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.
iPad Declines Yet Again Amid Worst Tablet Quarter Since 2012
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The best news!
I need the prices coming down so I can upgrade to Air 2
[doublepost=1461906222][/doublepost]
Sarcasm gurus
I need the prices coming down so I can upgrade to Air 2
[doublepost=1461906222][/doublepost]
Sarcasm gurus
Well, I was thinking of getting an iPad to complete my Apple ecosystem, but my wallet is stressed out since I am trying to save up after spending so much already. I also won a Surface Pro 3 and its running great especially with the latest Windows 10 Insider build with significantly improved pen support. Its still running a powerful desktop operating system and is not limited by the UI like iOS is on the iPad. So, I think I will just stick with that for now. Apple does need to get more competitive on pricing in the future now. The company has made enough money over the past 13 years to insulate them from any macroeconomic conditions. Pass on some appreciate to the consumer for a change and lower the price on all products by 200 to 300 dollars. If they won't then, we will just keep what we have for longer.
But how many iPads and other tablets are out there and are being used daily? Looking at the numbers, that number is probably growing, although there is probably a saturation and several growth markets are in difficult economical times.
Actually I still see room for growth with the +50 generation. Many of them don't have a computer and don't want one but more and more activities in our daily life include or even require online access. Many of those just recently got their first smart phone but at some point that small display is just not good enough.
10 million units in 3 months, still means 10 million additional potential customers for apps, accessories etc.
Why would I have to replace everything within a year or two? I am happy with my iPad Mini and also still use an iPod Touch from 2008. For the price that these 'premium' devices cost, I expect them to last several years.
Maybe this industry should get used to slower renew cycles and focus more on real product improvements and innovations.
Actually I still see room for growth with the +50 generation. Many of them don't have a computer and don't want one but more and more activities in our daily life include or even require online access. Many of those just recently got their first smart phone but at some point that small display is just not good enough.
10 million units in 3 months, still means 10 million additional potential customers for apps, accessories etc.
Why would I have to replace everything within a year or two? I am happy with my iPad Mini and also still use an iPod Touch from 2008. For the price that these 'premium' devices cost, I expect them to last several years.
Maybe this industry should get used to slower renew cycles and focus more on real product improvements and innovations.
Last edited:
Cause they've done nothing with the iOS ui for iPad, why use one when you could use a Mac or Windows laptop?
Ipads have been declining for years.. i don't recall a price cut generating the peak of 20million units 3 years ago..
Its folly to suggest otherwise. Innovation is what creates demand. The post PC era comment from apple smacks of desperation from marketing to prop up ever decreasing sales.
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.
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.
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.
Only then they can realistically claim that iPad can replace PCs.
Will Apple do that? No way! They have invested so much in the IOS eco system that changing the IOS to something like the OS X will not be feasible. So, they will remain in the hole they dug themselves in.
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'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.
Apple already make a large profit. You scheme slashes that profit, and your projected sales do not raise enough extra revenue to compensate for it. Don't rely on words like large, more, less. Go through the figures again and you will find out. It's very simple arithmetic. Your scheme doesn't work unless Apple can build a $649 iPad for less than $169. I wouldn't put it past them but research suggests they can't.
Anyway, we're way past the get-a-room stage. I'll leave you the final word.
Yes, if there was a way to distinguish between refurbs that are a new sale and refurbs that are on their second life.
If a unit is sold and then returned for a refund, you'd have to deduct it from sales figures and then it could be counted when it sold again.
If a unit is sold and then exchanged as defective it would be fine to count it twice at both sales as long as the unit that replaced it was not counted.
I think for statistical purposes that they just count how many new units are produced and sold. I doubt they get into subtracting and adding them back in. But I really don't know.
I've rarely seen a citation of sales that also said amid returns and exchanges of X amount of units.
Now that would be an interesting statistic.
You get the difference between a retrospective report and a prediction, do you?
