128GB iPad3 - Would you pay $150 more?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by Piggie, Jun 4, 2011.

  1. Piggie macrumors 604


    Feb 23, 2010
    Simple question really:

    Would you pay another $150 (plus sales tax of course) for a 128GB iPad3 over a 64GB iPad3 ?

    Given that the price difference between the 32 and 64 models is $80. So thats $80 for a 32GB difference ($160 for 64GB) but prices come down a bit as capacity goes up generally.

    So, realistically a nice round number of an extra $150 would probably be around what you would expect, ish.

    So would you? Is another 64GB of movie, and music storage worth $150 more?

    And I suppose also, do you think Apple will up the RAM on the next model?
  2. Nishi100 macrumors 6502a

    Mar 27, 2010
  3. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604


    Feb 23, 2010
    Just to add, given the choice I'd select the 1TB model. But I don't think Apple would offer this on the iPad3 :D
  4. Built macrumors 68020

    Oct 3, 2007
    Los Angeles
    Absolutely. I would love an additional 64GB of storage. While the advent of wireless storage (like the new Seagate) is great, you can't use it everywhere, i.e. on a commmercial airliner. I could definitely use the storage.

    Sure, I can only watch so many movies even on the longest flight, but I like to have a choice...depending on my mood.
  5. UngratefulNinja macrumors 68000


    May 9, 2009
    Nope. I could prob even make do with an 8 gb. I'm a compulsive deleter :D
  6. Mlrollin91 macrumors G5


    Nov 20, 2008
    Ventura County
    Difference is $100 between models, so 128GB could be either $100 or $200 plus tax, depending on how you think Apple would play it.
  7. erayser macrumors 65816


    Apr 9, 2011
    San Diego
  8. bruinsrme macrumors 603


    Oct 26, 2008
    How about this, 128G for the price of the 64G, 64G for the price of the 32G and so on.
  9. aneftp macrumors 601

    Jul 28, 2007
    At close to $1000 for iPad 3 with 128gb memory, Apple realizes the base 11 inch MacBook Air at $999 would look more attractive to some customers.

    Apple tries hard not to cannibalize their own products with pricing.
  10. iLucas macrumors 6502

    Feb 5, 2011
    I would...if I needed that much storage.
    I currently have a 64GB iPad and its not close to being full so i don't know that i'd ever use 128.
  11. Sydde macrumors 68020


    Aug 17, 2009
    I would pay $150.us over the price of a 32gb for 32 + a usable SD card slot. I want unlimited storage. Of course, Apple's solution to capacity limits lies elsewhere
  12. shenfrey macrumors 68000

    May 23, 2010
    I barely use 16GB as it is I have trouble filling it, I can't comprehend people who want 128GB lol. Store all your movies on? Pfft, most of us just swap and change anyway

    Sent from my iPad 2 using Tapatalk
  13. wordoflife macrumors 604


    Jul 6, 2009
    I would never spend upwards of $1000 on an iPad. It's not like I can't, but there's just other things I'd rather buy and do if I paid $500 for one. With Airplay, I could live with less space.
  14. Domino8282 macrumors 6502a


    Apr 22, 2010
    Southeast USA
    With a multitude of apps for video streaming and iCloud coming soon, I can't foresee needing more than 32-64 GB in the near future.
  15. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Feb 4, 2008
    No, because I can almost assure you that a 128GB iPad 3 would either cost $699 or not exist.

    I'm not sure where you're getting these $80 and $150 numbers. Apple doesn't charge based on per-gigabyte costs. The company has always loved to make numbers nice and round instead of doing some funky math on those costs. It's been pretty much the same for iPods, iPhones and iPads. Just look at the 16GB vs. 32GB vs. 64GB iPad. $100 for each, but a 16GB bump on one and 32GB bump on the next.
  16. Funkymonk macrumors 6502a


    Jan 7, 2011
  17. tkadrum macrumors member

    Mar 8, 2011
    No! I have 64gb, and still have 47gb available. I have 10cds, 4 movies and tons of apps. So no!
  18. Piggie thread starter macrumors 604


    Feb 23, 2010
    Guess I should put my feeling on this as I asked :)

    If it's not overpriced, and I know we are talking about Apple memory prices here and I don't have to explain myself there ;)

    Then I would like as much local memory storage as possible.
    I could right now more than fill up almost Two 64GB iPad with just my mp3's alone.

    I don't consider I have many films compared to many but again, I could fill up about Ten 64GB iPads with my film collection alone.

    And that's without any Apps or Photo's or personal data.

    About a 1TB iPad would suit me fine, and I'd know I had everything with me.

    But this is not going to happen is it? Perhaps in 10 or even 20 years memory will be so large that 1TB, like 1GB now will just be considered small?

    Given that we are living in today, and not in the future, then what are the options?


    Well, that's not going to be any good is it. How long to upload 1TB or more of data and how much will is cost to get Apple to hold onto this data for me?

    So I'd see iCloud as a non starter personally for anything serious, as opposed to streaming a few iTunes music and movie files.

    So that only really leaves home storage / NAS and access the data from such a device from my iPad.

    However, then we need all Apple's apps to be aware of off-line NAS storage, so when you open up music/video/photo etc etc apps, your NAS drive pops up as standard allowing you to load the data from it.

    And that is not the case right now.

    Methinks Apple has a lot of work to do on this front.

    Building in remote data access, say from a home NAS device in as standard, would be a good start.
  19. Rikithemonk macrumors newbie

    Jun 5, 2011
    No. The iPad is bordering on too expensive as it is. I'm saying this as a avid iPad 1 user. Because of the prices, I'm holding off on the iPad 2 and am waiting for an iPad 3 before upgrading. I just can't afford it.
  20. dukeblue91 macrumors 65816


    Oct 7, 2004
    Raleigh, NC
    I'm going to say no on buying more room as I now have the 32gb and still have plenty of room.
    Could I fill it up, sure I could but I don't but any songs on my iPad and only the movies and shows I want to watch when I travel.
    I use my iPhone as my iPod so to speak.

    As far as more ram in the iPad I say yes as I'm expecting 1 gig of ram in the iPad 3.
    That's actually the main reason I held of on buying the iPad 2 because of the ram.
  21. EssentialParado macrumors 65816

    Feb 17, 2005
    Makes no sense. Aside from the fact that the iPad is a different product from a laptop, how would it be hurting Apple for someone to choose a MacBook Air over an iPad?

    The opposite of what you said is actually true—Apple try very hard to encourage customers to buy the more expensive models. They have staged pricing, so it only costs $50-100 extra to get the next model up.

    Who's forcing you to buy the more expensive 128GB version? I don't think the poster is suggesting Apple ditch the $499 model.
  22. REM314 macrumors 6502


    Jun 1, 2009
    I'd rather Apple just gave us removable memory but ahahahhaha we all know that won't happen.
  23. 3goldens macrumors 68000


    Feb 26, 2008
  24. zhenya macrumors 603


    Jan 6, 2005
    First, Apple's flash memory prices on the iPad are extremely competitive. Just because you can buy some piece of junk SD card for $40 doesn't mean it compares in any way other than capacity to what Apple uses.

    Second, I used to be like you, thinking I needed to have everything with me on all devices all the time. Now, I realize that I always have 98% of what I actually listen to on my iPhone, and that Zumocast works really freaking well for giving me access to my video library. If I happen to be offline and not have access to my movies - I do something else...

    Apples cloud offering will not likely require you to manually upload all of your content, so that arguments out. Lastly, a centralized cloud system for distributing media makes sense, because right now it is ridiculously inefficient for everyone to have to keep their own copies of content, back it up, and pay for all the electricity that system requires. Move your content to the cloud, and I bet you save on electricity in the first year what you pay in subscription fees.

    There is no telling if Apple will turn out to be the primary player in this market, but the fact that they are actually working with the content creators rather than going renegade means there is a good chance they will. Mark my words that this is going to be how people access content in the future.
  25. jmpnop macrumors 6502a


    Aug 8, 2010
    I'm sure Apple would charge $200 more;)

    I too would like to see 8GB iPad:D


    Agree with this, $1000 for a tablet is too expensive. A good Windows laptop or Mac can be got for that price.

Share This Page