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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 3, 2012, 07:03 PM   #1
Kendo
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Why can't a Retina mini sell for same price as a regular iPad?

I see all these posts about how a Retina iPad mini can't exist next year because they don't want to cannibalize the flagship 9.7" iPad and also because it would raise the mini's price to regular iPad territory.

Suppose they come out with a Retina mini which has a higher ppi than the regular iPad, does it matter? They cater to different markets. One for those that prefer bigger screens, and one for those that want a more portable device with a smaller screen.

If they are priced the same, that is no different than when an iPod classic was priced at the same price as an iPad nano years ago. One had 160GB of music in a large form factor, the other had 16GB of music in a portable form factor. Different markets.

Even if they both cost the same, you are paying for a bigger screen with one and portability with the other.
Kendo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 07:22 PM   #2
aneftp
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kendo View Post
I see all these posts about how a Retina iPad mini can't exist next year because they don't want to cannibalize the flagship 9.7" iPad and also because it would raise the mini's price to regular iPad territory.

Suppose they come out with a Retina mini which has a higher ppi than the regular iPad, does it matter? They cater to different markets. One for those that prefer bigger screens, and one for those that want a more portable device with a smaller screen.

If they are priced the same, that is no different than when an iPod classic was priced at the same price as an iPad nano years ago. One had 160GB of music in a large form factor, the other had 16GB of music in a portable form factor. Different markets.

Even if they both cost the same, you are paying for a bigger screen with one and portability with the other.
Business 101.

Apple wants to maximize their supply train. Much cheaper to order millions of 7.85 inch non retina screens than to try to add to that same supply train a couple million retina 7.85 inch screens.

2. They don't want to cannibilize the $499 iPad base market

3. The most important. They don't want to throw out such a great product in Oct/Nov 2012 that leaves consumers with very little to desire with the next mini 2.

That's why no retina for 2012. Sure bet there will be retina for 2013 model.

Same crap happened with iPhone 2007. Apple purposely left 3G and GPS out of the original iPhone.

Bam what happens in 2008? iPhone 3G with GPS. Otherwise it's the same exact phone. Same processor. Same RAM. Same camera.

It's just apple and they have become quite predictable.
aneftp is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 07:24 PM   #3
Kendo
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
Business 101.

Apple wants to maximize their supply train. Much cheaper to order millions of 7.85 inch non retina screens than to try to add to that same supply train a couple million retina 7.85 inch screens.

2. They don't want to cannibilize the $499 iPad base market

3. The most important. They don't want to throw out such a great product in Oct/Nov 2012 that leaves consumers with very little to desire with the next mini 2.

That's why no retina for 2012. Sure bet there will be retina for 2013 model.

Same crap happened with iPhone 2007. Apple purposely left 3G and GPS out of the original iPhone.

Bam what happens in 2008? iPhone 3G with GPS. Otherwise it's the same exact phone. Same processor. Same RAM. Same camera.

It's just apple and they have become quite predictable.
That's what I meant though so we are in agreement. I'm saying most posters say a retina WON'T happen in 2013 because of the reasons I listed.
Kendo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 08:37 PM   #4
Night Spring
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
An iPad mini with a retina screen would require HIGHER pixel density than iPad 3/4, because it'll need the same number of pixels as iPad 3/4 squeezed into a smaller space. So a retina iPad mini would probably cost MORE than a regular sized iPad.
Night Spring is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 08:53 PM   #5
Stetrain
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
What if they technically can't make an iPad Mini with those specs and the same dimensions right now?

The combination of the increased screen backlight and higher power CPU/GPU would require a larger battery. The iPad 3/4 has a battery that's a little over two and a half times the capacity of the Mini's battery (45Whr vs 16Whr).
Stetrain is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 09:55 PM   #6
Michael CM1
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
One expectation could be this in about 12 months:

1) Fifth-generation iPad with 32GB storage at $499
2) Second-generation iPad mini with Retina display, 16GB storage at $349
3) Original iPad mini with 16GB storage for $249

If it's technically possible to get the RD on an iPad mini in a year, I wouldn't be surprised to see that. It provides nice separation between models and would creep iPad ownership down toward the level of the Kindle Fire.
__________________
13.3" 2014 MacBook Air; Mid-2010 21.5" iMac; silver 64GB iPhone 6; white iPad Air 32 GB; third-gen TV (x2)
Michael CM1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 09:57 PM   #7
53x12
macrumors 68000
 
53x12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
It's just apple and they have become quite predictable.

And their innovation has been slowing down as well. Not sure Tim Cook has what it takes to guide Apple forward.
53x12 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 10:03 PM   #8
AdonisSMU
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
And their innovation has been slowing down as well. Not sure Tim Cook has what it takes to guide Apple forward.
Im not sure how much more innovation you guys could possibly want....developers are having trouble keeping up with the current innovations let alone adding new ones..

----------

Not having retina display is like putting in retina display in the iPad mini and then keeping the old doc connector.
AdonisSMU is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2012, 10:05 PM   #9
53x12
macrumors 68000
 
53x12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post
Im not sure how much more innovation you guys could possibly want....developers are having trouble keeping up with the current innovations let alone adding new ones..

----------

Not having retina display is like putting in retina display in the iPad mini and then keeping the old doc connector.


$100 billion ought to buy a lot of innovation. Like craming in a RD into a iPad mini with 10 hr battery life + same form and weight for $329. Now that is innovation. You know they will have it figured out in 6 months. Innovation would be figuring that out 6 months in advance. Innovation.

Last edited by 53x12; Nov 3, 2012 at 10:15 PM. Reason: Spelling
53x12 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 12:15 AM   #10
takeshi74
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kendo View Post
Why can't a Retina mini sell for same price as a regular iPad?.
Always consider the source (i.e. armchair experts in this case -- on both sides of the matter).
takeshi74 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 05:33 AM   #11
aneftp
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
$100 billion ought to buy a lot of innovation. Like craming in a RD into a iPad mini with 10 hr battery life + same form and weight for $329. Now that is innovation. You know they will have it figured out in 6 months. Innovation would be figuring that out 6 months in advance. Innovation.
As with most Apple Products. The iPad mini was a finished product (hardware wise) months ago.

Apple probably started working on the iPad Mini 2 project 2-4 months ago.
aneftp is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 05:38 AM   #12
Hpye
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Night Spring View Post
An iPad mini with a retina screen would require HIGHER pixel density than iPad 3/4, because it'll need the same number of pixels as iPad 3/4 squeezed into a smaller space. So a retina iPad mini would probably cost MORE than a regular sized iPad.
iPhone 4,4s,5 have more ppi than 9.7 ipad, why can't on mini
__________________
MacBook pro 13", iPhone 4s 32gb white, iphone 5, samsung galaxy s3, ipad mini slate/black MacBook Pro Retina Display 15"
Hpye is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 11:36 AM   #13
Night Spring
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hpye View Post
iPhone 4,4s,5 have more ppi than 9.7 ipad, why can't on mini
Making a bigger screen is harder. The bigger the screen, the more chance there is that you get a defect somewhere.
Night Spring is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 11:46 AM   #14
comatose81
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
And their innovation has been slowing down as well. Not sure Tim Cook has what it takes to guide Apple forward.
It's great to have so many experts on how to run a multi-billion dollar company and how to evaluate multi-billion dollar company CEOs!
comatose81 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 11:59 AM   #15
53x12
macrumors 68000
 
53x12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by comatose81 View Post
It's great to have so many experts on how to run a multi-billion dollar company and how to evaluate multi-billion dollar company CEOs!
No problem.

Btw, the rest of the business world sees this as well. If you stopped your Apple fanboyism and actually see what is going on, you would realize that yourself. Btw, I own many Apple products and love them. But can be honest and see that Apple has lost the innovation it once had.

Even this article by Forbes mentions how Apple has lost the innovation they had when under Steve Jobs and now Apple has resolved to fighting in court rather through innovation. Tim Cook is a lame duck imo.


Quote:

Apple, Losing in the Smart Phone Market, Tries to Win in Court

Apple (AAPL) is getting plenty of ink over its court battles — most recently in its negotiations with Google (GOOG) over iPhone patents. Without Steve Jobs to innovate, Apple is trying to win in a court of law what it has been losing in the marketplace.

Apple won a $1 billion in damages from Samsung on August 24 in a California court on a claim that Samsung had “willfully” copied Apple’s iPhone and iPads. Apple requested eight Samsung products be banned from the U.S. market. And a hearing on that request is scheduled for December 6, according to AP.

Now Apple is in discussions with Google that have the potential to settle claims that Google’s Android violates eight of its patents. In a suit filed in February 2012, Apple asserts that Android specifically violates its patents with features such as “popular Google apps like YouTube, Google Maps and Gmail as well as Google’s Quick Search Box that lets users search multiple types of data at the same time,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

To stop Google, Apple requested an injunction against Samsung Galaxy Nexus sales but that request was turned down on appeal and should be decided in the next two months. Apple’s suit is scheduled to go to trial in March 2014 but the Journal reports that Tim Cook and Larry Page are discussing these patent issues – so perhaps they will come to a settlement.

When it comes to market share, Google’s Android has been roundly trouncing Apple. IDC reported that Android smartphone shipments accounted for 68% of the smartphone market to the iPhone’s 17% in the second quarter of 2012.

Why is Android beating Apple? If you look just at product features, Laptop argues that the best Android phones have five compelling features that the iPhone 4S lacks:

4G Speeds: The iPhone 4S has much lower download speeds. Laptop argues that “every major carrier sells 4G Android phones, including Verizon (VZ)” offer handsets that download much faster — between “10 and 20 Mbps” compared to “1.5 to 2 Mbps.” for the 3G iPhone 4S.
No limit to Apps: Apple’s standards board limits what a user can download whereas, Laptop asserts that ”there are literally dozens of app stores in addition to Google’s Android Market.”
Keyboard Flexibility: Android offers many kinds of keyboards — “dozens of third-party alternatives, from Swype to Better Keyboard,” according to Laptop. It reports that “jailbreaking” is the only way to get an alternative to the iPhone’s keyboard.
Bigger Screens: The iPhone 4S comes only with a 3.5 inch screen whereas Android phones make many form factors available — as big as 4.5-inches for the Samsung Infuse.
NFC Support/Mobile Payments: The Samsung Nexus S and the HTC Amaze 4G have Near Field Communications (NFC) chips that enable those Android phones to let you pay at a growing number of retailers. Apple does not have this feature.
Will the iPhone 5 — rumored to be released within weeks – have the features needed to win more market share? The marketplace will decide.

But one thing is clear — Apple and Google have very different ways of making money. Apple makes its profits from the wide gap between the price it charges for the iPhone and its costs. Android is designed to help Google make money from mobile advertising.

Apple’s iPhone had sales of $22.7 billion in the first quarter of 2012, as Tim Worstall noted, whereas Microsoft (MSFT) revenues were a lower, $17.4 billion. With a profit margin of 35% — the iPhone could generate profit of about $35 billion in 2012.

By contrast, GigaOM estimated that Google’s Android advertising revenues were a mere $550 million — a pittance compared to the $2.5 billion Google expects to make in 2012 off of iOS mobile advertising and “in-app advertising through Google’s AdMob subsidiary.”

While Google’s Android revenues look small, it has created a credible competitor to the iPhone — free of Apple’s constraints — and that means more choice for consumers.

Without Steve Jobs to mesmerize Apple users, does Tim Cook have any hope of growing iPhone market share through innovation, rather than global litigation?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercoh...-win-in-court/
53x12 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 12:15 PM   #16
Andy-V
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
$100 billion ought to buy a lot of innovation. Like craming in a RD into a iPad mini with 10 hr battery life + same form and weight for $329. Now that is innovation. You know they will have it figured out in 6 months. Innovation would be figuring that out 6 months in advance. Innovation.
They can't really innovate on the price of 3rd party components. No way could apple have offered a retina iPad mini at that price today and still keep their profit margins. That would be some magical stuff.
Andy-V is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 12:32 PM   #17
AdonisSMU
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Night Spring View Post
An iPad mini with a retina screen would require HIGHER pixel density than iPad 3/4, because it'll need the same number of pixels as iPad 3/4 squeezed into a smaller space. So a retina iPad mini would probably cost MORE than a regular sized iPad.
I know that. Any idiot should know that. The R&D related to it alone...

I wouldve just released a mini with retina display at the $500 price point of the regular. I honestly think people wouldve bought it anyway...i know I wouldve. Size is the issue for me and I wouldve bought a retina display iPad mini at the same price as the regular iPad with retina display.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
No problem.

Btw, the rest of the business world sees this as well. If you stopped your Apple fanboyism and actually see what is going on, you would realize that yourself. Btw, I own many Apple products and love them. But can be honest and see that Apple has lost the innovation it once had.

Even this article by Forbes mentions how Apple has lost the innovation they had when under Steve Jobs and now Apple has resolved to fighting in court rather through innovation. Tim Cook is a lame duck imo.
Id say its too soon to tell. Steve Jobs was only as good as the people under him. You are giving him way too much credit. The iPad mini was already on the radar back in 2010. While steve jobs famously panned the idea, he's reversed original positions on more than one occasion and notably on iOS's biggest selling point...the apps. The market is trying to drive down the shares artificially so they can pick them back up later at a cheaper price.
AdonisSMU is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 12:36 PM   #18
53x12
macrumors 68000
 
53x12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy-V View Post
They can't really innovate on the price of 3rd party components. No way could apple have offered a retina iPad mini at that price today and still keep their profit margins. That would be some magical stuff.

Sure they could. Part of the reason is that Apple controls the world wide market for these parts by their purchasing power.

Everyone said when the iPad 3 was released. There was no way Apple could put in a better camera for the same price. No way Apple could put in a faster CPU for the same price....etc. So which is it?
53x12 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 12:39 PM   #19
AdonisSMU
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Night Spring View Post
Making a bigger screen is harder. The bigger the screen, the more chance there is that you get a defect somewhere.
Im going to disagree because pixels are pixels cramming 2k pixels into a smaller screen is no easy task...I would imagine. If I were apple I wouldve done a similar approach to the iPhone and made the screen retina for a 7.9inch display and then just did the iPhone treatment for the iPad 2 apps but maybe apple tested that and didnt like the experience. So this was the next best thing.

Either way i wouldve paid $500 bucks for an iPad mini with retina display.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
Sure they could. Part of the reason is that Apple controls the world wide market for these parts by their purchasing power.

Everyone said when the iPad 3 was released. There was no way Apple could put in a better camera for the same price. No way Apple could put in a faster CPU for the same price....etc. So which is it?
You are not factoring in time. That may have been true at the time.
AdonisSMU is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 01:27 PM   #20
Night Spring
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post
Im going to disagree because pixels are pixels cramming 2k pixels into a smaller screen is no easy task...I would imagine. If I were apple I wouldve done a similar approach to the iPhone and made the screen retina for a 7.9inch display and then just did the iPhone treatment for the iPad 2 apps but maybe apple tested that and didnt like the experience. So this was the next best thing.

Either way i wouldve paid $500 bucks for an iPad mini with retina display.

Well, for instance, Apple could make a 7.9 screen with the same dpi as the 9.7 iPad, and that would be retina. However, that would result in a screen with a different resolution -- iPad is 2048x1536, and I don't feel like doing the math, but a 7.9 screen with the same dpi would be about 1800x1000 or whatever. So that would be another resolution app developers would have to code for. And iPhone apps can be pixel doubled on an iPad, because the iPad is more than double the pixels of an iPhone. But an iPad mini with the same dpi as the iPad would be some in-between size that isn't double anything, so no, you'd get horrible looking graphics.

The only way Apple can make a retina mini without ending up with yet another resolution app developers have to code for is to make a 7.9 screen with a 2048x1536 resolution, which means the mini screen will have a higher dpi than the iPad!

And you may be willing to pay more for the mini, but the average person is going to expect that a smaller device would cost less than a bigger one.
Night Spring is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 01:38 PM   #21
AdonisSMU
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Night Spring View Post
Well, for instance, Apple could make a 7.9 screen with the same dpi as the 9.7 iPad, and that would be retina. However, that would result in a screen with a different resolution -- iPad is 2048x1536, and I don't feel like doing the math, but a 7.9 screen with the same dpi would be about 1800x1000 or whatever. So that would be another resolution app developers would have to code for. And iPhone apps can be pixel doubled on an iPad, because the iPad is more than double the pixels of an iPhone. But an iPad mini with the same dpi as the iPad would be some in-between size that isn't double anything, so no, you'd get horrible looking graphics.

The only way Apple can make a retina mini without ending up with yet another resolution app developers have to code for is to make a 7.9 screen with a 2048x1536 resolution, which means the mini screen will have a higher dpi than the iPad!

And you may be willing to pay more for the mini, but the average person is going to expect that a smaller device would cost less than a bigger one.
But if size is your issue and not price? They cant just stay in the middle here? They shouldve just charged a higher price or offered people the option for a retina non retina device. The people who cared about portability cared about it more than they did price. Its better to make a high end product high end all the way through. Its such a lovely device for it not to have retina display. It really is disappointing for such a beautifully made hardware product.

What you have right now is a high end product thats not high end. I think they shouldve just made it high end all the way through. I suspect its because they were trying to hit a deadline for release. Its almost the perfect tablet product. I want a no holds barred premium tablet experience in this form factor. Its the sexiest device apple has ever released for Christ's sake.

Last edited by AdonisSMU; Nov 4, 2012 at 01:47 PM.
AdonisSMU is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 05:24 PM   #22
xofruitcake
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
deleted
xofruitcake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 06:15 PM   #23
fupresti
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
No problem.

Btw, the rest of the business world sees this as well. If you stopped your Apple fanboyism and actually see what is going on, you would realize that yourself. Btw, I own many Apple products and love them. But can be honest and see that Apple has lost the innovation it once had.

Even this article by Forbes mentions how Apple has lost the innovation they had when under Steve Jobs and now Apple has resolved to fighting in court rather through innovation. Tim Cook is a lame duck imo.
Apples iPhone business is worth more on its own than Microsoft.

Tim Cook is a lame duck? Considering Apple as it stands today wouldn't exist without his abilities? Sure buddy, tell me again what Fortune 500 company you are CEO of again?
__________________
13" Macbook Air
32GB "New iPad", 32 GB iPhone 5
TV 3
fupresti is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 06:22 PM   #24
Kendo
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by 53x12 View Post
No problem.

Btw, the rest of the business world sees this as well. If you stopped your Apple fanboyism and actually see what is going on, you would realize that yourself. Btw, I own many Apple products and love them. But can be honest and see that Apple has lost the innovation it once had.

Even this article by Forbes mentions how Apple has lost the innovation they had when under Steve Jobs and now Apple has resolved to fighting in court rather through innovation. Tim Cook is a lame duck imo.
You claim to have knowledge of the "business world" but don't realize it was Tim Cook's expertise in chain management that made Apple utilize a number of suppliers like Sharp, LG, Samsung instead of one supplier. His streamlining process saved Apple billions in efficiency not to mention not having to bend their butt for one supplier by having many suppliers they can go to if they were to get shafted by their main supplier.

You view Tim Cook through the eyes of an Apple fan (which is who Steve Jobs catered to) but not through the eyes of a businessman.

Quote:
At Apple, his first assignment was Senior Vice President for Worldwide Operations. According to CNN, he had a "mandate to clean up the atrocious state of Apple's manufacturing, distribution, and supply apparatus". Cook is credited with pulling Apple out of manufacturing by closing factories and warehouses around the world. This helped the company reduce inventory levels and streamline its supply chain to match the efficiency of Dell Inc., dramatically increasing margins.

These initiatives have proven key to Apple's success of being to unveil next-generation products, keeping them secret until they are ready for distribution to retail, forecasting demand and executing against that forecast. Cook has been quoted as saying "You kind of want to manage it like you're in the dairy business. If it gets past its freshness date, you have a problem". In January 2007, Cook was promoted to COO.
Kendo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2012, 06:34 PM   #25
kas23
macrumors 603
 
kas23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
I would buy it for the same price as an iPad 4 if it had a Retina. No doubt. But I don't think I'm the demographic Apple is targeting for the mini. They needed a device that would not only compete with the other 7 inchers, but a device that would target kids on grade school. Something tells me Apple wasn't targeting adults with this device.
kas23 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
Price Advice: Best price for a Retina iPad mini? iamMacPerson Buying Tips and Advice 1 Apr 21, 2014 11:09 AM
All iPads: Black Friday is making the iPad Mini Retina essentially the same price as ipad air FrozenDarkness iPad 26 Nov 24, 2013 11:06 AM
Resolved: I'm Going to Sell Retina MacBook Pro and Live on Retina iPad Mini, BUT I NEED........ HappyDude20 iPad 40 Sep 2, 2013 02:09 AM
iPad Mini: iPad Mini Retina Price? iSimpsons iPad 13 Jul 28, 2013 01:31 AM
All iPads: Over/Under: In 2 years iPad mini will sell more than regular iPads saintforlife iPad 4 Nov 8, 2012 06:19 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46 PM.

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

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