Go Back   MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPad

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 12, 2012, 07:33 PM   #76
zhenya
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckusToothnail View Post
Which is why I was ACTUALLY talking about the iPad Mini having the 1536x1152 resolution, NOT 2048x1536. And the Nook HD actually has a resolution of 1440x900, NOT 1280x800.

That would give the Mini a PPI of 245 and just SLIGHTLY edging the Nook HD's 243 PPI, hardly a "HUGE difference".



And yet the Nook HD has a 65% higher resolution than the Mini!

Really, with such a low-resolution screen you would expect the iPad Mini to be at least TWICE as thin as the Nook HD, not just 31% less, which in real world terms is just 0.13" or 3.3mm thinner.

Now if "thin" is SO important to you, even preferring a reduction of 0.13" in thinness over a 65% increase in resolution, then you might be heartbroken to find out that the Nexus 10, despite having over 30% HIGHER resolution, 0.355" bigger screen AND 35 higher PPI, is also THINNER than the iPad 4.
Yes, we understand that other tablets currently have higher resolutions (yet nobody has anything like 1536x1152.)

A number of us have explained the hardware, software, and marketing issues that preclude this, but you have so far chosen to ignore those points as you are so busy patting yourself on the back over an idea that has already been thoroughly discussed here over the previous months. Keep dreaming; it's not going to happen.
zhenya is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 07:37 PM   #77
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckusToothnail View Post


That's absolutely not true. In fact, no iPad app would need to be "rewritten". Rather, all the apps will be scaled up or down appropriately on the DEVICE side whether it's done on hardware or through iOS.


.
Heh heh, didn't Android use the same solution, automatic scaling and see how good the result is? when you are scaling stuff on the screen, button may be too large, too small, too fuzzy to look at, text is too small, too large and everything in between etc. etc. Just look at Iphone 5, how much trouble they have in getting app developer to add an additional role of stuff .. During Ipad 3 launch, they explain this point and no developer stand up and call them a liar. Would you think those folks who has to live with their app know better than armchair quarterback like us?
xofruitcake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 08:22 PM   #78
BuckusToothnail
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
"All sorts of reasons, chief amongst them battery, thinness and cost issues (screen)"

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacPod View Post
How is any of that Fear, Uncertainty, or Doubt?
Really? You need me to explain?

"If the iPad Mini gets a Retina Display,

1) the battery will die so much quicker and be so much heavier!

2) it's going to be SO thick, maybe even 0.13" or more than 50% thicker!!!

3) it'll end up costing WAY more than the full-sized iPad!"


Quote:
Originally Posted by MacPod View Post
The Nexus and Kindle are smaller screens, are thicker and heavier than the iPad mini.
Yes, the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire HD 7" have smaller screens, but with 30% HIGHER resolution. That's the point.

The Nook HD weighs 315 grams compared to the iPad Mini which weighs 308 grams.

So yes, the iPad Mini is "lighter" by 7 grams or around 2% less than the Nook HD, which I guess for you is a fair counter-balance to having 65% less resolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacPod View Post
They are also sold at close to cost, or even at a loss.
I agree and I'm not saying Apple should do the same or not expect to make a tidy profit with their products, which is entirely their right and why any company is in business.

My point is that I can't imagine Apple not being able to produce a "Retina"-level iPad Mini, ESPECIALLY with a resolution of 1536x1152, when its competitors have all done so with screens of comparable PPI AND within a reasonable cost.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MacPod View Post
Additionally, Apple can't just bump the mini up to a "retina-level" resolution, they have to double the resolution, or come up with yet another screen size (which they will not do unless truly necessary).
Well that's debatable and no one has truly answered why that's not possible. All I'm reading is "it'll look bad!" and "vector graphics can't scale like that!" which I'm not sure is even true.

Case in point, when an iPad user does the "pinch-to-zoom" and enlarges the screen size by 50% or decreases it by 75%, how would this look different to scaling the iPad app's resolution up 50% or down 75% to 1536x1152?

I "pinch-to-zoom" all the time on my iPad, and not just on "photos and videos", but in all types of apps with "vector graphics", and well beyond just a 50% zoom in or 75% zoom out and everything in between, and to me it always looks fine.

It seems people here equate scaling with primitive techniques like proximal interpolation, which of course will result in jagged edges and artifacts, even at 2x multiple, but there's a lot more sophisticated ways to scale like utilizing anti-aliasing algorithms or vectorization.

And isn't the whole premise behind "Retina Display" is that the naked eye can't make out the individual pixels on the screen?

The 1536x1152 resolution on the iPad Mini's 7.9" screen would be 245 PPI which is comparable to the full sized iPad's PPI of 264, and higher than the PPI of the MacBook Pro 15" which is 220 so it could rightly be considered "Retina".

So since the eye can't even resolve individual pixels on a Retina Display, how is it the 1536x1152 resolution on the 7.9" iPad Mini screen would produce "jagged edges" or "artifacts"?


Quote:
Originally Posted by MacPod View Post
I don't think anyone is saying that a retina iPad mini is impossible (so asking how "Apple can't" is a straw man), but that it's not possible to do, while still fitting into the parameters Apple wishes to meet.
If you read my sentence in the context of the post, you would know I was specifically addressing those "parameters" that the poster had given as the reasons why Apple "can't" put a Retina Display in the iPad Mini, and not ascribing to anyone the idea that Apple couldn't produce a Retina Display iPad Mini no holds barred, which has now become YOUR "straw man" argument.

Specifically, the "parameters" he mentioned were "battery, thinness and cost issues" which I went on to address, as well as the fact that not only did they achieve the "Retina"-level screen, but also added faster CPUs and double the RAM at 65% the price of the iPad Mini.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacPod View Post
Or simply, look at it in reverse. If Apple could make a retina mini, while still keeping price, size, weight, pixel dimension, and production rate the same, why wouldn't they?
Seriously?

It's called "planned obsolescence". Apple purposely "gimped" the iPad Mini with a low resolution screen so they could release Retina Display on the next model and everyone would be compelled to "upgrade" again.

About "still keeping price, size, weight...", how do you reconcile that with the fact that the iPad 3 was actually heavier AND thicker than the iPad 2?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacPod View Post
Of course they would. The fact that they haven't strongly implies that at least one or more of those are unattainable at the same time. And that also matches with a reasonable assessment of the current state of the technology involved.
This is, of course, EXACTLY what Apple WANTS you to believe.

Apple has always held back technology and released timed the release of certain "new" features not based on any real technological hurdles or production cost issues, but purely as part of a pre-planned "upgrade" schedule.

After all, are we to believe that phone cameras were so costly and technologically unavailable in 2010 when the first-gen iPad came out that no cameras were included at all?

Or that cost-effective 1.2MP FaceTime cameras were only available just recently when with the release of iPad 4?

And that STEREO SPEAKERS are still such an advanced, unattainable and future technology that they couldn't possible be included on a $499 tablet PC?
BuckusToothnail is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 08:28 PM   #79
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
IGZO should help cut down on the battery size and weight.
Laminated screens should make it thinner.
TSMC is already ready for 20nm designs so that will also help with smaller battery as well.

I think we will see Retina iPad Mini late next year.
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 08:57 PM   #80
zhenya
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckusToothnail View Post
Well that's debatable and no one has truly answered why that's not possible. All I'm reading is "it'll look bad!" and "vector graphics can't scale like that!" which I'm not sure is even true.

Case in point, when an iPad user does the "pinch-to-zoom" and enlarges the screen size by 50% or decreases it by 75%, how would this look different to scaling the iPad app's resolution up 50% or down 75% to 1536x1152?

I "pinch-to-zoom" all the time on my iPad, and not just on "photos and videos", but in all types of apps with "vector graphics", and well beyond just a 50% zoom in or 75% zoom out and everything in between, and to me it always looks fine.

It seems people here equate scaling with primitive techniques like proximal interpolation, which of course will result in jagged edges and artifacts, even at 2x multiple, but there's a lot more sophisticated ways to scale like utilizing anti-aliasing algorithms or vectorization.
Lower resolution items most certainly lose sharpness when zoomed too much on existing iPads. Go to any web page and pinch to zoom on logos, icons, thumbnails, pictures, etc. They all quickly become blurry.

And that's in the best of situations on the web which is designed with reasonably high resolution screens in mind and text that is designed to render at any resolution. Remember that you can't pinch to zoom the static parts of iOS, including buttons, controls, menu items, etc. those will all lose sharpness as they are re-scaled.

Higher resolution screens help, by making the transitions softer, but they are still noticeable, especially to folks who look for those kinds of things (ie. especially Apple and its notoriously fussy customer base).
zhenya is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 10:45 PM   #81
cardfan
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzN1337c0d3r View Post
IGZO should help cut down on the battery size and weight.
Laminated screens should make it thinner.
TSMC is already ready for 20nm designs so that will also help with smaller battery as well.

I think we will see Retina iPad Mini late next year.
Sounds good. What price would you pay? More than 499? You'd have to since it'd cost more than current retina ipads to make. Think that will go over well?

What's that mean for the bigger ipads' profit margins? Everyone will buy the magical, just as thin & light, fastest chip, long battery life, retina Mini at 329. You'd be an idiot not to. I'd be with you in line for that one though.

Apple doesn't operate this way. The current Mini will get cheaper for them with scale. They may even bump the processor and cut the price. But I wouldn't expect more than that. A retina ipad Mini doesn't make sense for Apple now or next year. There's too many potential (wanna have ipad) buyers Apple can reach down with the Mini to pick up and maintain their required margins.
cardfan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2012, 11:05 PM   #82
Harrycooke
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: London/New York
Quote:
Originally Posted by noteple View Post
Trends
Cost reduced manufacturing
Honor price points
Thinner
Lighter
Faster
Longer battery life
Smaller screen bezels
Minimum of HD resolution across all product moving toward 4k
4k on mobile devices isn't necessary. If you can't distinguish the individual pixels on the retina screens then 4k will do nothing to what you see.
Harrycooke is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 12:59 AM   #83
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
Sounds good. What price would you pay? More than 499? You'd have to since it'd cost more than current retina ipads to make. Think that will go over well?

What's that mean for the bigger ipads' profit margins? Everyone will buy the magical, just as thin & light, fastest chip, long battery life, retina Mini at 329. You'd be an idiot not to. I'd be with you in line for that one though.

Apple doesn't operate this way. The current Mini will get cheaper for them with scale. They may even bump the processor and cut the price. But I wouldn't expect more than that. A retina ipad Mini doesn't make sense for Apple now or next year. There's too many potential (wanna have ipad) buyers Apple can reach down with the Mini to pick up and maintain their required margins.
Apple has easily laminated the screen for the iMac27, which is a HUGE screen for that type of lamination technology, so laminating iPad Mini screens won't be all that difficult or costly.

Upgrading from 28 -> 20 nm technology "may" increase the cost of each chip Apple pays by up to 50%, but that's also unlikely to be a huge increase in cost, since currently the A6 is estimated to cost Apple less than $20.

Likewise, by this time next year, Sharp (or whoever IGZO has been licensed to), will have matured their fabrication process enough to make yields reasonable and keep costs down. Besides, wasn't a lot of the current justification for the mini's price is so that Apple doesn't have to raise it again later?

Apple is also likely to save a bit of money by going to the smaller battery.

I think you're also SEVERELY UNDERESTIMATING Apple's profit margins with the iPad Mini.
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.

Last edited by AzN1337c0d3r; Nov 13, 2012 at 01:05 AM.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 04:24 AM   #84
cardfan
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzN1337c0d3r View Post
Apple has easily laminated the screen for the iMac27, which is a HUGE screen for that type of lamination technology, so laminating iPad Mini screens won't be all that difficult or costly.

Upgrading from 28 -> 20 nm technology "may" increase the cost of each chip Apple pays by up to 50%, but that's also unlikely to be a huge increase in cost, since currently the A6 is estimated to cost Apple less than $20.

Likewise, by this time next year, Sharp (or whoever IGZO has been licensed to), will have matured their fabrication process enough to make yields reasonable and keep costs down. Besides, wasn't a lot of the current justification for the mini's price is so that Apple doesn't have to raise it again later?

Apple is also likely to save a bit of money by going to the smaller battery.

I think you're also SEVERELY UNDERESTIMATING Apple's profit margins with the iPad Mini.
It must be nice to ignore reality. I'll bite too. I can't wait for the magical ipad mini retina. Should be here as soon as March right?
cardfan is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 08:36 AM   #85
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
It must be nice to ignore reality. I'll bite too. I can't wait for the magical ipad mini retina. Should be here as soon as March right?
Must be nice to just make claims without reasonable assertions or facts to back up your position. Go troll somewhere else.

What? Are you afraid your brand new mini will be deprecated like the ipad 3?

2H2013, you heard it here first.
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 08:57 AM   #86
brig2221
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
I don't see the Mini getting a retina screen next year. I'm sure the processor will be bumped.

Here's what retina for the Mini involves: Much faster processor, bigger battery, more weight, thicker design, more expensive screen. It'd cost more to build this than the ipad 4.

Perhaps the tech will arrive that enables Apple to do this. But even if it does, would they? What differentiates a retina Mini from the bigger ipads then? Size? That's not enough. In fact, the Mini would have a better quality screen.

I think Apple is content on having the Mini be the "ipad Air" of the lineup. It's goal will be thin and light. Entry level pricing. And very much non-retina.
Could not have said it better myself, especially the contention that the mini is the "ipad air" of the lineup.

Although I think Apple's plan is to do what you said, the one caveat I would add is that if the iPad mini starts to outsell the full size model, and sales start to drop off at some point in time due to not having a Retina screen, I believe Apple would be forced to produce a mini on par (specs) with the full size model to keep sales up.
brig2221 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 09:08 AM   #87
cardfan
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzN1337c0d3r View Post
Must be nice to just make claims without reasonable assertions or facts to back up your position. Go troll somewhere else.

What? Are you afraid your brand new mini will be deprecated like the ipad 3?

2H2013, you heard it here first.
You're the one here making unrealistic claims even having to resort to speculating about what Sharp might be doing when that's insignificant. I've already backed up my assertions as to why we won't see a retina Mini anytime soon. You're letting your desire for a retina Mini get in the way and ignoring how Apple operates.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by brig2221 View Post
Could not have said it better myself, especially the contention that the mini is the "ipad air" of the lineup.

Although I think Apple's plan is to do what you said, the one caveat I would add is that if the iPad mini starts to outsell the full size model, and sales start to drop off at some point in time due to not having a Retina screen, I believe Apple would be forced to produce a mini on par (specs) with the full size model to keep sales up.
Absolutely agree. I've never said it wouldn't happen. But it won't be next year. Apple would be foolish not to milk the current Mini. Drop the price as cost scales down, reach even lower while still maintaining its insane margins.
cardfan is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 10:26 AM   #88
glhiii
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Can't stand the screen

I had a Nexus 7. Returned it when I saw the Mini would be lighter and got the Mini first day it was available. Used the Mini for 12 days and finally couldn't stand the screen -- it's not just bad, it's unacceptable imo. Saw a Nexus 7 at Sam's club yesterday and picked it up (32 gb for $247). The screen is much better than the Mini's, though colors in photos appear washed-out (bad calibration?) But the screen is more than acceptable. Apple will have to increase the resolution and quality of the mini screen sooner rather than later. They can increase the pixels without quadrupling the number and software developers can tweak their apps. I think this will happen in the next year.
glhiii is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 10:28 AM   #89
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
You're the one here making unrealistic claims even having to resort to speculating about what Sharp might be doing when that's insignificant. I've already backed up my assertions as to why we won't see a retina Mini anytime soon. You're letting your desire for a retina Mini get in the way and ignoring how Apple operates.

You have yet to assert or prove how my claims are unrealistic. ZOMG I SAID IT'S UNREALISTIC, SO IT'S MUST BE UNREALISTIC.

How is it even speculation that Sharp is working IGZO displays? It's a known fact.

Learn to Google:

1

2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indium_gallium_zinc_oxide
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 04:10 PM   #90
cardfan
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzN1337c0d3r View Post
You have yet to assert or prove how my claims are unrealistic. ZOMG I SAID IT'S UNREALISTIC, SO IT'S MUST BE UNREALISTIC.

How is it even speculation that Sharp is working IGZO displays? It's a known fact.

Learn to Google:

1

2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indium_gallium_zinc_oxide
It's an insignificant fact as mentioned before. It has little to do with Apple deciding to make a retina Mini. I'm glad you're excited though.

ZOMG, Sharp is making IGZO!! We'll see a retina Mini next year for sure. You heard it here first!! LOL Umm...no.

Look it's been fun, but I've already laid out why we won't see one. If I'm wrong, i'll join you in line next year. But I'm usually right. This isn't trolling but just trying to put expectations in check. Time will tell..
cardfan is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 13, 2012, 06:41 PM   #91
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardfan View Post
It's an insignificant fact as mentioned before. It has little to do with Apple deciding to make a retina Mini. I'm glad you're excited though.

ZOMG, Sharp is making IGZO!! We'll see a retina Mini next year for sure. You heard it here first!! LOL Umm...no.

Look it's been fun, but I've already laid out why we won't see one. If I'm wrong, i'll join you in line next year. But I'm usually right. This isn't trolling but just trying to put expectations in check. Time will tell..
If you looked at those articles you'd read in between the lines and realize the Sharp rep is saying that a certain premium product is going to be using these panels.

BTW, just so that you know, I'm not going to be buying a Mini Retina, the form factor is still too large for me. I can't palm it.
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 03:32 AM   #92
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzN1337c0d3r View Post

Likewise, by this time next year, Sharp (or whoever IGZO has been licensed to), will have matured their fabrication process enough to make yields reasonable and keep costs down. Besides, wasn't a lot of the current justification for the mini's price is so that Apple doesn't have to raise it again later?

Apple is also likely to save a bit of money by going to the smaller battery.

I think you're also SEVERELY UNDERESTIMATING Apple's profit margins with the iPad Mini.

I think you need to review the conference call transcript for the Ipad mini gross margin.. The BOM estimate for Ipad mini (and Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD etc.) only accoutn for the material and cost of labor to build a device. There are a lot of other cost that the BOM estimate don't cover: profit to Foxconn, manufacturing inefficiency (broken part, rework etc. etc.), transportation cost (moving parts from one suppliers to the others, Fedex the device from China to US), warranty cost, distribution cost (Walmart, Target etc will need to have their profit and so is Apple store), inventory cost, design cost, regulatory cost (getting government to approve the sale in different countries)... If it is so easy to run a business, everyone will be a great business man. ... Apple project 36% gross margin (i.e. before design, market, corporate overhead, tax etc.) for 4Q12 for everything they sell. And Ipad mini is "significant below that"...

http://www.morningstar.com/earnings/...=AAPL&pindex=5

We also added the iPad Mini to our iPad line up. The iPad Mini has the full iPad experience and we priced it aggressively at $329, delivering incredible value to our customers. Its gross margin is significantly below the corporate average. So, in summary, we expect our gross margin to decline by about 400 basis points sequentially
xofruitcake is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 08:42 AM   #93
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by xofruitcake View Post
I think you need to review the conference call transcript for the Ipad mini gross margin.. The BOM estimate for Ipad mini (and Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD etc.) only accoutn for the material and cost of labor to build a device. There are a lot of other cost that the BOM estimate don't cover: profit to Foxconn, manufacturing inefficiency (broken part, rework etc. etc.), transportation cost (moving parts from one suppliers to the others, Fedex the device from China to US), warranty cost, distribution cost (Walmart, Target etc will need to have their profit and so is Apple store), inventory cost, design cost, regulatory cost (getting government to approve the sale in different countries)... If it is so easy to run a business, everyone will be a great business man. ... Apple project 36% gross margin (i.e. before design, market, corporate overhead, tax etc.) for 4Q12 for everything they sell. And Ipad mini is "significant below that"...

http://www.morningstar.com/earnings/...=AAPL&pindex=5

We also added the iPad Mini to our iPad line up. The iPad Mini has the full iPad experience and we priced it aggressively at $329, delivering incredible value to our customers. Its gross margin is significantly below the corporate average. So, in summary, we expect our gross margin to decline by about 400 basis points sequentially
Amazon, Barnes and Nobles, and Google all have these same extra costs. In fact, it probably costs them them even more since they don't have the HUGE volumes that Apple has. Sure their devices have lower BOM, but Apple's products are $130-$150 more expensive for everyone else's!

Quote:
Its gross margin is significantly below the corporate average.
So Apple's profit margin on the iPad Mini will be 20% instead of the 30% they make on everything else they make and 5-10% competitors make.

Welcome to competition. They are going to have to put faster processors and a better screen on it next year if they want to have any hope of challenging the next wave of tablets.
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 06:18 PM   #94
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzN1337c0d3r View Post
Amazon, Barnes and Nobles, and Google all have these same extra costs. In fact, it probably costs them them even more since they don't have the HUGE volumes that Apple has. Sure their devices have lower BOM, but Apple's products are $130-$150 more expensive for everyone else's!



So Apple's profit margin on the iPad Mini will be 20% instead of the 30% they make on everything else they make and 5-10% competitors make.

Welcome to competition. They are going to have to put faster processors and a better screen on it next year if they want to have any hope of challenging the next wave of tablets.

I am not sure you understand the term gross margin enough.. Apple will be at best make 5-10% after paying everything in the base Ipad mini model and the competitor tablets will loss money. And Apple already respond to competition by bring Ipad mini price down to $329 and they are selling out the mini. Why would Apple need to lower price anymore? It is a bizzarre argument that Apple sell out their product at $329 starting but yet need to lower price further. What more will Apple gain in that situation???? I think a better way to look at the situation is why would Nexus 7/10, Nook, Kindle Fire HD need to sell their tablet in such a low price? Consumer are speaking out their preference with their purchase. How long can Amazon, Google, and B&N continue if they keep losing money to sell their device?
xofruitcake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 06:24 PM   #95
Awakener
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash211 View Post
Why does everyone think a 7" ipad retina screen is technologically impossible...we have a 5" retina screen, a 10" retina screen, a 13" retina screen, a 15" retina screen, etc TODAY, why is a 7" so impossible in a couple of months or year from now? I know it might make the ipad mini a little thicker but so is the ipad 3 and 4 and plenty of people bought those.
From Cult of Mac:

"Why An iPad Mini With Retina Display Would Have Cost $379"

http://www.cultofmac.com/201118/why-...t-379-feature/
Awakener is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 06:26 PM   #96
clyde2801
macrumors 601
 
clyde2801's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In the land of no hills and red dirt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xofruitcake View Post
I am not sure you understand the term gross margin enough.. Apple will be at best make 5-10% after paying everything in the base Ipad mini model and the competitor tablets will loss money. And Apple already respond to competition by bring Ipad mini price down to $329 and they are selling out the mini. Why would Apple need to lower price anymore? It is a bizzarre argument that Apple sell out their product at $329 starting but yet need to lower price further. What more will Apple gain in that situation???? I think a better way to look at the situation is why would Nexus 7/10, Nook, Kindle Fire HD need to sell their tablet in such a low price? Consumer are speaking out their preference with their purchase. How long can Amazon, Google, and B&N continue if they keep losing money to sell their device?
As long as they can make it up providing content. Two different business models.
__________________
I've found that the sanest question I can ask myself is 'Am I going crazy?' --Jack Robbins
2012 base 15" rMBP, late 2013 13" rMBP, 64gb gold iPad Air 2, 64gb gold iPhone 6+
clyde2801 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 06:44 PM   #97
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by clyde2801 View Post
As long as they can make it up providing content. Two different business models.
heh heh, the rub in Google, Amazon, and B&N business model is that they have to assume consumer will buy a certain amount of goods or do enough search on the device in Google's case for a certain period of time. The number may or may not work out in the real world (i.e the consumer may not be using the device as often as the manufacturer hope or keeping it as long as they hope). And even if they all work out, each one of them will have to pony up the money now and try to collect the profit down the road a year at a time. As the technology moving faster and faster. Who is to say that someone will not buy a Nexus 7A next year and just trash their Nexus 7 that they buy this year? I have a Samsugn Infuse that I bought about a year ago and my trade in value is so little that I will dump it instead of going through the motion to sell it when I am ready for a new one. The more unit they sell, the more money they will tie up into those device.

You will see it play out in Google response to Nexus 4 and Nexus 10. Both of them are sold out now.. Let's see if Google rushes their contractor and try to get as many Nexus 4 and Nexus 10 produced for the holiday season like Apple is doing for Ipad mini, Iphone 5, Ipod Touch etc... If the sold out persist,you will know that the business case is not solid. If they tried to rush their contractor, you will know that they think they will make money...
xofruitcake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 10:11 PM   #98
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by xofruitcake View Post
I am not sure you understand the term gross margin enough.. Apple will be at best make 5-10% after paying everything in the base Ipad mini model and the competitor tablets will loss money. And Apple already respond to competition by bring Ipad mini price down to $329 and they are selling out the mini.
The mini isn't selling out where I live, and it's one of the most affluent places in the US. In fact, I stood in line for the iPad Mini release and combined for iPad4 and iPad Mini, there were barely 40 people in line. The only model the sold out of that morning was the 16GB iPad Mini in White. They still had dozens of every other single model left. Compare this to every other product launch, where the line wrapped around the whole entire mall, multiple times! I don't think the iPad Mini is selling all that well.

But maybe the mini really is selling out everywhere else. The mini is selling out because 2 reasons:

1) Some people will just buy anything with an Apple logo on it.
2) Apple is creating an artificial supply shortage to keep prices up and retain the "premium" status of their product.


Quote:
Why would Apple need to lower price anymore? It is a bizzarre argument that Apple sell out their product at $329 starting but yet need to lower price further.
Did I say Apple needed to lower their price? Did you read anything I wrote? I wrote that Apple is technologically and monetarily able to put a Retina display in the iPad Mini next year and that it will be necessary to retain its premium status and price... not drop the price and compete in the Android market.

People simply aren't going to pay $130 more next year and get much inferior hardware, even if it is iOS.
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.

Last edited by AzN1337c0d3r; Nov 14, 2012 at 10:24 PM.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2012, 10:22 PM   #99
AzN1337c0d3r
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by xofruitcake View Post
heh heh, the rub in Google, Amazon, and B&N business model is that they have to assume consumer will buy a certain amount of goods or do enough search on the device in Google's case for a certain period of time.
No, you are assuming that's what's Google/B&N business plan is. Only Amazon has been proven to be a loss-leader. And we don't know that actually for sure. Just guess based on some total spreadsheet numbers.

Quote:
The number may or may not work out in the real world (i.e the consumer may not be using the device as often as the manufacturer hope or keeping it as long as they hope). And even if they all work out, each one of them will have to pony up the money now and try to collect the profit down the road a year at a time.
You say this like it is a bad thing. It's not. This is called business and they are taking a risk and betting that the 7-inch market is more sensitive to cost than Apple thinks it is.

Quote:
As the technology moving faster and faster. Who is to say that someone will not buy a Nexus 7A next year and just trash their Nexus 7 that they buy this year?
I'm sure the financial side of these Google/B&N/Amazon have already taken this scenario into account and decided the risk was worth the potential rewards if this scenario played out. They aren't stupid you know.

Quote:
I have a Samsugn Infuse that I bought about a year ago and my trade in value is so little that I will dump it instead of going through the motion to sell it when I am ready for a new one. The more unit they sell, the more money they will tie up into those device.
I bought a Samsung Galaxy S2 a year ago and just recently sold it for more than I paid for it! It held its value equally well compared to the iPhone 4S which was the chief competitor at the time and it worked way better for me with its removable battery than the 4S which I couldn't even go a day without recharging.

Quote:
You will see it play out in Google response to Nexus 4 and Nexus 10. Both of them are sold out now.. Let's see if Google rushes their contractor and try to get as many Nexus 4 and Nexus 10 produced for the holiday season like Apple is doing for Ipad mini, Iphone 5, Ipod Touch etc... If the sold out persist,you will know that the business case is not solid. If they tried to rush their contractor, you will know that they think they will make money...
What? Sold out for Apple means that the iPad mini is successful but sold out for Google means that Nexus 7 is not solid?????? What kind of logic is that?
__________________
rMBP (10.8), 2.6 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD
Hackintosh (10.7.4), 4.6 GHz i7-3930K, 32 GB RAM, 3xHD7970, 2x240GB Vertex 3 RAID 0 SSD, 2x600GB Velociraptor 10KRPM, Drobo S 5x2TB, 2x HP LP3065 30-inch.
AzN1337c0d3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > iPhone, iPod and iPad > iPad

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
All iPads: How are big iPads better than mini iPads? printz iPad 32 Feb 19, 2014 07:33 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:44 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC