And I'll take it away<grin> because you're doing the apples and oranges comparison. They sell those devices at cost and lock you into their stores - these companies aren't stupid or unsuccessful, you end up buying stuff from them and that's where they make their profit. These devices aren't cheaper, you just don't pay all the price for the product up front - they are clever and they eventually get their money, they just quietly slide it out of your wallet one note at a time without your ever realising what they're doing.
So it sounds like you're saying Apple purchasers are the real dopes because they pay more up front and Apple still wants you to use iTunes for all media on the device.
If you go by that logic it just makes Apple sound greedy.
But if you compare an iPad Mini to a Kindle Fire HD (7/8.9) or a Nexus 7 it is clearly a better built product which uses premium products when compared to the other devices.
----------
I guess I'll agree with the OPs feeling about the iPad Mini and Retina Display.
If you think of it, Apple needed to chose between two resolutions, either go with iPad/iPad 2 resolution and keep the device thin and fast while maintaining remarkable battery. Or go with Retina display resolution and compromise battery life or thinness.
They aren't going to pick a third resolution because Apps needed to scale properly and didn't want to further fragment the Apps available for their device line up.
I think it makes sense to pick the lower resolution of the iPad 2 as it still has a higher PPI than the first two iPads yet runs everything in a fast, efficient manner.
If (when?) they release the iPad Mini with Retina display I'll truly be congratulatory to Apple for keeping the battery life, efficiencey and thinness of the first generation model. That will be a work of miracles.