One of the oldest rules with products is that smaller stuff costs less. It has less so it somehow costs less to make so it costs less to buy. That expectation is alive and well today, driving prices and features in the latest electronics.
The Mini 2 had all the same parts as the Air 1. Same processor, same GPU, same materials, same cameras, same antennas, same storage, same resolution. The cost to produce the Mini 2 and Air 1 were so close, apple margins on the Mini 2 were noticeably less. Because the price was less, in closer proportion to its size.
The price is still less and now with the Air 2 and Mini 3, so are the specs. Apple could have 1) kept the minimal margins or 2) charged the same for both models, or 3) lowered the specs (production cost). They went with #3 and we've got a lot of disappointment. But what if they had gone with #2? Would you pay as much for a Mini 4, equal in every respect with an Air 3?
The Mini 2 had all the same parts as the Air 1. Same processor, same GPU, same materials, same cameras, same antennas, same storage, same resolution. The cost to produce the Mini 2 and Air 1 were so close, apple margins on the Mini 2 were noticeably less. Because the price was less, in closer proportion to its size.
The price is still less and now with the Air 2 and Mini 3, so are the specs. Apple could have 1) kept the minimal margins or 2) charged the same for both models, or 3) lowered the specs (production cost). They went with #3 and we've got a lot of disappointment. But what if they had gone with #2? Would you pay as much for a Mini 4, equal in every respect with an Air 3?