Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Open to iPad Price Cuts if Demand Lags?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They should kill the 16gb model and sell the 32Gb for $499.
I mean 16gb on that? that's like putting 4gb on a iPhone
It all depends on what you use it for. I'm "planning" to get one as a portable web device. I don't need 32GB and I probably won't use 16GB. I have the 32GB 3GS and I only use 14GB. I have 5 pages of apps and most of them are just occupying screen space.
Can you point specifically to where they've said this? I recall that prior to the unveiling there was a rumour that it was intended as a multi-user device, but I don't remember anything in the keynote or on Apple's site that suggests this.
I think the notion that this is a personal device is correct -- it is an appliance for an individual.
You must not have a Kindle if you think the iPad is basically a "Kindle competitor". If anything, Amazon will completely have to re-think their entire Kindle plan. And the pricing starts at $10 more than the Kindle DX.
I'd go out on a limb and say the touchscreen web surfing experience will be the only "killer app" that is needed to sell a ton of these things initially.
Isn't the 3G version launching close to the iPhone update? Late April or early May iPad 3G and the 4th gen iPhone in June-ish right?
I had already thought about a price cut depending on how well it sells or how AT&T might try and lure in customers for the 3G version... but the pre-pay data deal just seems like that shoots the idea outta the water.
I still want one but I'll see how sales and pricing play against each other.
I had already thought about a price cut depending on how well it sells or how AT&T might try and lure in customers for the 3G version... but the pre-pay data deal just seems like that shoots the idea outta the water.
I still want one but I'll see how sales and pricing play against each other.
iPad Camera Kit. If the purpose is to move content on a SDHC card to the iPad that is there. Yeah costs more and sticks out the side but if absolutely required, can be done.
If SD slot so can more content off the iPad or as an "expansion" slot? Then no, Apple doesn't really agree with you. Expansion slots aren't targeted at this (or the iPod) product line up.
Because Apple gets Flash for free.
Look all the other Touch/Phone models have this $100 difference pricing. Why would you expect it to be different on the iPad? Similarly, why would you think it was ineffective at being a product price point when those other two don't seem to have a major problem using exactly the same tactic ?
Once the teardowns appear on the web, I suspect you will find that the iPads mothboard is much more similar in size to the iPhone/Touch than it is to the any of Apple's other products. One reason there are these $100 jumps between flash prices is because it is Flash at 2-3 different levels of technology (e..g, 60nm vs. 45 nm ) and bit densities. In short do it with one chip solutions in order to absolutely minimize space and power consumption. If you used 2-3 year old chips and multiple chip solutions could cut costs. However, at that point have increased power and take up more space. Battery, weight, and space are all at a premium on the iPad.
In a related track. If can stream off apple TV and/or other devices to this device than don't need to keep you WHOLE ENTIRE library of content on it. 2-3 movies is plenty for a trip and if not huge HD encoding there will be room.
With random devices typically come random drivers. That typically leads to decreased stability. Same argument as being used against Flash. "Less stability so we dumped it".
Additionally will have yet another hole to plug into the device's case. Also looses the "no correct orientation" as soon as have stuff dangling on the outside. [ yes also does as docked, but docked isn't intended to be the default mode for the iPad. If buy an iPad and 90% usage is as docked .... increasingly likely you bought the wrong device. ]
Ehhhhh. 16:9 isn't so hot in portrait mode. Again, the no correct orientation will diminish. The balance is going to be bit more uneven when changing orientation also.
I don't think movie mode is a top 3 driver of the design. Besides put some black bars up and scale you still have a viewable image. (likewise spinning DVDs not in top 3 either. )
However, i suspect more so is that probably have an issue with getting someone to build IPS panels they would want in what is probably a low run rate configuration. Once there are "millions" of iPads they will have a better argument. Also wouldn't be surprised if they have this panel somewhat speced for a long time. The rumors were that this has been in gestation for a very long time.
Technically yes. But pragmatically, no. Buying special standalone GPS chips that do not use in other product lines will only help drive UP costs not push them down. Combo radios ( GPS + 3G , Wifi + Bluetooth ) are where it is at on devices like this with limited space. If someone had a GPS + Wifi + Bluetooth offering maybe that would fly, but not sure any of Apple's usual suspects do.
What Apple does to keep up margins and reduce complexity is use components across product lines. Expecting different will often result in mismatch expectations.
If your approach to computers is "more holes for more gadgets" equates with higher value ... You are going to have problems with Apple's approach to design. Don't hold your breath.
Yep smart move!
Better yet don't even order at all. Instead send Steveo a note listing your three objections and why the price isn't reasonable. One of those should focus on the paltry flash memory installed.
Flood Apple with E-Mails and a corresponding lack of orders and maybe they will wake up. Notably the installed flash is one if the few things that they can address at this point hardware wise. That is why it is worth focusing on.
As to pricing Apple could easily drop $50 off the base model and a $100 off the top end model. The only thing that I see as reasonable is the up charge for the 3G and GPS capability, that only because of additional IP and licensing charges.
By the way I like iPad as an idea. It is the implementation that is bothersome and the lack or expense of the flash. I can put up with a few details implementation wise but the lack of flash just has me bummed out.
Take the base model as an example. Load a good mapping program, a couple if other apps some pics and the next thing you know you are short flash with less than 10 GB. That isn't enough for even one TV show season from iTunes. If you have a bit of data or other media installed you are out of luck. I just can't fathom why Apple was so stupid here, it is not like the flash costs that much.
Everyone! Cancel your orders!
Better yet don't even order at all. Instead send Steveo a note listing your three objections and why the price isn't reasonable. One of those should focus on the paltry flash memory installed.
Flood Apple with E-Mails and a corresponding lack of orders and maybe they will wake up. Notably the installed flash is one if the few things that they can address at this point hardware wise. That is why it is worth focusing on.
As to pricing Apple could easily drop $50 off the base model and a $100 off the top end model. The only thing that I see as reasonable is the up charge for the 3G and GPS capability, that only because of additional IP and licensing charges.
By the way I like iPad as an idea. It is the implementation that is bothersome and the lack or expense of the flash. I can put up with a few details implementation wise but the lack of flash just has me bummed out.
Take the base model as an example. Load a good mapping program, a couple if other apps some pics and the next thing you know you are short flash with less than 10 GB. That isn't enough for even one TV show season from iTunes. If you have a bit of data or other media installed you are out of luck. I just can't fathom why Apple was so stupid here, it is not like the flash costs that much.
I just meant it is more of a fixed purpose entertainment device than a general computing device. But as you point out, the Kindle is the device most threaten by the iPad.
Sure. Mobile web surfing was the "killer app" that actually sold the original iPhone, but the experience wasn't as great in practice as in concept. The experience on the iPad needs to be a lot better because, unlike the phone and mp3 utility of the iPhone, there isn't much other purpose for having one of these right now.
iPad price is fine - it's the spec thats been crippled
$499 is great price - but the pad needs the camera put in before release. SD loading with the adaptor is a pain but can be done. The form factor and envelope isn't going to get a change anytime soon. So spec changes will be internal - ie camera and memory.
$499 is great price - but the pad needs the camera put in before release. SD loading with the adaptor is a pain but can be done. The form factor and envelope isn't going to get a change anytime soon. So spec changes will be internal - ie camera and memory.
Actual Cost
I've read that the actual cost of the $499 iPad is somewhere around $270. Apple could definitely drop the price if they had to considering most of its components are similar to, or the same as, 2 of their other devices (the iPod Touch and the iPhone). The chip is new and the size of the device is bigger, but the camera was nixed to cut costs and create a reason for cosumers to re-buy the product next year after AT&T's exclusivity contract expires.
I've read that the actual cost of the $499 iPad is somewhere around $270. Apple could definitely drop the price if they had to considering most of its components are similar to, or the same as, 2 of their other devices (the iPod Touch and the iPhone). The chip is new and the size of the device is bigger, but the camera was nixed to cut costs and create a reason for cosumers to re-buy the product next year after AT&T's exclusivity contract expires.
Analysts agree that the actual manufacturing cost of the basic iPad is below $300. Of course, there are overheads, just as development, logistics, marketing and all the usual costs, but it is also true that Apple and similar companies have very good deals on parts. In many occasions, they even order more parts just to secure manufacturing capacity and supply (and to hurt their competitors with shortage of certain parts).
Anyway, Computerworld put Apple's margin between around 40 and 55 percent. (A previous post also included something like this, maybe it was exactly the same article.)
http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti..._on_each_499_iPad?taxonomyId=163&pageNumber=1
I think there will be a lot of people that aren't trying to put tons of content on their iPads. I can think of several that I know that are planning to use it as mostly a wifi email/browser, and that's really all. The base model will be more than enough for them.
I don't think Apple is expecting people to carry their entire iTunes library (or even a large chunk of it) around with them on an iPad. They still expect you to constantly sync with a main computer. I wish they'd get away from that though.
1. 3G is an OPTION
2. Apple won't even ship 3G until well over a month after the non 3G ones come out.
3. Probably well less than 1/2 of the iPads sold will be 3G (my guess).
This is a device that's probably going to spend the overwhelming majority of its time in the home, accessible by multiple users, with the occasional foray to the local Starbucks or library (which have wifi access anyways, so again, who needs 3G?).
If Apple made the device more powerful people would probably take it on vacations too, but without an SD card slot reader so I can easily offload my photos to it (without a dongle), no flash, no video chat, etc, I see limited use for it on family holidays.
That incredibly "cheap" price is for a mere 16GB version. It's the famous "starting at only" price. Maybe they can come out with a no-memory version for 100u$$ less!
For this kind of device a minimum acceptable is 32GB. To do the advertised; consuming media (movies,songs and books), 16GB is a joke.
I think a lot of people are considering what they would like to have on a laptop, and overlooking the fact that this device doesn't have the same exact uses. A lot of audio and video will be streamed to this device (from the internet, and from other computers in the home) so it won't need to be stored locally. 16GB is going to be plenty for a lot of people, just like the bottom of the line iPod Touch (8GB?) is plenty for my kids.
Flash is in no way 'half the content on major sites', unless your definition of 'major sites' is porn. I've been using Flash-blockers and the improvement in my browsing experience has increased dramatically.
As for the camera, the camera's view from the iPad's normal use position (the lap) will be directly up your nostrils. Spare me any video conferencing from such a hacked up concept.
Geeks dramatically overestimate the degree to which people want to see them while talking.
I Hope There's More to iPad
Price cuts won't be THE motivating factor for me to purchase an iPad. It's all about features/capabilities first. My thoughts on iPad so far are as follow:
1) Storage - 64GB is not enough storage. I will only purchase an iPad if there is a 128 GB option.
2) Printing - iPhone OS must allow me to wirelessly print to a network printer from an iPad. No printing capabilities, no deal.
3) USB port - Requiring adapters/dongles?? No thanks, Apple. There should be one USB port on iPad. I would like to plug my digital camera camera directly into the iPad via USB. I also wish to swap files with colleagues via a USB flash drive. A SD Card slot would also be a plus. I'm not interested in having to sync with Mac/PC or use email to swap files, and to also have to deal with dongles.
4) iTunes Media Streaming - iPad must be able to stream audio, video, and photos FROM a Mac/PC running iTunes, or FROM an Apple TV on the network.
5) iTunes Home Sharing - iTunes Home Sharing/syncing must work with ALL playlists, not just Purchased items.
6) Webcam - A front-facing camera must be included. No front-facing webcam, no deal. A second 5 megapixel camera with LED flash for taking pictures is debatable, perhaps only on the higher end 3G model iPad.
7) Adobe Flash Support - Hmmmmmm. Still thinking about this one. I use Click2Flash on my MacBook Pro, however there ARE times when I access Flash content, mostly video. I'm also concerned that some Educational / E-Learning content may not be accessible due to the lack Flash support.
8) Multitasking - Multitasking and background process support is a MUST. Push Notifications is not a substitute. Saying that Netbooks are no good for anything won't make it true, Steve. I guess Apple and best buddy AT&T don't want incoming VOIP calls to be handled seamlessly.
9) Price - Price is not the major deciding factor as software/hardware specs matter more to me. The $130 uptick for 3G/GPS/Compass is a little suspect, however.
I will obviously reserve my final judgement when iPad finally ships in a few months. I have no problem skipping iPad v1.0 and waiting for iPad v2.0. That's a first for me, LOL, but I was completely underwhelmed by Steve's iPad keynote. My friends/colleagues and I hope there are a few more surprises that have yet to be announced, otherwise we're just not interested this time.
Cheers,
ITGuy
Price cuts won't be THE motivating factor for me to purchase an iPad. It's all about features/capabilities first. My thoughts on iPad so far are as follow:
1) Storage - 64GB is not enough storage. I will only purchase an iPad if there is a 128 GB option.
2) Printing - iPhone OS must allow me to wirelessly print to a network printer from an iPad. No printing capabilities, no deal.
3) USB port - Requiring adapters/dongles?? No thanks, Apple. There should be one USB port on iPad. I would like to plug my digital camera camera directly into the iPad via USB. I also wish to swap files with colleagues via a USB flash drive. A SD Card slot would also be a plus. I'm not interested in having to sync with Mac/PC or use email to swap files, and to also have to deal with dongles.
4) iTunes Media Streaming - iPad must be able to stream audio, video, and photos FROM a Mac/PC running iTunes, or FROM an Apple TV on the network.
5) iTunes Home Sharing - iTunes Home Sharing/syncing must work with ALL playlists, not just Purchased items.
6) Webcam - A front-facing camera must be included. No front-facing webcam, no deal. A second 5 megapixel camera with LED flash for taking pictures is debatable, perhaps only on the higher end 3G model iPad.
7) Adobe Flash Support - Hmmmmmm. Still thinking about this one. I use Click2Flash on my MacBook Pro, however there ARE times when I access Flash content, mostly video. I'm also concerned that some Educational / E-Learning content may not be accessible due to the lack Flash support.
8) Multitasking - Multitasking and background process support is a MUST. Push Notifications is not a substitute. Saying that Netbooks are no good for anything won't make it true, Steve. I guess Apple and best buddy AT&T don't want incoming VOIP calls to be handled seamlessly.
9) Price - Price is not the major deciding factor as software/hardware specs matter more to me. The $130 uptick for 3G/GPS/Compass is a little suspect, however.
I will obviously reserve my final judgement when iPad finally ships in a few months. I have no problem skipping iPad v1.0 and waiting for iPad v2.0. That's a first for me, LOL, but I was completely underwhelmed by Steve's iPad keynote. My friends/colleagues and I hope there are a few more surprises that have yet to be announced, otherwise we're just not interested this time.
Cheers,
ITGuy
Streaming? Maybe on wifi. But not with 3G. Not in the US... Not with AT&T.
If your kids have a few albums in their collection and a film. Or maybe two. Will that thing run some Torrent app? There are some TV shows that are around a gigabyte, maybe a few of those. But nothing enjoyable in terms of quality. 16 GB is really, really bad for a media device. I have an iPhone 3G with 8 GB and I stopped listening to music with it. A few apps, a few podcasts, a few little home video on Cycorder (400 Mb at the most), an audiobook and that's it - no room for music.
I think you are reading into Apple's presentation what you want. Not what they said.
If you don't think this is meant primarily to be a mobile device, I think you are grossly missing the point. You will take this device with you most places you go. Maybe not into the bathroom at a truckstop, but it is meant to move with you.
The device weighs HALF as much as a MacBook Air!!! The MacBook Air is targeted as a communal usage device?
It runs 10 hours on battery!!!! A month of standby time!!!! Those are key features of a device that hardly ever goes 15ft from its docking station or 6ft from the closest plug? Really?
The keynotes targets usages are (about 7 mins in.)
Browsing
Photos ( this is only point where mentioned 'sharing' )
Video
Music
Games
eBooks
How many folks are going to do those where consume the above content in a communal set up?
iPhoto "shares" pictures how? On a Mac OS X machine everyone has their own folder as far as store goes. Folks can share in the since of gather people around the screen. Can gather around the screen on a iPad too.
Likewise on books , video , music. Gather around and shared viewing/consumption more so that share files.
Music ... looks at all of the "Home Sharing" capabilities Apple has recently rolled into iTunes. So multiple computers in the household can "share" content (or more so locally duplicate content. ). Will be relatively straight forward to extent that to Video and iPhoneOS Apps content too. However, note you are sharing copies in the mobile/detached mode ... not the same exact file.
It has a "standard" iPhone/Touch docking connector. So the canonical backup target is a computer. (Likewise built in synch capabilities ).
With this specific product release; no. Not everyone (at least at these current prices ). Just enough so that don't have contention problems. But yes, when this product (and the Touch/iPhone lines) fully matures 4-5 years from now, I think the vision really is that most of the market Apple wants to sell into has one of these devices. That's is where Apple is going. There will be, at that point, a smaller segment of folks who are still hooked to Windows and MacOS X devices, but they'll flip to being the minority.
Relatively large to what? A Touch yes. However, to wide swaths of laptops it is much smaller, lighter, and more affordable than many of them. On wider swaths the iPad is better on at least one of those. Even more true when compared to Apple's laptop line up. At that point it is less/better on each of those quality than any of them. Blatantly, true when compared to their non-laptops when comparing complete systems including display.
The iPad is between the Touch/Phone and the Mac OS X devices. All the presentation material promotes that point. That's is the point... to be the middle compromise. Better at several things than the "smaller device". product line and not quite as robust/"all encompassing" as the "larger device" product line. Everything comes as a compromise for some capabilities. No device does everything.
Apple is losing sales right now because they do not have a product between the Touch/Macbook. It is extremely unlikely that they will loose more sales when they fill that gap.
Obvious Apple isn't going to approve a torrent app for the iPad. 16GB will be fine for some. I lived w/ an 8GB iPhone for two years after using a 80GB iPod with no prob. You learn to manage content.
You only have so much time to use the device in a day, and can't view every movie you own, or listen to every album. An hour long TV show, properly optimized and downrezzed, is about 500MB. You could easily put a movie, a couple TV shows, 1000 songs, and a couple dozen apps with room to spare on a 16GB iPad.
I'm not sure you grasped what was said or understand the electronics marketplace.
In any event back to the camera support. Hasn't it always been a feature of the Touch hardware to make viewing pics simple? A built in SD slot just makes this iPad even more useful in that respect.
Oh and by the way, no Apple doesn't get it's flash for free, any idiot knows that. What they do get is the best pricing in the industry. Further even at consummer retail the 16 to 32Gb upcharge is a huge joke. At the entry level though the included flash is hardly enough to deliver the promises of the machine.
I'd love to hear that the reason the flash is so expensive is that they have implemented highly durable SLC tech but the reality is likely to be Cheap MLC tech. As such we are likely seeing a 10X markup.
You have made an assumption based apparently on a narrow view of what the usage pattern will be. But let me give you a hint, it is a computer as such flexible to the will of the user. That is if there is enough flash storage.
Which by the way is likely what they are doing with the Camera kit. At this point I suspect that there is a USB host port now on the dock connector. So it is most likely Apple is 99% of the way there as is.
Well obviously I never said that so thanks for filling my mouth with words I never said. First my number one complaint is the lack of Flash storage. That is a huge problem.
Second I'd like to see a real USB port as opposed to a funky Dock dongle. This shouldn't be a huge issue and directly takes care of a lot of different user needs. Frankly it makes more sense than putting in a hole for a camera.
Dace
Which makes it totally unacceptable, that is a dongle to plug in what is in effect a dongle.
Well first I was actually thinking camera or pic transfer but data transfer or storage isn't a bad idea either. It just opens up the tablet to more apps than can be supported without.
In any event back to the camera support. Hasn't it always been a feature of the Touch hardware to make viewing pics simple? A built in SD slot just makes this iPad even more useful in that respect.
It isn't the price point but the AMOUNT of flash available at each price point that is the problem. 16GB is far to little even fir a base model device. There is no rational arguement to support Apple being stingy here.Because Apple gets Flash for free.
Look all the other Touch/Phone models have this $100 difference pricing. Why would you expect it to be different on the iPad? Similarly, why would you think it was ineffective at being a product price point when those other two don't seem to have a major problem using exactly the same tactic ?
Oh and by the way, no Apple doesn't get it's flash for free, any idiot knows that. What they do get is the best pricing in the industry. Further even at consummer retail the 16 to 32Gb upcharge is a huge joke. At the entry level though the included flash is hardly enough to deliver the promises of the machine.
I'd love to hear that the reason the flash is so expensive is that they have implemented highly durable SLC tech but the reality is likely to be Cheap MLC tech. As such we are likely seeing a 10X markup.
This I agree with to an extent.
Nope, not at all. To get the densities in a storage models chips of 8 or 16GB are stacked on top of each other in sort of a multichip module. They would all be of the same process. A 32GB module would have 2-16GB or 4-8Gb wafers bonded together in one flash storage module. The economics might dictate the use of multiple modules with the modules containing multiple wafers.
True but the device is much larger and should easily support more flash devices. Plus a much bigger battery is a given. Apple simply has to balance the number of flash sites on the motherboard against other factors.
You are assuming everybody has the same needs as you. Take a long trip in a boat far from shore and your needs change rapidly. Look at a few videos that are part of a class or training session and say you know for sure that you don't need to refer back to them. Same thing for students books, just because last quarter passed doesn't mean all the material is no longer viable.
You have made an assumption based apparently on a narrow view of what the usage pattern will be. But let me give you a hint, it is a computer as such flexible to the will of the user. That is if there is enough flash storage.
While this is true to an extent it is no where near the problem that Flash is. Besides who says Apple needs to deliver all the drivers, they never have for Bluetooth. I'd be happy with camera, mass storage and web cam support.
Which by the way is likely what they are doing with the Camera kit. At this point I suspect that there is a USB host port now on the dock connector. So it is most likely Apple is 99% of the way there as is.
Ok but who cares? We ould likely only have a camera plugged in long enogh to upload the Picts. If it is a we'd cam it would be attached only slightly longer. The idea here isn't to solder the camera (or whatever) to the device, but to have it connected sporadically just like is common now.
Using that sort of logic Apple should have went square. Sort of like Hassey users but how many square portraits do you see these days. In anyevent a wider screen is more conducive to human vision than the square. Not to mention that hollywood left the square years ago.
Well yeah and the old black and white films of the twenties where viewable. I want more than viewable, I want a high quality screen that is atleast HD video wide.
Except that this screen is being produced specifically for Apple.
Last I knew they where using a separate GPS radio that was not comboed with anything.
Oh gee I'm so displeased that my expectations are beyound Apple. Not to mention you seem to have put the GPS chip functionality into another.
Well obviously I never said that so thanks for filling my mouth with words I never said. First my number one complaint is the lack of Flash storage. That is a huge problem.
Second I'd like to see a real USB port as opposed to a funky Dock dongle. This shouldn't be a huge issue and directly takes care of a lot of different user needs. Frankly it makes more sense than putting in a hole for a camera.
Dace