Bloomberg: iPad Mini Coming in October [Updated]

[Kevin777]

And how does this relate to a 13" tablet?

10" tablets (like my iPad) are fine, but too small for reading regular PDFs, or for browsing most magazines (both PDF or from services like Zinio). Hell, they are too small even for browsing the web comfortably.

7" tablets are useless (Steve Jobs said it). Too small for anything useful, on the market mainly because they are cheap.

Because unless they make it out of Apple Magic Metal & Apple Magic Glass, made from sand on Mars that makes it weigh 1/4th as much the current iPad, a 13" iPad will weigh even more and be even bulkier than the current iPad.

Count up all the postings by people who say that the current iPad is too heavy for long term practical use.

The Laptop example was a representation of how size correlates to weight, in most cases, and how people think they want something until they experience the reality of it.

Here's another example: People think they want windmills for electricity. They're beautiful (in the distance), and green, and make you feel oh-so-good that you are saving the world from filthy oil.

Then they experience the reality of electrical windmills: How they are 400+ foot tall monstrosities that make a constant, low frequency, whup-whup-whup sound, that they are filled with oil-based products to make them run, that there are huge numbers of environmental factors, etc. etc. etc.

Suddenly the reality is not living up to the perception....

Make your own 13" iPad: Find a way to increase the weight by about 1/3, and then try carrying that around. How much do you like it?

 

[Kevin777]

And how does this relate to a 13" tablet?

10" tablets (like my iPad) are fine, but too small for reading regular PDFs, or for browsing most magazines (both PDF or from services like Zinio). Hell, they are too small even for browsing the web comfortably.

7" tablets are useless (Steve Jobs said it). Too small for anything useful, on the market mainly because they are cheap.

"Steve Jobs said it".....Hmmmm

Maybe they'll discover a secret stash of "Dead Steve Scrolls" in Cupertino, in which he will have said that the 7" iPad is actually the perfection of creation and laid out the master plan for slipping in the 7" iPad Mini and taking over the 7" tablet market in an act of metaphoric ju-jitsu...

Would you then say that a 7" iPad is a glorious thing?

Because St. Steve said so?

Steve Jobs was famous for doing 180's on a daily basis. Just read the links on interviews with Tim Cook. If anything, he was crediting for having the strength to admit when he was wrong and move in another direction.

If St. Steve were alive today, he'd be telling us (showing us!) why the 7" iPad is the best in it's class, and laying out all the reasons it is so that we didn't realize before...

"Too small for anything useful" in your world..not in the worlds of millions of others...

 

[Kevin777]

Fortunately for you, I'm just expressing my opinion. As you said, to each his or her own. Just because I said what I said means I'm imposing my will on anybody.

But it does if it prevents other people from being able to experience Apple joy on a platform (7") that they are willing, and can afford, to buy...

And it doesn't answer the central question: How does the existence of a 7" iPad prevent you, in any way, from enjoying your 10" iPad?

It's not like they're going to REPLACE the 10" iPad with the 7" iPad....

An Apple SWAT team is not going to show up at your door and force you to give up your 10" iPad (...they only do that if you have one of their iPhone prototypes... )

 

[pipa]

Smaller iPad's. Bigger iPhones. I can't keep up with all this craziness. Lmao

 

[RQPS]

Perhaps they are just making a bigger iPhone.

 

[gnasher729]

I think Apple have several aces up their sleeves here:

• (Sir) Jonny Ive and the Apple design team.
• The ability & desire to sell premium products (in terms of the actual build quality).

But, I think the biggest one they have is in Tim Cook, as he is a supply chain & logistics guru.

The biggest one is that Apple, unlike Amazon, Google, and everyone else, doesn't have to undercut Apple on price in order to sell a tablet.

 

[moethebartender]

Didn't Apple learn their lesson in the early 90s by making too many products?


So they are making a smaller iPad, keeping the original iPad, making a bigger iPhone and keeping the older smaller iPhone along with have a iTouch the same size as a iPhone?

Which product is a consumer suppose to buy?? I don't get it.

IMO Apple didn't really make too many products in the 90s. They made a handful of Mac form factors and gave them a confusing, incoherent array of multiple names for the same product. For example, the same basic machine would be sold as a Performa for the home consumer, Quadra for the high-powered business user, LC for schools, and Centris for no one in particular. Their motley assortment of portable/consumer devices like the QuickTake didn't help, either. While innovative, they were poorly marketed and often didn't seem to have any discernible market.

And I don't see them going in the same direction today. There may be more than one iPad, but Apple doesn't badge engineer them into the "school iPad," "business iPad," etc. When a customer wants an iPad, she can simply choose how powerful an iPad she needs without puzzling over a confusing array of unfamiliar brand names. An "iPad mini" probably wouldn't confuse the consumer, since they'd be clearly perceived as a "small iPad" rather than a "big iPod touch."

 

[Kevin777]

Ahh the bi-annual 7 inch iPad rumor, pass the salt, i need a pinch to put with it.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just be sure to come back in October and tell us all how you think it's the greatest thing Apple has ever come out with....And how you bought two of them!

 

[Bezetos]

Can someone explain to me why people in this thread are afraid that they are going to have a choice between two different tablets? I know you need just one phone, one tablet, but come on... Choice is good.

 

[ader42]

I don't believe they'll bring out an iPad mini. Why? Because it will break Apple' Human Interface Guidelines if it has the same resolution as ipad2 but smaller physical size.

Apple repeatedly (including WWDC ADC 2012 videos ) state that buttons etc. should be a minimum of 44 pixels wide and high (ipad2) and 88 pixels wide and high (retina) to be usable with the size of people fingers.

Simply put, the buttons in the UI will be too small to be used effectively with an iPad 2 resolution at a smaller physical size, not just in Apple' own apps, but also in all the apps in the app store. That's if the OS & UI stays the same for iPad mini.

If there's one thing Apple cares about it's their users experience, they will not bring out an ipad mini that is not usable.

What we might see is the new iPhone being 1024 x 768... so it's not an iPad mini it's an iPhone maxi

 

[Rogifan]

Ahh the bi-annual 7 inch iPad rumor, pass the salt, i need a pinch to put with it.

Yeah whatever happened to the iPhone Nano?

 

[fertilized-egg]

I don't believe they'll bring out an iPad mini. Why? Because it will break Apple' Human Interface Guidelines if it has the same resolution as ipad2 but smaller physical size.

Apple repeatedly (including WWDC ADC 2012 videos ) state that buttons etc. should be a minimum of 44 pixels wide and high (ipad2) and 88 pixels wide and high (retina) to be usable with the size of people fingers.

Apple's HIG states 44 points, not pixels. Moreover, it's the same for both iPad and iPhone which means 44 points are smaller on iPhone but still follows the HIG.

 

[Rogifan]

Can someone explain to me why people in this thread are afraid that they are going to have a choice between two different tablets? I know you need just one phone, one tablet, but come on... Choice is good.

I'm not afraid of anything. I just don't buy this wall street meme that Apple will (or has to) sell a 7" device to compete with the Kindle Fire and Nexus7. There is zero evidence that Apple is getting burned from Kindle Fire sales. Heck, Amazon won't even reveal sales figures for the Fire. You'd think if it was such a big seller they'd want people to know about it.

Google just came out with the Nexus for $199 and now there's talk that Amazon will lower the price on the fire to $149. Google and Amazon are in a race to the bottom not caring if they make any profit on their devices. Andy Rubin said the profit margin on the Nexus is $0. That's not Apple's business model. So it's likely a 7" tablet from Apple would be priced $100 more than comparable tablets from Google and Amazon. Now maybe there's a ton of Apple fans who would pick up one of these in a heartbeat. But outside of that, for those people just looking for a cheaper tablet, what will entice them to spend $100 more on an Apple tablet? Especially if they're not already part of Apple's ecosystem?

 

[Kevin777]

I'm not afraid of anything. I just don't buy this wall street meme that Apple will (or has to) sell a 7" device to compete with the Kindle Fire and Nexus7. There is zero evidence that Apple is getting burned from Kindle Fire sales. Heck, Amazon won't even reveal sales figures for the Fire. You'd think if it was such a big seller they'd want people to know about it.

Google just came out with the Nexus for $199 and now there's talk that Amazon will lower the price on the fire to $149. Google and Amazon are in a race to the bottom not caring if they make any profit on their devices. Andy Rubin said the profit margin on the Nexus is $0. That's not Apple's business model. So it's likely a 7" tablet from Apple would be priced $100 more than comparable tablets from Google and Amazon. Now maybe there's a ton of Apple fans who would pick up one of these in a heartbeat. But outside of that, for those people just looking for a cheaper tablet, what will entice them to spend $100 more on an Apple tablet? Especially if they're not already part of Apple's ecosystem?

Because Apple's clean, slick & smooth interface will entice them to pay more. They just won't pay $100's of dollars more. I'm living proof of it. I want an Apple device. I want a 7" form factor. I'll pay $399, tops, if the hardware specs & capabilities warrant it, but no more. I don't care what the Amazon & Google devices are priced at. I have an Android device (Motorola Xoom), It's very nice for the money I paid for it (it's a refurb. It has ICS, and will soon have Jelly Bean), but I have no faith that any Android device will ever be 100% as good as a similarly classed iOS device. So I am willing to pay at least some amount more for the Apple device.

Just not any price that Apple demands.

Unless Apple wants to try & gouge for the highest profit margin possible, I don't care about price alone. I only care when price gets too high for the value packaged in.

And I want that 7" form factor. Will Apple leave me no choice but to buy an Android device? I don't think so. I think Apple wants my money to go to Apple and not Google....

 

[Bezetos]

I'm not afraid of anything.

I wasn't targeting my question at you.

I just don't buy this wall street meme that Apple will (or has to) sell a 7" device to compete with the Kindle Fire and Nexus7. There is zero evidence that Apple is getting burned from Kindle Fire sales. Heck, Amazon won't even reveal sales figures for the Fire. You'd think if it was such a big seller they'd want people to know about it.

There is a proven demand for 7" tablets.

Google just came out with the Nexus for $199 and now there's talk that Amazon will lower the price on the fire to $149. Google and Amazon are in a race to the bottom not caring if they make any profit on their devices. Andy Rubin said the profit margin on the Nexus is $0. That's not Apple's business model.

A race to the bottom?

Sony loses money on every PS3 they sell, because they make money on every game they sell.

If Google makes no money on every Nexus, it will still earn money on products and services, especially thanks to exposure to Google service.

So yes. Apple's business model is different since it's all about maximising profit. Apple wasn't really ever about competing with their prices.

So it's likely a 7" tablet from Apple would be priced $100 more than comparable tablets from Google and Amazon. Now maybe there's a ton of Apple fans who would pick up one of these in a heartbeat. But outside of that, for those people just looking for a cheaper tablet, what will entice them to spend $100 more on an Apple tablet? Especially if they're not already part of Apple's ecosystem?

Again. There are people who actually prefer 7" from larger models. If there are people who were considering buying an iPad but preferred a smaller size and went with an alternative, Apple will now have something to offer them.

There will definitely be some demand. Apple just needs to scale stock numbers accordingly.

 

[Miharu]

Indeed, I'm one of those looking to buy a 7" tablet. Actually my favourite at this point seems to be the Galaxy Note but that's way too expensive as it's also a smartphone. Google Nexus 7 looks very very interesting and the price point is extremely tempting at $199.

I believe that if Apple does make the iPad mini, it will be priced at $299 for 16 Gb. It could have the same specs as the iPad 2 to minimize any fragmentation, so that developers don't have to write apps specifically for the new iPad mini.

Reason why I want a smaller tablet is that I don't want a laptop replacement. A laptop always has a proper keyboard and the support for all real apps.

 

[poloponies]

So yes. Apple's business model is different since it's all about maximising profit. Apple wasn't really ever about competing with their prices.

So apparently you weren't around when the iPad was introduced and the general response was that Apple offered a good value for the price? The only reason that prices started plummeting for competing devices was that they soon realized they weren't going to touch the iPad on quality/user experience so they decided to go for bargain pricing instead. There is no profitability at the low end. It's not about corporate greed, it's about being able to sustain a business.

 

[Bezetos]

So apparently you weren't around when the iPad was introduced and the general response was that Apple offered a good value for the price? The only reason that prices started plummeting for competing devices was that they soon realized they weren't going to touch the iPad on quality/user experience so they decided to go for bargain pricing instead. There is no profitability at the low end. It's not about corporate greed, it's about being able to sustain a business.

Again:

"Apple wasn't really ever about competing with their prices"

Just because they have some products that some people think are "good value for money" doesn't mean that their strategy is based around competing with other manufacturers with their prices. Because they are not.

Plus, spare me the fanboy "not going to reach iPad's quality" nonsense.

 

[poloponies]

Again:

"Apple wasn't really ever about competing with their prices"

Just because they have some products that some people think are "good value for money" doesn't mean that their strategy is based around competing with other manufacturers with their prices. Because they are not.

Plus, spare me the fanboy "not going to reach iPad's quality" nonsense.

I was making my statements with respect to a specific context. The original Galaxy, Playbook and Slate failed because they tried to compete at the same price point but failed to offer the same experience based on quality of the devices and user experience. I would never suggest that others can't compete on the quality of the build but in the iPad 1 era, getting a competing device to market was the goal and the quality of that device was of secondary concern.

 

[Kevin777]

Again:

"Apple wasn't really ever about competing with their prices"

Just because they have some products that some people think are "good value for money" doesn't mean that their strategy is based around competing with other manufacturers with their prices. Because they are not.

Plus, spare me the fanboy "not going to reach iPad's quality" nonsense.

I'm not an Apple fanboy, by any means, and not an Android one either. I'm all about value and what you get from the device for the price. I've worked with both iOS & Android devices, and iOS devices just have an edge in the GUI that I have yet to see an Android device match (and I'm so tired of all the endless promises that the "next" version of Android will be so awesome & blow iOS away...).

Now there are plenty of links describing the basic design flaws of the original iPad, so it's not like Apple always comes out with perfection in v1.0 of anything. And certainly no one would say that an original iPad is worth it's original price given the specs it had. So there is always the value equation to be made.

Plus, look how delicate & fragile the iPad is compared to other devices (not to say that all of them don't require some kind of case protection, but the iPad just seems more delicate than most Android devices I've seen. Price you pay for thinness and light weight, I guess...)

Nevertheless, for that iOS GUI, I am will to pay more for an iOS device than I would for a similarly sized Android device.

...I'm just not will to sell my children or trade my dog for one if Apple demands it, as all the Apple fanboys will do in a heartbeat

 

[fredf]

A 7" iPad shouldn't just be about money and unselling competitors.
It's not for everyone but there is a substantial case to be made for a 7" tablet. I have not bought an iPad yet simply because I am waiting for the smaller form factor.

But I am not willing to buy a cheap 8 gig device with no 3 or 4 G capability. I want a full fledged but 7" iPad otherwise it's just a toy.

Produce a smaller iPad with 16 gig memory and cell access and I would pay $399 for it over an Android. But price it at $199 or $249 without 16 gig or 3/4G and I walk away.

The idea of Apple is functionality not rock bottom prices.

 

[Bezetos]

(...)
Nevertheless, for that iOS GUI, I am will to pay more for an iOS device than I would for a similarly sized Android device.(..)

Exactly. There are people who want a 7" tablet and will buy it because of their OS preference; and they are ready to pay more since "Apple wasn't really ever about competing with their prices".

 

[fertilized-egg]

If Google makes no money on every Nexus, it will still earn money on products and services, especially thanks to exposure to Google service.

That's the oddest thing about Google's foray into the world of mobile OS. Arguably, the could've made more money if they stayed as the best buddy of Apple as they are still making far more money off iOS than with Android. If you include the cost of development for Android and the fact mobile ads are less effective than desktop one in general, Android as a business just isn't all that appealing.

There's that data mining part that's important, but with the map gone from iOS, even that's taking a hit for Google. Imagine: instead of Ping, Twitter and Facebook, iOS could've been packed with Google services by now.

Yes we know the likely reason for why Google went ahead Android and that's because they were really afraid of Microsoft taking over mobile and replacing everything with their own service. (Symbian was also a Microsoft anti-dote in a large way too) But in terms of actual benefit to Google at this point, Android's benefit seems a bit dubious. Then again, who knows. Maybe Microsoft would've taken over if Android wasn't around.

 

[motorazr]

So would the iPad mini be geared toward people who already have a Macbook Air or simply don't want to spend as much on a normal iPad..?

I think it'd be interesting to see how such a device faired in practice.. but I can't see too many current iPad owners buying one, since it would seem a bit redundant.

That is, unless there are some sort of killer features that are reserved for the iPad Mini.

 

[Kevin777]

So would the iPad mini be geared toward people who already have a Macbook Air or simply don't want to spend as much on a normal iPad..?

I think it'd be interesting to see how such a device faired in practice.. but I can't see too many current iPad owners buying one, since it would seem a bit redundant.

That is, unless there are some sort of killer features that are reserved for the iPad Mini.

Lighter weight, smaller screen size (in relation to distance from eyes) for better video viewing, half the cost (!), greater portability....those are all killer enough features for me to buy one. Plus it would be a smaller unit for smaller hands (kids).

Heck, I'd even buy two! Why? Well, when two kids squabble & fight over one 10" iPad & drop it, that's a bad thing. For the about same money, I could (hopefully) get two iPad Mini's, eliminate the fights & squabbles, and find that they get dropped less often...and that's a good thing!

Maybe they'd even communicate & play nicely together VIA their iPad Mini's (.....Nahhhhhhhhh....)