Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'iPad' started by 1080p, Oct 7, 2012.
Because of this:
No way an iPad Mini will cost less than an iPod Touch (5th Gen).
Agree. Not a hope at $250, I'm thinking around the $400 mark.
That makes sense, maybe you're right, but only Apple will confirm what's the final number
$399 and it replaces the iPad 2 in the line up.
Then it's a complete waste of time and the 7" tablet is still wide open. I'm guessing 300! 400 and people will buy the nexus 7 or iPad 3!
people shopping for an ipod touch probably won't be cross-shopping that with an ipad mini. some people with $299 to spend will probably buy one device, and some people will probably buy the other.
further, apple's pricing on their product lines don't always make sense. the iphone 5 starts at $199, $100 cheaper than the new ipod touch. does that make a lot of sense? sure, the pricing is subsidized but even the unsubsidized iphone 5 is even more expensive than the much bigger ipad with cellular. does that make sense? and the answer is yes, because people looking to buy a phone are not interested in the tablet, and vice versa.
I think it 350$
I'm fine $350 price tag as long it has retina display!
Next logical step is that if it does come with that price tag (which I think it will), the specs it has will *not* be inferior to the existing products (i.e. Kindle Fire HD, Nexus 7, Nook). I think they're going to release a high-end 7" tablet with a matching price tag.
normally i would agree but since its apple they'll probably release a lower spec than the nexus 7 and sell it for double the price.
Bear in mind the iPod touch starts at $299 with 32GB storage. What about an iPad mini for $299 with 16GB, leaving it up consumers if storage or screen size is more worth their money? Not saying it will happen but I think it's worth taking into consideration..
Totally agree and many I fear will be disappointed when the Mini gets introduced with this price point. Apple leads the market and as such they know they can price their gadgets as such and people will buy them.
If they introduce a 32GB version don't be too surprised to see a $499 price tag. Just sayin'.
I think it will be $299 for 16GB with the same resolution as the iPad 2.
Why does the price have to coincide with the ipods and touch?
The mini is a different product.
I can not understand why anyone would buy the touch these days (just get the phone)
IMO- when looking the 3- touch, mini, iPad- the decision will be based on size not cost.
Pick the size that best suits your needs and move on from there.
Why would anyone who wants a small touch buy a mini just because it's the same price?
Ipad mini 16gig wifi will be about $250-$299 and no more.
I would consider the mini at that price. And if you offered me a full size ipad for the same price- I would still go mini.
size matters not cost.
Depends upon features but I don't think it will sell for prices in the 350 and up range for a "small" model. I certainly wouldn't spend that type of money for what is currently described as expected Mini. Apple is fighting the $200 7" and sure it will be bigger but that is the market. I think it has to be competitive in price to those devices.
Doesn't mean that is what Apple will do. At $350 and up I won't be buying.
iPhone has always been more expensive than the iPad.
Your argument is invalid.
And this is just one of the reasons.
The 16GB LTE iPad is $20 less than the much smaller 16GB iPhone 5. Seems the iPod Touch argument just falls apart after looking at this comparison.
You could be right, and you could be wrong. I am super anxious to find out though.
I personally do not think the price will have anything to do with the iPod Touch price (respectfully). Here is my thoughts:
1 - We already know that Apple considers adding 16 GB of storage to a product to be worth an extra $100 (See iPad and iPhone 16 GB to 32 GB)...
2 - They are different items, the iPod touch is a "smart" MP3 player, not a tablet. If I wanted an iPod Touch, I certainly wouldn't want an iPad Mini instead. While the mini may be more portable than the 9.7" iPad, but it won't fit in my pocket or be good for exercising like the iPod Touch IMO
3 - The Kindle Fire and Nexus 7 have an 8 GB version, so there is a possibility we will see an 8 GB iPad. Apple would know whether they could make that decision based off of how many 8 GB iPhone's they are able to sell. I know a lot of people who do not have any music/videos on their iPhone or iPad... Only apps and photos they took.
4 - Perhaps they will take a slightly lower profit margin versus some other products. They certainly should not have to make much up profit do to R&D.
I know one thing, I will most likely be buying one for my Girlfriend for Christmas
A kid who doesn't get a smart phone... Or someone on T-Mobile... Or someone who only uses a business phone and has no choice which model they get... Parents want something for their kids to entertain them...
Some quick ones off of the top of my head that could be in the market
I agree to an extent because I personally do not see the value of an iPod Touch ... However, I do know there is still a market for it.
1 - Except for the previous generation iPod Touch that remains on sale. Only $50 difference between the 16 and 32.
3 - Only the "old" style Kindle Fire come in 8GB. The new Kindle Fire HD starts at 16. Similar to how Apple keeps the iPhone 4 around with 8GB capacity.
The engineering that goes into shrinking the iPhone.
Extra microphones. Historically better cameras then iPad. Camera flash.
Higher PPI display.
All cost more money. $20 difference seems plausible.
Not to mention business strategy. They price the iPhone higher at full retail, because subsidies will bring the price lower.... thus more profit for Apple.
You argument falls apart because Apple doesn't ADVERTISE them at $650. They advertise at $199. The $650 is for
A. Unlocked buyers. (Small percentage)
B. The bad news after someone finds out they are not eligible for an upgrade.
I understand the logic, but respectfully disagree. These are different product lines. One fits in your pocket, the other one doesn't. As others have mentioned, more work is required to get essentially the same components to fit in a smaller space. One has a retina display (the iPod) the other won't (the iPad Mini). It's comparing apples and oranges, and there's just as much reason to believe that Apple will low-ball the price to compete with the Kindle Fire.
Many disagree with me (which I understand, it's just my personal opinion), but I believe Apple will price the entry-level iPad Mini at $199 for a simple reason - they want to compete with the sub-$200 Kindle Fire and draw new customers into their ecosystem. They can sell models with increased storage and LTE support for $300-$600 and bank on those for a higher profit margin, but the $199 model (again, my personal opinion) would be geared towards introducing new customers into the Apple community with a lower profit margin.
For those new customers, the iPad Mini might be their only Apple product. They may own an Android phone and a Windows PC. But Apple is hoping that once they get their hands on an iPad and start buying apps, music, and books through iTunes and the App Store, that their next phone will be an iPhone, and maybe their next computer will be a Mac.
Amazon uses this same logic with the pricing of their Kindles. They don't make bank on the tablets, they make bank on the content. Apple doesn't have to do this across the board with their products, but it would be smart to do it at the entry level to draw in new users.
My 2 bits.
Using your logic, the iPad mini could be the same price as the new iPod Touch because of the cost of miniaturization of the Touch. And the Touch has the same display and flash as the iPhone.
You are right on number 1, but I didn't say they always charge $100 more for 16 GB of data. I was saying they are willing to do so, and they feel that they can do it. And again, that's the "old" model.
The iPhone 5 16 GB to 32 GB is $100 more.. and we saw it only costs them like an extra $10 for the extra capacity. So it is possible IMO.
And the iPad Mini is expected to only carry the A5 and have a non-retina display (no telling what they will actually do)... Which would allow them to do it.
^This.... Makes a lot of sense. I can see how it would be more difficult to design/manufacture the iPhone 5 v the current iPad.
ADDITIONAL: Also, I think the fact that the profit margin on the 16 GB iPhone 5 is roughly $443, the 32 GB iPhone 5 is $543, and the 64 GB iPhone 5 is $612 is absolutely insane. I don't care about the amount of the profit they make cuz I know there is R&D and they want to make a profit, it just bothers me how much higher it is for the 32 GB and 64 GB compared to the 16 GB....
It is not like it took any effort for them to put 32 or 64 GB in the phone instead of 16 GB. They really need to decrease the difference in storage capacity prices. Needing or wanting a 64 GB model means you are getting hosed compared to someone who buys a 16 GB model (even with subsidy).
Worse cameras, no cellular radios. A5 Processor. (Faster A6 in iPhone.) Probably only has 512 MB of RAM. (iP5 has 1GB). Also... historically while iPod touch has a retina display, it is still inferior. Check this article:
Also... my "miniaturization" argument is iPhone vs. iPad. So they miniaturized the iPod touch too? They also charged a premium for it too. No $199 entry level model. $299 to get into it.
While its true that in previous generations, iPod touches had inferior displays to corresponding iPhones, this year, Apple said that the new iPod touch has the same screen as the iPhone 5.