iPad mini iPad Mini cost $188 to make!

[zhenya]

Really? The iPad is more expensive, heavier, has lower ppi, has an inferior camera, has less RAM, and it is slower (according to the geekbench scores I saw). As a piece of hardware, it is undeniably inferior on paper. Yes, I love the iPad's build quality, and yes the ecosystem is great, and yes the Apple service is unparalleled, but as a piece of hardware it is not the best Apple could do.

Eh, what?

I presume you mean the Nexus 10, which isn't into consumers hands yet so there is no real feedback on it. It's marginally lighter, while having a different form factor which accounts for the different dimensions. The screens are for all intents and purposes a wash, as are the cameras; you should know by now that the software behind the cameras has almost as much to do with the end result as the optics of two different but similar lenses. Apple excels at this and Android devices are all over the map. In any case 'adequate' is all that's necessary for tablet cameras.

I don't know what scores you are looking at, but Anandtech's preliminary review shows that other than one or two tests that are based strictly on CPU speed, the Nexus 10 is barely on par with the iPhone 4S, let alone the new generation of devices. Most of its graphics scores are approximately half of the iPhone 5's scores. I fail to see anything there that leads me to believe the ipad 4 is but the class leader by a wide margin.

This article's charts do not have the ipad 4 in them, but use the iPhone 5 as reference.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6425/google-nexus-4-and-nexus-10-review

This is their early investigation of the new A6x graphics chip. Note that most scores are between 20 and 50% higher than even the iPhone 5!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6426/ipad-4-gpu-performance-analyzed-powervr-sgx-554mp4-under-the-hood

 

[palpatine]

Eh, what?

I presume you mean the Nexus 10, which isn't into consumers hands yet so there is no real feedback on it. It's marginally lighter, while having a different form factor which accounts for the different dimensions. The screens are for all intents and purposes a wash, as are the cameras; you should know by now that the software behind the cameras has almost as much to do with the end result as the optics of two different but similar lenses. Apple excels at this and Android devices are all over the map. In any case 'adequate' is all that's necessary for tablet cameras.

I don't know what scores you are looking at, but Anandtech's preliminary review shows that other than one or two tests that are based strictly on CPU speed, the Nexus 10 is barely on par with the iPhone 4S, let alone the new generation of devices. Most of its graphics scores are approximately half of the iPhone 5's scores. I fail to see anything there that leads me to believe the ipad 4 is but the class leader by a wide margin.

This article's charts do not have the ipad 4 in them, but use the iPhone 5 as reference.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6425/google-nexus-4-and-nexus-10-review

This is their early investigation of the new A6x graphics chip. Note that most scores are between 20 and 50% higher than even the iPhone 5!

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6426/ipad-4-gpu-performance-analyzed-powervr-sgx-554mp4-under-the-hood

Interesting. This is what I read last, "Unfortunately we didn't have a brand-new iPad 4, with its upgraded Apple A6X processor, but Geekbench results we've seen elsewhere suggest that the Nexus 10 has the beating of that too. One stand-out performance win for the Nexus 10 is in floating-point CPU figures, where it's four times faster than the iPad 3 (and, we expect, roughly 1.6 times the iPad 4). This is due to two Cortex-A15 VFP floating point units, one per core, that provides full hardware support for such mathematics. The practical advantages of this will include faster physics engines in games, quicker scaling and image manipulation, more efficient signal processing (in, for example, virtual synthesisers and audio manipulation), and other maths-intensive tasks." http://www.zdnet.com/google-nexus-10-review-7000006821/

I don't see how in the world 300 ppi for the screen is a wash. LOL.

 

[zhenya]

Interesting. This is what I read last, "Unfortunately we didn't have a brand-new iPad 4, with its upgraded Apple A6X processor, but Geekbench results we've seen elsewhere suggest that the Nexus 10 has the beating of that too. One stand-out performance win for the Nexus 10 is in floating-point CPU figures, where it's four times faster than the iPad 3 (and, we expect, roughly 1.6 times the iPad 4). This is due to two Cortex-A15 VFP floating point units, one per core, that provides full hardware support for such mathematics. The practical advantages of this will include faster physics engines in games, quicker scaling and image manipulation, more efficient signal processing (in, for example, virtual synthesisers and audio manipulation), and other maths-intensive tasks." http://www.zdnet.com/google-nexus-10-review-7000006821/

I don't see how in the world 300 ppi for the screen is a wash. LOL.

Anandtech data vs. a Zdnet press release. LOL

The screen res is a wash because the difference between 264 ppi and 300 ppi is about 12% - ie. probably not visible as opposed to the 100% change from 132 to 264 ppi on the ipad 2 vs the 3 or 4.

 

[palpatine]

Anandtech data vs. a Zdnet press release. LOL

The screen res is a wash because the difference between 264 ppi and 300 ppi is about 12% - ie. probably not visible as opposed to the 100% change from 132 to 264 ppi on the ipad 2 vs the 3 or 4.

It's true what you say about our ability to see the difference. Personally, I probably wouldn't be able to notice on anything above about 260. I won't know until I try. But, the point is that the screen is significantly better. Assuming there are people who can tell, that 12%, in my opinion, is a big deal, and shows how far behind the iPad 4 is right after launch. And, it costs one hundred dollars more.

 

[zhenya]

It's true what you say about our ability to see the difference. Personally, I probably wouldn't be able to notice on anything above about 260. I won't know until I try. But, the point is that the screen is significantly better. Assuming there are people who can tell, that 12%, in my opinion, is a big deal, and shows how far behind the iPad 4 is right after launch. And, it costs one hundred dollars more.

Ok, gotcha. 12% more pixels that are not even noticeable is a big deal and cause the ipad to be way behind, yet a graphics chip that is 50-400% slower isn't worth mentioning.

 

[zephyrnoid]

Even the iPad 1 is worth about 40% of its purchase value after 2.5 years.

Please offer us the citation? I get my facts form Gartner reports, which I pay dearly for

----------

Intrestingly, I don't handicap winners only on what I NEED. NOW

At the end, customer will decide what is the best value for them. so it is fair that you will make that choice for yourselves. But my bet is that Ipad mini will outsell everything including Ipad 3/4, Nexus 7 in this, and Kindle Fire HD in this Christmas session. A big part is the marketing position that Apple is in now. It has biggest distribution network throughout the world (Nexus 7 is not going to be able to sell in China for a long long time while Apple is rumored to start selling in China in Dec) will help. The bigger tablet apps catalogs will help. The better apps experience will help. The 4:3 vs 16:9 for web surfing and reading books will help. The bigger screen area will help. And at $329, it is one of the cheaper Apple device for the developing world.

I think we will need to have this play out longer to see who will win at the end. Right now both Google and Amazon contract out their design and manufacturing of their respective tablet. No one can make money in this space now given that Fire HD and Nexus 7 set a very low price point. If every Android major maker leave the tablet space, who is going to design and manufacture the next tablet for Google and Amazon??? Look around and see which major Android manufacturer announce new tablet for the future?? and for that matter which other Android tablet is available for Christmas season? Only the small Android players is left in the tablet space. It is an unintended consequence of the war between Apple, Amazon and Google and all the other Android tablet maker get caught. Samsung has a really nice Nexus 10..But I seriously doubt that they can make much money out of them now given Google price Nexus 10 at $400. Samsung can sell the uplevel Nexus 10 under their own name (e.g. 64G version).. But not at a price that they want to.. And the next Samsung tablet will have to match the Nexus 10 also..

Microsoft take a different path for Surface. They price it as high as Ipad and it will leave room for their hardware partners to make some money if W8 catch on (If W8 does not catch on, it really doesn't matter anyway, there will be no W8 tablet if W8 crash and burn in the market place) and guarantee a new wave of W8 tablet to come in the next year.

 

[AzN1337c0d3r]

Anandtech data vs. a Zdnet press release. LOL

The screen res is a wash because the difference between 264 ppi and 300 ppi is about 12% - ie. probably not visible as opposed to the 100% change from 132 to 264 ppi on the ipad 2 vs the 3 or 4.

The number of pixels between 264 and 300 ppi is not 12%. It's 1-(264/300)² = 23%

 

[zhenya]

Please offer us the citation? I get my facts form Gartner reports, which I pay dearly for

Even today Amazon will pay you $190 for a 16GB ipad 1 wifi that originally retailed for $500. That's near 40% without even trying to get the higher price available by selling it directly.

The number of pixels between 264 and 300 ppi is not 12%. It's 1-(264/300)² = 23%

No it's not. (300-264)/300=12% fewer pixels than the Nexus.

 

[lianlua]

The number of pixels between 264 and 300 ppi is not 12%. It's 1-(264/300)² = 23%

You're both correct. It's a 12% change in density. 23% is the change in pixel count. Just like doubling resolution increases pixel count by 4x, you're looking at different figures.

 

[zhenya]

You're both correct. It's a 12% change in density. 23% is the change in pixel count. Just like doubling resolution increases pixel count by 4x, you're looking at different figures.

Thank you for clearing that up.

 

[palpatine]

Ok, gotcha. 12% more pixels that are not even noticeable is a big deal and cause the ipad to be way behind, yet a graphics chip that is 50-400% slower isn't worth mentioning.

Better is better. It may not matter to you, but that is a different conversation. I'm not sure where you are getting this information about slowness, but like I said, the iPad is an inferior product in many respects.

As for the screen, I won't know until I see it. Some people may be impacted more by it than me, in the same way that I don't notice differences in the sound quality of speakers as much as other people do. The current iPad screen is so good, I cannot detect pixels, so I guess it is difficult to imagine something better at this point, yet Google has brought it into existence. I am looking forward to seeing it.

And, at 100 less than the iPad, I am pretty impressed by the pricing. I was also pleasantly surprised by the N7, which costs so much less than the iPad Mini, but is a really solid device. Asus and Samsung have stepped up and put out some awesome products. Last year I wouldn't have imagined either company capable of doing it, and I certainly wasn't terribly optimistic about Android.

In a sense, I think Google and its partners have thrown down the gauntlet, and from iOS 6 to the Mini, Apple has offered an anemic response. I find Jelly Bean far more enjoyable these days than iOS 6. I am impressed, for example, that someone has come out with multiple user options in the iOS. That is what I consider to be innovative.

Turning to apps made by the OS manufacturers, one thing I will give Apple credit for is Pages. It works seamlessly with the desktop in a way that I have not been able to replicate in the Googleverse, and it even has fully functional footnotes, which I haven't been able to find anywhere else in iOS or Android (someone please school me on this if you know about any). It may seem like a small thing, but when only one app out of hundreds of thousands can do this, it deserves recognition. It's not innovation, but it is good design, and I think Google just hasn't recognized yet how important it is to have a few fully functional "Office" apps that just work.

 

[nfl46]

Finally read the whole thread. Interesting.

 

[palpatine]

Finally read the whole thread. Interesting.

Ugh. I think a bunch of my posts just got deleted by a moderator. That was a lot of text... I wonder why. I thought it was still on topic (about how typical / atypical Apple's pricing model is). But, I guess not. Kind of a waste of time if the conversation gets shut down

Thanks OP for bringing up the topic. I enjoyed hearing everyones' viewpoints.

 

[AzN1337c0d3r]

Even today Amazon will pay you $190 for a 16GB ipad 1 wifi that originally retailed for $500. That's near 40% without even trying to get the higher price available by selling it directly.



No it's not. (300-264)/300=12% fewer pixels than the Nexus.

No it's not. PPI is a measure of the size of the LENGTH of a pixel. Note the square in my equation. That gives you the number of pixels in a SQUARE inch.

 

[Krevnik]

In a sense, I think Google and its partners have thrown down the gauntlet, and from iOS 6 to the Mini, Apple has offered an anemic response. I find Jelly Bean far more enjoyable these days than iOS 6. I am impressed, for example, that someone has come out with multiple user options in the iOS. That is what I consider to be innovative.

On the OS front, Win8 and Android do certainly offer compelling features compared to iOS... but on the hardware side, I'm not sure the gauntlet that Google has thrown down with the Nexus 7 is a great one.

Not so much from the spec standpoint, but rather the statement that there is nothing in the hardware worth making a profit on. Amazon and Google are both more interested in using the razor to sell blades. But because Google sells the blades to someone else (advertisers), the end-user may not even realize the semi-subsidized nature of the hardware.

Apple on the other hand is subsidizing their services (iCloud) partly through storage increases, but also partly through hardware sales. Much like including coupons for free blades when you buy a razor, only without the coupon for you to see and hold.

I think the customer feedback on pricing of the 7-8" tablet market is interesting, mostly because it points out that business models keep getting more complicated to the point where the average consumer may not be able to make the appropriate distinctions between them anymore. Much like how it is very hard to figure out the ecological costs of something like a power plant, it is getting hard to figure out the social and economic costs of a business model.

Google's model is interesting since it tends to hide the cost of the subsidy all over the place. That money comes via advertising revenue, which means it's being paid for by other products we buy from companies with an advertising budget. So every time you buy something from P&G for example, some small fraction of the cost is going to Google. So you still pay out the difference, but a tiny bit at a time over a very long period of time. The model is even more effective when you consider that you are paying that fraction even if you buy an iPad instead.

Turning to apps made by the OS manufacturers, one thing I will give Apple credit for is Pages. It works seamlessly with the desktop in a way that I have not been able to replicate in the Googleverse, and it even has fully functional footnotes, which I haven't been able to find anywhere else in iOS or Android (someone please school me on this if you know about any). It may seem like a small thing, but when only one app out of hundreds of thousands can do this, it deserves recognition. It's not innovation, but it is good design, and I think Google just hasn't recognized yet how important it is to have a few fully functional "Office" apps that just work.

Well, the whole point of Google's ecosystem is to get you to use their stuff as much as possible to make their ad spots more valuable through data mining. It's the whole reason you see a breadth of services from them. But they also tend to throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks as well, as they aren't actually that invested in any one project unless it turns out to be a big deal (like GMail, Maps and Search have, for example), or someone inside the company is invested enough to make it part of their 20% project.

 

[h00ligan]

Less screen, less attention to detail, less access to great applications, and a whole lot less fun. Sounds like the N7 to me.

The less screen thing is ridiculous. They turn safari in landscape and use it full screen......guess what...browsers on android do that too...and with more resolution you are getting more presentation. The buttons don't have to be ever present, despite the on stage spin.