Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Most Ridiculous iPad 3 Rumor Yet - No 64 GB Model

you guys are aware that they have dropped capacities from one year to the next with the ipod right?

the first ipod photos were available in 40 and 60gb, the mid year refresh dropped the 40 gb to 30 gb and then to 20gb and 60gb when it was renamed ipod with color display. Then the 2008 classic was only available in 120gb from the previous 160gb.

I doubt it will happen but it isn't out of the realm of possibilities, perhaps they are trying to get people to depend on the icloud service for space. That's what the kindle fire pretty well depends on.
 
iEvolution said:
you guys are aware that they have dropped capacities from one year to the next with the ipod right?

the first ipod photos were available in 40 and 60gb, the mid year refresh dropped the 40 gb to 30 gb and then to 20gb and 60gb when it was renamed ipod with color display. Then the 2008 classic was only available in 120gb from the previous 160gb.

I doubt it will happen but it isn't out of the realm of possibilities, perhaps they are trying to get people to depend on the icloud service for space. That's what the kindle fire pretty well depends on.
Click to expand...

You can't compare an iPod that only plays music with an iPad that is technically "a computer" with applications, photos, games and much more. Further more 160GB and 120GB doesn't make a difference to the 80% of iPod an iPhone buyers who don't own that quantity of music. So the "drop" was negligible.
 
homeboy said:
You can't compare an iPod that only plays music with an iPad that is technically "a computer" with applications, photos, games and much more. Further more 160GB and 120GB doesn't make a difference to the 80% of iPod an iPhone buyers who don't own that quantity of music. So the "drop" was negligible.
Click to expand...

the same can be said about the 64gb model, it sells the least out of all the models and most people dont use such capacity.

only thing the ipad can do over the ipod (which can play video, photo nd music) is use apps and apps (98% anyway) are small in comparison to video.

160gb to 120gb is a drop in capacity even if you want to pretend it isn't.

Im just saying they've done it before that's all. I really doubt they'll do it but its not impossible.
 
iEvolution said:
the same can be said about the 64gb model, it sells the least out of all the models and most people dont use such capacity.
Click to expand...

The 64GB sell less for the obvious reason that its expensive, borderline the price for a decent mid-range PC which is more than what most people are willing to spend on a third device.
 
iEvolution said:
you guys are aware that they have dropped capacities from one year to the next with the ipod right?

the first ipod photos were available in 40 and 60gb, the mid year refresh dropped the 40 gb to 30 gb and then to 20gb and 60gb when it was renamed ipod with color display. Then the 2008 classic was only available in 120gb from the previous 160gb.

I doubt it will happen but it isn't out of the realm of possibilities, perhaps they are trying to get people to depend on the icloud service for space. That's what the kindle fire pretty well depends on.
Click to expand...

They only have done it on the harddrive enabled Ipods and only because of HD availability. On all the flash based items they have doubled the size every other generation, (iPhone 4S being the most recent example).
-Tig
 
homeboy said:
The 64GB sell less for the obvious reason that its expensive, borderline the price for a decent mid-range PC which is more than what most people are willing to spend on a third device.
Click to expand...

We dont actually know that the 64GB ipad sells the least. On a survey of 1000 US Ipad owners, only 15% said they owned a 64GB Ipad, by comparison, 4.3% said they owned both an iPad 1 and an Ipad 2 and 8% had no idea what model they had. The most interesting thing of the survey to me was that as the memory increased so did the likelyhood of 3G being on the iPad. 57% of the 64 GB surveyed has 3G, which is interesting given the unit without 3G is already $700. Also even if 15% is correct thats still 800K units a month, and the 64 Gb are the most profitable of the iPads.
-Tig
 
@MythicFrost

My old 133mhz pc from back in the day were a 2000$ computer - not you can get a quad-core for less... - Times and prices change... - But lets see - I dont believe in more then 50$ price bump on a iPad 3... only question is where the entry level will start - maybe with a 16gb iPad 2 for 399$ and then next will be the 32gb iPad 3 for 549$ :)
 
We might see 8GB iPad 2, 16, 32 and 64 iPad 3, sort of like how Apple continues to offer previous gen iPhones with lower capacity and price.
 
Zwhaler said:
We might see 8GB iPad 2, 16, 32 and 64 iPad 3, sort of like how Apple continues to offer previous gen iPhones with lower capacity and price.
Click to expand...

No way they are going to make a 8gb iPad - thats not enough space for ANYTHING... apps and books can go up to 2gb each :)
 
VinceDae said:
No way they are going to make a 8gb iPad - thats not enough space for ANYTHING... apps and books can go up to 2gb each :)
Click to expand...

I was citing this rumor, it would make sense especially if the iPad 3 sees a price increase over the current, in which case many more budget consumers would purchase a discounted iPad 2.
 
MythicFrost said:
What I'm saying though, is that the iPad 3 won't be the base model. I think we'll see a 16GB iPad 2 at $499, a 32GB iPad 3 at $650, a 64GB model for $750 and a 128GB model for $850. (I also suspect the iPad 2 will have a slightly faster processor, and perhaps use the A5X which may be produced at 28nm.)

The display in the iPad costs between $80-$120, and Apple's not going to absorb the increased cost of a retina display. And the difference between 32GB and 16GB of storage is almost nothing, the latter is about $8 and the former twice that.

It's true that Infinity Blade 2 is only 1.1GB, but Rage HD is 2GB, Modern Combat 3 is 1.7GB, Gangstar Rio is 1.7GB, etc., and there's a heap of games that are all around the 500MB-1GB mark, and that adds up quickly on a 16GB device.

These file sizes are already quite large, but when they start updating to support the iPad 3's retina display, they will only become larger.

Mmm, a 32GB iPad 3 is $50 less than what the 32GB iPad 2 costs right now. It's unlikely, considering the presumably higher cost for the retina display.
Click to expand...

That seems even more ridiculous to me then. I just can't see Apple bumping up the processor speed "slightly" and offering a 16GB iPad 2 for 499. It just wouldn't make any sense. If they're going to keep the iPad 2 around they may as well offer it at a budget price to kill off all those $300 android tablets that are starting to appear.

We don't know how much any of these components will cost Apple nor do we know what they consider an acceptable profit margin on each device sold. No doubt, the retina display will cost more but falling costs of other components could definitely soften the blow. Apple brought out the iPhone 4 with a retina display, brand new processor, larger memory options, a jump in ram, a hugely upgraded camera (2 in fact), and a completely redesigned shell. It all likely cost Apple more to manufacture but the price to consumers did not change.

As far as storage options are concerned, the problem is that you're applying your habits to others. There are tons of people who aren't even using half of their 16GB, they mostly use the device to browse the internet or watch streaming content.
 
erawsd said:
That seems even more ridiculous to me then. I just can't see Apple bumping up the processor speed "slightly" and offering a 16GB iPad 2 for 499. It just wouldn't make any sense. If they're going to keep the iPad 2 around they may as well offer it at a budget price to kill off all those $300 android tablets that are starting to appear.

We don't know how much any of these components will cost Apple nor do we know what they consider an acceptable profit margin on each device sold. No doubt, the retina display will cost more but falling costs of other components could definitely soften the blow. Apple brought out the iPhone 4 with a retina display, brand new processor, larger memory options, a jump in ram, a hugely upgraded camera (2 in fact), and a completely redesigned shell. It all likely cost Apple more to manufacture but the price to consumers did not change.

As far as storage options are concerned, the problem is that you're applying your habits to others. There are tons of people who aren't even using half of their 16GB, they mostly use the device to browse the internet or watch streaming content.
Click to expand...
It seems to be more reasonable than them taking a cut in profit. And we do have an idea, for example, the iPad's display costs about $120 -- the iPhone 4S display costs about $30. If they're going for a quad-core, more SGX543's, 1GB RAM, and better cameras, they're only going to be paying more.

Actually, I don't believe it cost them too much more to make the iPhone 4, the iPad is different though -- they make about $250 profit on the $499 model.

Maybe, but it's just too easy to fill it up. Throw on a movie or two, a big game or two, and you've only got like 7GB left.

After Mr X coming out and saying prices and storage capacities will remain the same, I'm hoping that's true, but I said what you replied to before that.
 
A 128 GB model would be nice to have.. just to have it (if it was the same as the current 64GB price.. which would be near improbable).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back