iPad mini Why can't a Retina mini sell for same price as a regular iPad?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by Kendo, Nov 3, 2012.

  1. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    #1
    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.
     
  2. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    #2
    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.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    #3
    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.
     
  4. macrumors G4

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #4
    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.
     
  5. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    #5
    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).
     
  6. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    #6
    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.
     
  7. macrumors 68000

    53x12

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    #7

    And their innovation has been slowing down as well. Not sure Tim Cook has what it takes to guide Apple forward.
     
  8. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #8
    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.
     
  9. 53x12, Nov 3, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012

    macrumors 68000

    53x12

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    #9


    $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.
     
  10. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    #10
    Always consider the source (i.e. armchair experts in this case -- on both sides of the matter).
     
  11. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    #11
    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.
     
  12. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2011
    #12
    iPhone 4,4s,5 have more ppi than 9.7 ipad, why can't on mini
     
  13. macrumors G4

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #13
    Making a bigger screen is harder. The bigger the screen, the more chance there is that you get a defect somewhere.
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #14
    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!
     
  15. macrumors 68000

    53x12

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    #15
    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.


     
  16. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #16
    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.
     
  17. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #17
    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.

    ----------

    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.
     
  18. macrumors 68000

    53x12

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    #18

    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?
     
  19. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #19
    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.

    ----------

    You are not factoring in time. That may have been true at the time.
     
  20. macrumors G4

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #20

    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.
     
  21. AdonisSMU, Nov 4, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012

    macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #21
    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.
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2012
  23. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #23
    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?
     
  24. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    #24
    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.

     
  25. macrumors 603

    kas23

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    #25
    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.
     

Share This Page