iPad Mini outselling iPad 2 to 1

[palpatine]

Yuck. Let's stop the mudslinging.

The forums tend to attract Android trolls who label anyone who buys an Apple device sheeple who are brainwashed by marketing. Hence, the negative reading of comments critical of Apple stuff. I misread the post about marketing as well.

And, the forums tend to attract people enthusiastic (perhaps overly so) about their consumption choices, and they do not take criticism of their devices or the Appleverse sitting down, so you sometimes have to step back from this stuff and not take it too personally.

Let's let it go.

 

[xofruitcake]

No, that's not at all the reason for the duration of their product refreshes - it's all about their product and business strategy. There is a cost associated with each new feature or technology, a cost to research and a cost to implement. When you spread that cost across more units, the price per unit of that cost is less, and that figures into Apple's big focus: profit margin. If you now halve the number of units to spread that cost across, one of two things will happen: cost per unit goes up, so either Apple's profit margin goes down, or prices to the consumer goes up. Which do you think is going to happen?

Apple keeps its product lines simple - few choices, long refresh durations. This business strategy creates a simplified supply chain and that keeps costs down. Each new refresh that makes changes (minimal to significant) also means the whole production line must change, and that means more costs. Launching a product means lots of marketing spend (big cost again). You get the idea but what I'm trying to tell you is that refreshing a product costs companies lots of money, and that's why Apple isn't going to change the refresh cycle.

heh heh, I trade Apple stock all year and gross margin is only one part of the equation. You need to worry about volume also to get to your net profit which is what every business try to optimize. Iphone has 50-60% gross margin, Ipad 3/4 has about 25-30% gross margin and Ipad mini has > 20% gross margin. Why would Apple choose to refresh Ipad 4 after Ipad 3 was only out 6 months? and why would they price Ipad mini at 329 with the lowest gross margin of all the products that they carry?

Refreshing cost company a lot of money and Apple management talked about that in the last Q conference call Q&A. But the alternative of not refreshing is to sell a lot less products and end up with a lot less revenue and profit. 4Q11 Apple sold 37M iphone with the 4S launch and by 3Q12, Apple only sold 26m iphone with 6-7m of them iphone 5. With the fast launch that Tim Cook is pursuing (100 countries in 4Q12), the Q to Q sales decline for Iphone 5 is going to be tremendous starting 2Q13. What choice will Apple have at that point other than launching another new Iphone or other products that may fill in the earning gap?

----------

Sales of current models decline as the availability date of the new model approaches. Could that be why iPhone sales dipped in 3Q12? Nah.

Iphone 5 certainly has something to do with the slow sale in 3Q12. But 2Q12 number is not that much better either. One year is awfully long time for consumer to buy the same item if there are alternative out there. The key is that Apple does not live in a vacuum. Competitor from Android land will drive their schedule as much as the fast moving component technology. Apple used to be able to do that but I don't see that anymore.. Just think about why an A6X now in Ipad4? Wasn't it only 6 months?

 

[0dev]

Come on man... you can't really believe that in this day and age, can you? You're digging up the Mac vs PC fossil.

Time has proven that this is not the way to view iOS vs Android.

Both systems basically do the same thing as far as your average consumer is concerned, they have the same popular apps (Facebook, Twitter, games, etc.), they're similar sizes, they fill the same place in the market. The only difference to them is one has a better brand on it, and they think that and a higher price equals a better product. Simple as that.

 

[currahee2100]

Both systems basically do the same thing as far as your average consumer is concerned, they have the same popular apps (Facebook, Twitter, games, etc.), they're similar sizes, they fill the same place in the market. The only difference to them is one has a better brand on it, and they think that and a higher price equals a better product. Simple as that.

I have a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and a Galaxy Note, the quality of apps on apple's side is also a lot better. The problem with Android is that it's not unified and it ticks me off when I learn that I can't get app X or app Y on ONE of my devices but I can for the other due to compatibility. I just bought an iPad mini and I forgot how much better the app quality is.

Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses. I do like them both, regardless of their flaws.

 

[WilliamLondon]

I am not trying to troll here, but simply to share my opinion about the product, and to suggest, as many others have done, that the product many of us want is one that is superior to the competition.

Please don't think I think you're a troll, that's not at all what I thought.

I have not implied it is worthy of derision, have I?

Actually, yes. Declaring the product's technology as "old" does exactly that.

Please don't think this is all aimed at just you (and especially don't take any of this personally), but calling the product's technology "old" implies Apple went into their barn of old crap, waded through bins of scheit, plucked out some bits here and there, cobbled a bunch of rusty old 3GS screens together with scotch/cello tape and provided no warning to users to be careful, using this device may cause you lockjaw<wry grin>. Calling out the tech as "old" is intended to focus on one or two components and draw attention away from the device as a whole, which is what we should focus on with any device and where where the mini especially shines. Perhaps that's not intended, but that's how all these negative comments are received.

Yes, the product is using some of the same specs of previous products, but it's in a form factor no one else has ever manufactured. It runs all the existing apps available (more than on any other platform) in this form factor, with great battery life. It's an amazing product, and the fact they opted to maximise form factor over screen resolution is something that criticising Apple's technology choices ignores (and I've still not seen anyone who criticises the technology decisions provide a better solution to what Apple realistically *could* have done in this form factor today, instead of merely providing a wish list,or list of demands, of what they *should* have done with the mini).

Ideally, what would a mini look like if it had in it everything you think it should have had? What screen resolution, and how would that fit in the ecosystem that is iOS apps? How fat would the device be? How hot would it get? What processor would be required to power it? How much RAM would be ideal? How heavy would this device be? How would it fit overall into the iPad family? What would its price be? And what profit margin would that provide? How many units could it expect to sell at that feature set and price? What would be the roadmap for that product and feature set for gen 2?

I don't mean to be difficult here or set you up for the impossible or ensnare you in a trap, please don't think that, but these questions are real questions that product managers and companies deal with, and all the negativity on this forum regarding the mini (and perhaps any new product Apple releases) is quick to attack Apple's decisions, but ignores the reality of the corporate world in which these decisions are made and nearly always fails to suggest a reality-based better product.

 

[0dev]

I have a Galaxy Tab 10.1 and a Galaxy Note, the quality of apps on apple's side is also a lot better. The problem with Android is that it's not unified and it ticks me off when I learn that I can't get app X or app Y on ONE of my devices but I can for the other due to compatibility. I just bought an iPad mini and I forgot how much better the app quality is.

Both systems have their strengths and weaknesses. I do like them both, regardless of their flaws.

Can you tell me what apps you find to be of lower quality on Android? I'm just curious. I've not considered quality of Android apps to be an issue for ages.

 

[palpatine]

I don't mean to be difficult here or set you up for the impossible or ensnare you in a trap, please don't think that, but these questions are real questions that product managers and companies deal with, and all the negativity on this forum regarding the mini (and perhaps any new product Apple releases) is quick to attack Apple's decisions, but ignores the reality of the corporate world in which these decisions are made and nearly always fails to suggest a reality-based better product.

A retina display and an A6X processor. That would have been great. Everyone will say it can't be done. I've seen the arguments. They would say the same thing if I asked for better specs on the iPad. But, how did Samsung create a display for the Nexus 10 with significantly better dpi than the iPad, a comparable battery life, more RAM, lighter weight, and at a significantly lower cost? They found a way.

I'm no engineer, and maybe I am asking too much, but these specs are the kinds of things I want as a consumer. I'm willing to pay more for it, but I won't be purchasing or recommending the Mini until I see something better. Personally, as much as I like Samsung's products, and own one myself, I hold Apple to a higher standard

 

[0dev]

A retina display and an A6X processor. That would have been great. Everyone will say it can't be done. I've seen the arguments. They would say the same thing if I asked for better specs on the iPad. But, how did Samsung create a display for the Nexus 10 with significantly better dpi than the iPad, a comparable battery life, more RAM, lighter weight, and at a significantly lower cost? They found a way.

I'm no engineer, and maybe I am asking too much, but these specs are the kinds of things I want as a consumer. I'm willing to pay more for it, but I won't be purchasing or recommending the Mini until I see something better. Personally, as much as I like Samsung's products, and own one myself, I hold Apple to a higher standard

The reason is simple. Apple's main priority is to jack up their profit margin as much as possible, whereas the current line of Nexus devices are all made at a very minimal profit margin. If Apple didn't only care about the bottom line they could have made the iPad Mini a true Nexus 7 competitor, but they knew they could get away with being lazy and simply slapping the internals from an iPad 2 into a smaller shell, pricing it at almost triple the production cost, and still sell millions.

 

[AdonisSMU]

The reason is simple. Apple's main priority is to jack up their profit margin as much as possible, whereas the current line of Nexus devices are all made at a very minimal profit margin. If Apple didn't only care about the bottom line they could have made the iPad Mini a true Nexus 7 competitor, but they knew they could get away with being lazy and simply slapping the internals from an iPad 2 into a smaller shell, pricing it at almost triple the production cost, and still sell millions.

R&D is a cost as is marketing, the various apple stores, the employees both dire t and indirect, the liberal return policy etc.... All that factors in not just raw production materials costs

 

[nStyle]

I disagree with those saying price is the reason for the Mini outselling the regular iPad. For one, it's only $170 more. If you're spending $329 on a tablet, its likely you could afford "the real deal".

The Mini is just so portable and more usable than a regular iPad.

This is coming from someone who currently owns an iPad 4.

 

[rowspaxe]

If Apple didn't only care about the bottom line they could have made the iPad Mini a true Nexus 7 competitor, but they knew they could get away with being lazy and simply slapping the internals from an iPad 2 into a smaller shell, pricing it at almost triple the production cost, and still sell millions.

Last time i checked, coporations were in business to maximize profits, not unit sales. Apple's brand dominance allows them to command more than a third higher unit price than nexus. As the tablet innovation curve flattens, android partners will be in a race to the bottom to make $100 tablets. And apple will still be selling all the $329 minis--and a lot of them.

Apple is able to do this because no competitor in the 20 years has be able to outflank its design strength and eco system. Samsung may provide some competition; they are the best candidate to provide a technical breakthru.

 

[slffl]

If I didn't have an iPad 3 provided by work already, I would definitely get the iPad mini. I love it!!

----------

A retina display and an A6X processor. That would have been great. Everyone will say it can't be done. I've seen the arguments. They would say the same thing if I asked for better specs on the iPad. But, how did Samsung create a display for the Nexus 10 with significantly better dpi than the iPad, a comparable battery life, more RAM, lighter weight, and at a significantly lower cost? They found a way.

I'm no engineer, and maybe I am asking too much, but these specs are the kinds of things I want as a consumer. I'm willing to pay more for it, but I won't be purchasing or recommending the Mini until I see something better. Personally, as much as I like Samsung's products, and own one myself, I hold Apple to a higher standard

Give me a break. It's the same old PC vs Mac argument. Specs don't mean jack squat when you're running a crappy OS on it. Choose your OS FIRST! Then choose your hardware!!!

iOS is by far better than Android IMO. So it doesn't matter WHAT the 'specs' are for any Android device! I'm getting an AMERICAN designed OS and hardware that I love!!!

 

[palpatine]

If I didn't have an iPad 3 provided by work already, I would definitely get the iPad mini. I love it!!

----------



Give me a break. It's the same old PC vs Mac argument. Specs don't mean jack squat when you're running a crappy OS on it. Choose your OS FIRST! Then choose your hardware!!!

iOS is by far better than Android IMO. So it doesn't matter WHAT the 'specs' are for any Android device! I'm getting an AMERICAN designed OS and hardware that I love!!!

OK. I don't think this really caught the gist of what I was saying (Apple could do better), but it seems you are not interested in the specs. That is fine, but some of us are, and it doesn't mean we are stuck in the 90s.

As for the OS, I happen to like aspects of iOS, Wimdows, and Android. These are exciting operating systems. Even though Apple tends to fit my use case best, I certainly have nothing against the others. I recommend people buy the device that best fits their use case, taking into account hardware, software, operating system, and other elements.

For some people, 7.9" is too big for a "small" tablet, and the Nexus is better. For others, they need to read technical journals in PDF form, and the large iPad is the best fit. I imagine there is also a use case for the Kindle Fire. I like maps that work, so I am fortunate to have had an Android phone after Apple Maps bungled my iPhone's GPS, making it impossible to navigate even the easiest routes. Now that my iPhone has Google Maps, I can go back to using the iPhone. It's nice to have a choice these days and not be forced to pay for some company's boneheaded decisions.

Like Woz, I enjoy using nice tech, no matter who makes it.

 

[AndersBrohus]

OK. I don't think this really caught the gist of what I was saying (Apple could do better), but it seems you are not interested in the specs. That is fine, but some of us are, and it doesn't mean we are stuck in the 90s.

As for the OS, I happen to like aspects of iOS, Wimdows, and Android. These are exciting operating systems. Even though Apple tends to fit my use case best, I certainly have nothing against the others. I recommend people buy the device that best fits their use case, taking into account hardware, software, operating system, and other elements.

For some people, 7.9" is too big for a "small" tablet, and the Nexus is better. For others, they need to read technical journals in PDF form, and the large iPad is the best fit. I imagine there is also a use case for the Kindle Fire. I like maps that work, so I am fortunate to have had an Android phone after Apple Maps bungled my iPhone's GPS, making it impossible to navigate even the easiest routes. Now that my iPhone has Google Maps, I can go back to using the iPhone. It's nice to have a choice these days and not be forced to pay for some company's boneheaded decisions.

Like Woz, I enjoy using nice tech, no matter who makes it.

You don't need to be stucked in the 90s just because you don't care about specs on your tablet or smartphone....

I got the top model from HTC for around 2 years ago, it worked great and ran fluid but when my brother came with his iPhone 3GS and it was faster then and ran more fluid then my HTC i was like

"How is this possible!? HTC specs the device as more powerful then the iPhone 3GS!??!!!!"

And i clearly sold my HTC and got the iPhone 4 that should have the some of the same specs then the Android phone but the iPhone 4 was and still is WAY faster then the crappy Android sorry to say but Android is not just good enough for me, and i think it's not yet fully developed to run good enough on all the devices it want's to run on...

I brought the iPad 1 when it came in the US because i was on holiday in the States at that moment, i was like

"WOW! It's fast and portable!"

But for around 2 months ago i sold it because i would buy the iPad mini when i got the money, and now i have the iPad mini! And this time it is really portable and fast enough for me

 

[WilliamLondon]

A retina display and an A6X processor. That would have been great. Everyone will say it can't be done. I've seen the arguments. They would say the same thing if I asked for better specs on the iPad. But, how did Samsung create a display for the Nexus 10 with significantly better dpi than the iPad, a comparable battery life, more RAM, lighter weight, and at a significantly lower cost? They found a way.

I'm no engineer, and maybe I am asking too much, but these specs are the kinds of things I want as a consumer. I'm willing to pay more for it, but I won't be purchasing or recommending the Mini until I see something better. Personally, as much as I like Samsung's products, and own one myself, I hold Apple to a higher standard

I think you're asking too much - there have been lots of articles about how technically speaking some of what you want isn't available today, and the other bits you want wouldn't work in the world of Apple (e.g. screen resolutions that don't play well in the iOS ecosystem which Android device manufacturers don't seem as bothered about, e.g. N7/KFireHD - 1280x800, Nook HD - 1440x900, prev. 1024x600).

One thing about product price - the alternatives from Google and B&N and Amazon will always be less expensive when you purchase their product, because they sell them at cost - they are manufacturing and selling these products to get you to buy them so you'll then buy stuff from their online stores (plus Google products send data back to overlord headquarters from every device you use, which they then sell to other companies). The fallacy is that these devices are always so much cheaper than Apple products, but the reality is that these companies are just more patient about when they are able to extract their profit from a consumer's wallet - they're clever and they always get paid (these are quite successful companies after all). Apple just prefers to get their profit when they sell the device.

That's probably enough on the gen 1 mini, I think we've done that one, how about the gen 2?

I find it very exciting to think about how they'll update it when they do (I think they'll milk this product revenue stream for awhile until end of next year, which means we might see a big change in the product then if they take a whole year to refresh the product) - Anandtech doesn't believe retina is possible gen 2, that the tech isn't there yet to shrink down battery with appropriate CPU into the mini's form factor, so will they wait, or will they come out with some interim resolution on the mini? Also, I can't imagine they put the same resolution in the mini as in the full sized iPad - there wouldn't be enough product differentiation, unless the full sized iPad gets some big functional or feature jump in v5. Although I'm always happy to have a device with more RAM the mini actually performs very well with what it has and the CPU runs all the apps on the app store, so what's the point of a refresh if those two things are the only things getting an upgrade. The size is already great, so it must be they will upgrade the resolution, right? But to what? And what other updates to the product might we see? Exciting times ahead.

 

[cwwilson]

Well I did it....traded in my recently purchased iPad 4 for an iPad mini. I absolutely loved the retina display I mean it's gorgeous to work with but the weight and sheer size of the 4 was too much for it to ever leave the house, not to mention typing was a pain. The weight, thinness, form factor and build materials of the mini kept calling me back to the Apple store to get a third and final opinion before my return date was up. Every time I would hold the mini in my hands it just felt right.

I had a black 32GB 4 and trading it for a 64GB white mini that also had cellular meant I could get much more out of the device for not much more money (only costed an extra $20).

It's my first day with the mini and I'm excited to take this thing out into the wild, something I never felt comfortable with when I had the 4.

 

[judethat]

I had the iPad 3 which I sold intending to get the 4, but when I saw the mini it just made sense to me. It is the device I take with me everywhere and fits in my handbag easily. The 3 feels so heavy in comparison but is a good device too.

 

[Rodster]

Can you tell me what apps you find to be of lower quality on Android? I'm just curious. I've not considered quality of Android apps to be an issue for ages.

Since I own both iOS and Android tablets there is some truth to both sides of the argument. I know on my Kindle Fire HD there are some apps & games that are not compatible with certain android tablets that I own. But to be fair it is getting better now that the Kindle Fire and the Nexus 7 have become extremely popular. The biggest offender is Electronic Arts because it's a crap shoot as to what android tablet their apps support.

I can certainly vouch for the Kindle Fire HD that it gets it's share of exclusive apps which take advantage of the Amazon tablet and offer feature rich quality. The downside is I can't run a Kindle Fire specific app on my Nexus 7.

What I really like about iOS is that you can count on iPad apps to run on any iPad as long as the OS or hardware supports it. There are +/- to both platforms but without question, android is closing the gap.

 

[palpatine]

You don't need to be stucked in the 90s just because you don't care about specs on your tablet or smartphone....

Perhaps I wasn't clear. The poster was saying that my concern for specs was a replay of the old Windows/PC debates. I date those to the 90s (one could stretch them out to 2007 or so, I guess). That's all.

It isn't just about the specs, of course, but specs matter, or I'd be running an iPad 1 still. As it turns out, my Samsung Nexus III blows my iPhone 4s out of the water, and it looks good doing it, with a beautiful, large screen. I haven't tested it against the iPhone 5 yet. For me, it is about the best experience, and specs factor into it.

If the specs are poor, like the blurry screen (to my eyes) of the Mini, then it is a non-starter. I find the Nexus 7 screen far superior to the Mini's, but even it pales in comparison to the iPad 3, so I tend to use the iPad 3 more. But, that is just me.

I think, rather than going back and forth about what "is" the best product, we ought to recognize that we all have different priorities, and the "best" product for you might not be the best one for me. And, sometimes, the spec disparity is so much that we can say almost no one (unless they are devotees of a certain brand) would prefer an under-spec'd / under-performing product (like the Asus Prime with its horribly Wifi problems) to another (the iPad 3 that came out a few months later and far exceeded the Prime's capabilities).

 

[Rogifan]

Yuck. Let's stop the mudslinging.

The forums tend to attract Android trolls who label anyone who buys an Apple device sheeple who are brainwashed by marketing. Hence, the negative reading of comments critical of Apple stuff. I misread the post about marketing as well.

And, the forums tend to attract people enthusiastic (perhaps overly so) about their consumption choices, and they do not take criticism of their devices or the Appleverse sitting down, so you sometimes have to step back from this stuff and not take it too personally.

Let's let it go.

I have a lot of friends who own iPhones and not one of them has ever claimed any sort of superiority or better taste or whatever over those who don't own an iPhone. I have friends who own Android and Windows phones and they never have a problem letting me know why my iPhone is inferior to their phones. In fact one friend often jokingly refers to Apple as "rotten Apple". I just find it weird because I'm an Apple fan but it doesn't bother me if someone I know doesn't own an Apple product. That's their choice. Yet I see so many Google and Microsot fans where it really seems to bother them that someone could like Apple stuff. And they resort to insults like calling Apple fans isheep or people who buy stuff because of a shiny logo on the back. Just silly.

But I agree that we should all step back, take a deep breath and not take this stuff personally.

 

[Sital]

I guess I'm in the minority who prefers the iPad 4 over the Mini. I received the 4 for Christmas and was seriously considering returning it for a Mini, because of the smaller form factor. However, the more I thought about it, the difference in specs is more important than the difference in size. For me, portability isn't a huge issue as I wouldn't really bring either device with me on a day-to-day basis (that's what my iPhone is for).



Of course, if I had gotten the Mini for Christmas I probably would have convinced myself that for my uses the specs aren't that important.

 

[AppleRobert]

It doesn't mean much by there are no mini returns at a few local BBs I frequent. There are 3s and 4s, much more so than before Xmas.

 

[SeanR1]

I had the iPad 3 which I sold intending to get the 4, but when I saw the mini it just made sense to me. It is the device I take with me everywhere and fits in my handbag easily. The 3 feels so heavy in comparison but is a good device too.

I'm gonna get a mini soon, to replace my iPad 1. I'm hoping my wife will love it and maybe trade me her 3 for it.

 

[mantan]

I disagree with those saying price is the reason for the Mini outselling the regular iPad. For one, it's only $170 more. If you're spending $329 on a tablet, its likely you could afford "the real deal".

The Mini is just so portable and more usable than a regular iPad.

This is coming from someone who currently owns an iPad 4.

I think price is a factor for some consumers, especially around the holiday season. I, along with several other parents I know, bought iPad Mini's for Christmas gifts. The current price is a bit more than an iPod Touch.

$300 is also comparable to other 'big item' electronic gifts kids get (game consoles, etc).

If it had been $500, I doubt I would have bought one. Likewise I think there a lot of people who consider a $300 around the limit of what they'd make for an impulse buy. (a reason that golf drivers and Coach bags have sat that that price point for years.)

It's the same reason the iPhone is sold in droves at subsidized priced for $199-$299.

Price absolutely matters. It helps when the device is a size that is very popular, but if the Mini was $429 instead of $329, the sales would drop markedly.

 

[0dev]

Last time i checked, coporations were in business to maximize profits, not unit sales. Apple's brand dominance allows them to command more than a third higher unit price than nexus. As the tablet innovation curve flattens, android partners will be in a race to the bottom to make $100 tablets. And apple will still be selling all the $329 minis--and a lot of them.

Apple is able to do this because no competitor in the 20 years has be able to outflank its design strength and eco system. Samsung may provide some competition; they are the best candidate to provide a technical breakthru.

Google's Nexus devices (and Amazon's Kindle tablets) are being sold dirt cheap specifically because they aim to make money from content rather than the tablet itself. Apple on the other hand aims to make its money from unit sales. So they have different business models, hence the different pricing.

At the end of the day, though, you as a consumer get a far better deal by purchasing a Nexus 7 over an iPad Mini, because you get more tablet for your money. It's as simple as that.