I looked at both research firm's sites and didn't see that refurbs were, or were not, included. Maybe I missed it. If they weren't included, I wonder what the numbers would be if they were?
That would be counting the sale of the same unit twice.
I looked at both research firm's sites and didn't see that refurbs were, or were not, included. Maybe I missed it. If they weren't included, I wonder what the numbers would be if they were?
what are you talking about. you can put more apps on a single page inside a folder now. if that isnt innovative
SurfaceBook?Maybe the real issue is someone hasn't properly come up with a tablet + keyboard combination that works ideally. With the fanless design of the macbook, imagine a nearly identical laptop that simply had a slightly thicker screen that had half the battery in the screen + internals so that you could pull the screen off to do simpler tablet like tasks such as web browsing, videos, and messaging, and then connect the screen back on to get what the macbook is now. I bet Apple could have created such as device from the macbook at around the Air's thickness (both pieces connected together).
I've seen a few one of my friends likes it another hates it.SurfaceBook?
Wow!
I disagree. I have an 11" Air for portability but I still use my iPad to read my books and magazines. Nothing beats a tablet to read books, magazines, brochures and surf the web, watch the stuff on You Tube, especially when you are traveling or consuming these materials in bed. Also, for short travels, my iPad is sufficient to keep me in touch with the rest of the world and small enough to leave the Air at home, yet large enough to view everything comfortably as opposed to doing it all on an iPhone 6+.A very narrow view. No one NEEDS a tablet either. These are luxury items. You can easily say that a tablet in general is a solution in search of a problem when you talk (only) about price.
I disagree. I have an 11" Air for portability but I still use my iPad to read my books and magazines. Nothing beats a tablet to read books, magazines, brochures and surf the web, watch the stuff on You Tube, especially when you are traveling or consuming these materials in bed. Also, for short travels, my iPad is sufficient to keep me in touch with the rest of the world and small enough to leave the Air at home, yet large enough to view everything comfortably as opposed to doing it all on an iPhone 6+.
If that makes it a luxury item, so be it.
Maybe they can pull themselves out of this hole by introducing an iPad that runs a decent OS with file a system and multi user accounts, 1:1 Mac compatibility and the capability to accept USB peripherals like a USB disk ,even if it can do so with the help of a Lightning to USB adapter.What you have described above is exactly why nobody needs to upgrade their iPad unless it breaks.
Apple have dug themselves a hole by releasing arguably the best tablets - Air - mini, that continue to do everything required of them and Apple appear to be unable to think/innovate themselves out of it.
And what's the margin on an iPad? Because your big idea boosts revenue by $845M but increases manufacturing costs by 33%. Are you sure you're helping here? If those iPads cost $169 in parts and labour...
You're right. The reports are specific to new units sold.That would be counting the sale of the same unit twice.
Manufacturing costs doesn't increase at all... You're still using the same parts.
You're using 33% more of them.
You're making the same iPad but cutting the price. Manufacturing would cost 0% more.
The profit margin goes down per iPad, but the manufacturing costs stay the same. The price of manufacturing is included in the iPad, and then some.
You can't sell 5M more iPads without making 5M more iPads and without buying more parts. If the parts per iPad cost $169 you will need to spend an extra $845,000,000 to make those extra iPads.
The price of manufacturing and parts is included in the iPad, so when someone purchases the iPad, Apple is still making a profit. So if they sell more iPads, they're still making a bigger profit.
I've no idea what you're talking about now. Stick to the basic math. How much will it cost to make those extra 5M iPads, and how are Apple going to pay for it when the boost in revenue is only $845M?
The cost to make those iPads is offset when someone buys them. Ultimately Apple will make a large profit, even if they have to pay more for the parts and labor up front.
You're right. The reports are specific to new units sold.
Something more detailed would include units returned and resold, for example. Some of the returned units are returned as faulty or unsatisfactory and immediately replaced to the consumer. The replacement unit was accounted for statistically at the original sale. The returned unit goes into the refurb stream and is sold in the same or a future quarter. Accounted for, how?
I think there'd be a significant spike in refurb unit sales during the introductory phase of a new model -- iPP -- and Apple has an attractive refurb market. That's what prompted my curiosity.
You get the difference between a retrospective report and a prediction, do you?Says the company that predicted Windows Phone would surpass iPhone by 2016.