted to the high-res Nexus 7 at $199. Apple can command a premium price because of their ecosystem, but I think the hardware still needs to be on par with the competition.

    The above graphic does show the significant difference between a 7” and 7.85? screen. If people are looking for something more portable, the larger device looks fat and unwieldy next to the small, sleek Nexus.

    Edit: 3:2 aspect ratio

    [ Edited: 07 July 2012 08:23 AM by Drew Bear ]      
  • Posted: 07 July 2012 08:26 AM #96

    Sigh. I’m clearly on the wrong side of this debate. Let me list my reasons why the smaller tablet won’t happen just so you can prove me wrong.

    Cannibalization: The 7 inch iPad would surely cannibalize sales of the 10 inch iPad. Apple has no problem cannibalizing its own products if it serves a purpose. The iPad, for example, surely cannibalized iPod Touch and even MacBook Air sales but it created a whole new category of computing device. What purpose does a 7 inch tablet serve?

    Production Capacity: During the most recent earnings call, Tim Cook said that Apple was selling 10 inch iPads as fast as they could make them. A new iPad would draw resources from an already strained manufacturing capacity and it would take sales from an already best selling product. What purpose would that serve other than to reduce production and reduce margins?

    Margins: I’ve hear varios price points for the proposed 7 inch tablet. No matter what the price point, it seems clear that the margin on a 7 inch tablet would be lower than that of a 10 inch tablet.

    Category Confusion: Apple is extremely careful about keeping their product lines distinct. They want their potential buyers to have clear, unambiguous choices. A 7 inch tablet would blur the lines possibly making purchasing a more difficult and more confusing decision.

    Competition: I have no doubt that Apple’s entry into the market would blow away that of the competition. Further, a recent Goldman Sach’s report indicated that Apple Aficionado’s (my description, not their) would pay a 30% premium to purchase Apple devices. However, both Amazon and Google are using subsidized models to give away their tablets at cost. Apple would not be competing head-to-head, they would be selling thier devices while the competition was giving their devices away at cost.

    Market: Has it clearly been established that there is a strong 7 inch tablet market. Let’s exclude the Kindle which is a different animal entirely. The Android manufacturers failed with teh 7 inch tablet. Amazon Fire was a disappointment. Google Nexus 7 just entered the market. Where is the proof that the 7 inch tablet market is greater than that of the 10 inch tablet?

    Sales: Is there any proof that Apple has lost the sale of even 1 iPad because of the 7 inch tablet? Sales of the 10 inch tablet are outstripping supply. Why enter a new category when the old category is unaffected by that category?

    Purpose: “Our objective isn’t to make this design for this kind of price point, or for this arbitrary schedule, or line up other things or have X number of phones, it’s to build the best. ... Can we make a significant contribution far beyond what others have done in this area? Can we make a product that we all want?”- Tim Cook at AllThingsD. Does the 7 inch iPad meet Tim Cook’s criteria? Or does it violate it?

    Steve Job’s Objections: A 7 inch iPad is too small to use. A 7 inch iPod Touch is too big. Does this product really serve a need?

    [ Edited: 07 July 2012 08:29 AM by FalKirk ]      
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 09:23 AM #97

    http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/07/7-85-inch-ipad-to-ramp-up-production-in-september-at-foxconn-brazil/

    Signature

    Full Disclosure:

    - Long Apple
    - Pro: Apple HDTV, iPhone Air, Stock split, Consumer robotics

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 10:26 AM #98

    Also, keep in mind that there is an overlap already with the iPod price range.  There are iPod Touches that, fully decked out with 64Gb, go for $400, the same price as an iPad2.  I’m pretty sure the margin on those 64Gb iPod Touches is probably much better than the one on the iPad.

    However, iPods haven’t been updated in a while now, and September used to be, historically, when new iPods were announced.  My WAG is that the “new” iPods will simply be the current models, just cheaper.  Maybe something iOS 6.0 specific.  iPod world would still exist (heck, iPod Classic is still around!), and the price reduction might perk up sales during the holiday season.

    That could create a “space” in the lineup for a hybrid device, e.g, an 8” iPad Mini starting at $299, maybe going all the way to $499 for a fully decked out one.  Nobody questions the fact that there’s 11”, 13” and 15” Macs.  Why not something similar with the iPad?  This would snuff out any possible attempt by Google or Microsoft on the smaller tablet front, and even if it cannibalizes other Apple products and reduces margin, it would be worth it long term to own the entire tablet sector.

         
  • Posted: 07 July 2012 10:47 AM #99

    mjuarez - 07 July 2012 01:26 PM

    Also, keep in mind that there is an overlap already with the iPod price range.  There are iPod Touches that, fully decked out with 64Gb, go for $400, the same price as an iPad2.  I’m pretty sure the margin on those 64Gb iPod Touches is probably much better than the one on the iPad.

    However, iPods haven’t been updated in a while now, and September used to be, historically, when new iPods were announced.  My WAG is that the “new” iPods will simply be the current models, just cheaper.  Maybe something iOS 6.0 specific.  iPod world would still exist (heck, iPod Classic is still around!), and the price reduction might perk up sales during the holiday season.

    That could create a “space” in the lineup for a hybrid device, e.g, an 8” iPad Mini starting at $299, maybe going all the way to $499 for a fully decked out one.  Nobody questions the fact that there’s 11”, 13” and 15” Macs.  Why not something similar with the iPad?  This would snuff out any possible attempt by Google or Microsoft on the smaller tablet front, and even if it cannibalizes other Apple products and reduces margin, it would be worth it long term to own the entire tablet sector.

    +11,000%

         
  • Posted: 07 July 2012 10:59 AM #100

    FalKirk - 07 July 2012 11:26 AM

    Sigh. I’m clearly on the wrong side of this debate. Let me list my reasons why the smaller tablet won’t happen just so you can prove me wrong.

    Cannibalization: The 7 inch iPad would surely cannibalize sales of the 10 inch iPad. Apple has no problem cannibalizing its own products if it serves a purpose. The iPad, for example, surely cannibalized iPod Touch and even MacBook Air sales but it created a whole new category of computing device. What purpose does a 7 inch tablet serve?

    Production Capacity: During the most recent earnings call, Tim Cook said that Apple was selling 10 inch iPads as fast as they could make them. A new iPad would draw resources from an already strained manufacturing capacity and it would take sales from an already best selling product. What purpose would that serve other than to reduce production and reduce margins?

    Margins: I’ve hear varios price points for the proposed 7 inch tablet. No matter what the price point, it seems clear that the margin on a 7 inch tablet would be lower than that of a 10 inch tablet.

    Category Confusion: Apple is extremely careful about keeping their product lines distinct. They want their potential buyers to have clear, unambiguous choices. A 7 inch tablet would blur the lines possibly making purchasing a more difficult and more confusing decision.

    Competition: I have no doubt that Apple’s entry into the market would blow away that of the competition. Further, a recent Goldman Sach’s report indicated that Apple Aficionado’s (my description, not their) would pay a 30% premium to purchase Apple devices. However, both Amazon and Google are using subsidized models to give away their tablets at cost. Apple would not be competing head-to-head, they would be selling thier devices while the competition was giving their devices away at cost.

    Market: Has it clearly been established that there is a strong 7 inch tablet market. Let’s exclude the Kindle which is a different animal entirely. The Android manufacturers failed with teh 7 inch tablet. Amazon Fire was a disappointment. Google Nexus 7 just entered the market. Where is the proof that the 7 inch tablet market is greater than that of the 10 inch tablet?

    Sales: Is there any proof that Apple has lost the sale of even 1 iPad because of the 7 inch tablet? Sales of the 10 inch tablet are outstripping supply. Why enter a new category when the old category is unaffected by that category?

    Purpose: “Our objective isn’t to make this design for this kind of price point, or for this arbitrary schedule, or line up other things or have X number of phones, it’s to build the best. ... Can we make a significant contribution far beyond what others have done in this area? Can we make a product that we all want?”- Tim Cook at AllThingsD. Does the 7 inch iPad meet Tim Cook’s criteria? Or does it violate it?

    Steve Job’s Objections: A 7 inch iPad is too small to use. A 7 inch iPod Touch is too big. Does this product really serve a need?

    -11,000%

    Cannibalization
    What purpose does the 7” iPad serve? Can’t answer fully until all the use cases are invented over the next couple years but I’ll go with serving tens of millions (yes, this market will be immense) of people who are interested in a smaller tablet (a real tablet, not a Kindle).

    Production Capacity
    Seems obviously new capacity is coming online for this. Nobody on Earth would shift production to build this thing. Since it’s likely been planned for years, the incremental production capacity for it is all part of the master plan.

    Margins
    I’m no expert on production costs of these devices but mini iPad will hit Apple’s margin hurdle (30%) and then some. Could iPad mini have even better gross margin % than iPad even if gross margin $ per unit lag substantially behind?

    Category Confusion
    Blur the lines between what? iPod and iPad? They are virtually the same thing anyhow since iPod Touch is >50% of all iPods sold anyhow. No confusion here. Just a bigger iPad/smaller iPad. They’re all in the same family already.

    Competition
    Apple is competing in the smart phone space with competitors doing BOGO deals and iPhone is crushing them. Why is this any different? The Apple brand is insanely strong and it’s because the value of the ecosystem is off the charts.

    Market
    Was it clearly established there was a strong market for the iPad before it was released? Arguably, it is far more obvious there is a market for the 7” iPad now that iPad is such a massive success. iPad didn’t have that same foundation to build from when it launched but it is still a homerun. 7” iPad will be a homerun too.

    Purpose
    To compete against non-consumption and get everyone into the tablet era as quickly as possible while Apple’s lead is incredibly huge.

    SJ’s Objections
    Were complete BS. I honestly can’t believe anyone believed that crap about sanding down fingers. If iPhone and iPod Touch are big enough to sell tens of millions of units every quarter 7” iPad will be great.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 12:24 PM #101

    FalKirk - 07 July 2012 11:26 AM

    Cannibalization: The 7 inch iPad would surely cannibalize sales of the 10 inch iPad. Apple has no problem cannibalizing its own products if it serves a purpose. The iPad, for example, surely cannibalized iPod Touch and even MacBook Air sales but it created a whole new category of computing device. What purpose does a 7 inch tablet serve?

    First, I’m with the minority here in thinking this will be a 7” iPod touch, not an iPad. It will mostly cannibalize the smaller iPod touch and all the various non-iOS 7-inchers that are becoming “good enough” to compete against the 3.5” iPod touch. Any cannibalization of the iPad 2 will be minimal.

    Purpose? Domination & doom.

    Production Capacity: During the most recent earnings call, Tim Cook said that Apple was selling 10 inch iPads as fast as they could make them. A new iPad would draw resources from an already strained manufacturing capacity and it would take sales from an already best selling product. What purpose would that serve other than to reduce production and reduce margins?

    We’ll find out on the 24th if iPad supply has met demand. It seems to me Apple has gotten better in meeting demand of new iPhones & iPads…within a few months of release? I don’t think TC would agree to anything that would threaten production of either the iPad or next gen. iPhone. It’s a question of logistics & timing. TC can handle it.

    Margins: I’ve hear varios price points for the proposed 7 inch tablet. No matter what the price point, it seems clear that the margin on a 7 inch tablet would be lower than that of a 10 inch tablet.

    I’m not sure about this. The iPod touch uses a cheaper Retina display and cameras than the iPhone’s. Again, I don’t think TC would agree to this unless margins were pretty close to the iPod touch’s.

    Category Confusion: Apple is extremely careful about keeping their product lines distinct. They want their potential buyers to have clear, unambiguous choices. A 7 inch tablet would blur the lines possibly making purchasing a more difficult and more confusing decision.

    Apple’s product lines are steamlined compared to other companies’, but they do offer a decent selection in each family. Capability, capacity & prices. Consumers still have to make some choices.

    For some people the choice between the $999 MB Air and the $829 iPad LTE is probably pretty tough. A 7” Retina iPod touch at $299 will not have the screen real estate of the iPad 2 at $399, so that might be a tough decision for some.

    Competition: I have no doubt that Apple’s entry into the market would blow away that of the competition. Further, a recent Goldman Sach’s report indicated that Apple Aficionado’s (my description, not their) would pay a 30% premium to purchase Apple devices. However, both Amazon and Google are using subsidized models to give away their tablets at cost. Apple would not be competing head-to-head, they would be selling thier devices while the competition was giving their devices away at cost.

    I think you answered your own objection. Apple can command a premium price because they provide the best user experience & ecosystem. They also include in-store customer service and warranty. Neither Amazon nor Google does this, which is why they have to give away their products at cost.

    Market: Has it clearly been established that there is a strong 7 inch tablet market. Let’s exclude the Kindle which is a different animal entirely. The Android manufacturers failed with teh 7 inch tablet. Amazon Fire was a disappointment. Google Nexus 7 just entered the market. Where is the proof that the 7 inch tablet market is greater than that of the 10 inch tablet?

    The existing crop of 7” devices is no threat to any Apple device. The soon-to-arrive Nexus 7, Kindle Fire 2 and Nook 3 (?) will definitely give the iPod touch a run.

    It’s been said many times here that there is no tablet market, only an iPad market. The iPad will continue forward to disrupt the PC market. A 7” iPod touch will not interfere much with that.

    Sales: Is there any proof that Apple has lost the sale of even 1 iPad because of the 7 inch tablet? Sales of the 10 inch tablet are outstripping supply. Why enter a new category when the old category is unaffected by that category?

    Although the punditry will spin it otherwise, Apple will not enter the 7” device category in response to Nexus 7 & Kindle Fire. It has nothing to do with iPad sales. It has everything to do with expanding a product line (iPod touch) that already sells 20-25 million units a year.

    Purpose: “Our objective isn’t to make this design for this kind of price point, or for this arbitrary schedule, or line up other things or have X number of phones, it’s to build the best. ... Can we make a significant contribution far beyond what others have done in this area? Can we make a product that we all want?”- Tim Cook at AllThingsD. Does the 7 inch iPad meet Tim Cook’s criteria? Or does it violate it?

    See previous comment.

    Steve Job’s Objections: A 7 inch iPad is too small to use. A 7 inch iPod Touch is too big. Does this product really serve a need?

    SJ said that a 7” display was insufficient to provide the best tablet UI. He never mentioned the iPod touch or iPhone because he knew full well that the UI for those devices were optimized for the 3.5” display.

    One more thought: what if Apple decides to allow carriers to subsidize a 7” iPod touch 3G/LTE? There is a growing number of consumers who rarely use a smartphone to make a phone call. FaceTime, Skype and other SIP/VoIP apps would provide the means to make calls when needed. $399 unsubsidized or $0 with 2 yr. data contract.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 07 July 2012 12:40 PM #102

    Drew Bear - 07 July 2012 11:14 AM

    But if the goal is to produce a device closer in size/portability to the Nexus 7 with a higher resolution screen, then a 7” Retina iPad with 3:2 aspect ratio (not shown in the above graphic) makes more sense.

    Imagine an iPad Mini about the same size as Android 7” tablets, but with a much bigger display.

    It turns out the bezel on the Nexus 7 wastes so much space that you could fit a 7.85” 4:3 iPad Mini inside it and still have room for the home button and camera.

    Signature

    The only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. — Steve Jobs

         
  • Posted: 07 July 2012 12:41 PM #103

    mjuarez - 07 July 2012 01:26 PM

    Also, keep in mind that there is an overlap already with the iPod price range.  There are iPod Touches that, fully decked out with 64Gb, go for $400, the same price as an iPad2.  I’m pretty sure the margin on those 64Gb iPod Touches is probably much better than the one on the iPad.

    However, iPods haven’t been updated in a while now, and September used to be, historically, when new iPods were announced.  My WAG is that the “new” iPods will simply be the current models, just cheaper.  Maybe something iOS 6.0 specific.  iPod world would still exist (heck, iPod Classic is still around!), and the price reduction might perk up sales during the holiday season.

    That could create a “space” in the lineup for a hybrid device, e.g, an 8” iPad Mini starting at $299, maybe going all the way to $499 for a fully decked out one.  Nobody questions the fact that there’s 11”, 13” and 15” Macs.  Why not something similar with the iPad?  This would snuff out any possible attempt by Google or Microsoft on the smaller tablet front, and even if it cannibalizes other Apple products and reduces margin, it would be worth it long term to own the entire tablet sector.

    Adam already gave you an “+11,000%” and I can’t top that, but I did want to say that this is a very interesting and intriguing post. Nicely done.

         
  • Posted: 07 July 2012 12:48 PM #104

    FalKirk - 07 July 2012 11:26 AM

    Sigh. I’m clearly on the wrong side of this debate. Let me list my reasons why the smaller tablet won’t happen just so you can prove me wrong.

    No need to prove you wrong - or right.

    Apple, Inc will do that in its own time.


    But, it will be built in Brazil smile

         
  • Posted: 07 July 2012 01:03 PM #105

    Thanks to both Adam and Drew Bear for responding to my post. It’s helped to clarify my thinking.

    The first - and perhaps seminal - question is whether this is going to be a large iPod Touch or a small iPad. The answer to that question changes everything.

    A small iPad would have small icons. Too small in my opinion (and the opinion of the late Steve Jobs.)

    I’m not sure what need it would serve other than lowering the price of the device. And Apple doesn’t play that game.

    A larger iPod Touch is more intriguing.

    It avoids the “too small” for touch problem.

    It would replace the iPad Touch which is probably being badly cannibalized by the iPad.

    The fact that it’s being introduced in September - traditional iPod introduction time - adds some weight to that suggestion.

    It avoids the category confusion issue I discussed. An iPod touch is not an iPhone (no phone, won’t fit in pocket) but it is also not an iPad (smaller screen, apps not optimized for larger screen). There are 200,000 iPad specific applications. If you want a full-featured iPad, get an iPad. If you want big iPod Touch, get an iPod Touch Tablet.

    Hmm. The more I think about it, the more I like this idea.

    It would, of course, compete directly agains both the Amazon Fire and the Google Nexus 7 since they are both essentially running phone, rather than tablet, operating systems.

    By the way, I’m not one to dismiss Steve Jobs’ statements so blithely. I believe that he meant what he said about tablets and about most other things and that those who dismiss all of his utterances as market-speak are missing a lot brilliant insights.