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

What price range do you think?

SilentLoner

SilentLoner

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Dec 29, 2007
1,065
6
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

What price range are you thinking the new iPads will be?
 
SilentLoner said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

What price range are you thinking the new iPads will be?
Click to expand...

iPad 2 16GB: Starts at $399
iPad 3 16GB: Starts at $499
 
What I hope:
iPad2 16 GB - $399
iPad3 32 GB - $499

What is likely:
iPad2 8GB - $399
iPad3 16GB - $499

I really wish they'll take this time as an opportunity to upgrade the storage options on the new generation of iPads to 32, 64, and 128 GB, but without impact to the $499, 599, 699 pricing scheme. I don't think there is a compelling or competitive reason for them to do this yet though. My iPad2 16GB works well enough for me (though it is always full, requiring me to manage my usage when I want new apps), but as more apps get retina images added, the extra space is going to make an iPad3 16GB feel too cramped.

I think they could get away keeping the iPad2 with only an 8GB option because A) that's the precedent they've set with older phone generations and the low-end iPod Touch and B) the only real competitor in the "cheap" tablet market is the Kindle Fire, and it's only 8GB. But an 8GB really would be quite cramped.
 
redscull said:
What I hope:
iPad2 16 GB - $399
iPad3 32 GB - $499

What is likely:
iPad2 8GB - $399
iPad3 16GB - $499
Click to expand...

An 8GB iPad? Not ever. If Apple were to release a lower-cost iPad it may be something for the educational market but never limited to 8GB. Will never happen.
 
i just think 8GB is too small for something this is... just big, to be honest with you. im kind of surprised as to why 32GB is the standard for an ipad 2 at the moment, and i will be even more surprised if apple don't do this on the ipad 3, but then again, that just raises prices, and from what i have seen here it seems to be viewed negatively. 128GB would be quite nice if you consume a lot of apps, music and movies/TV programs, but what would it's price be?

16GB is $499 as it is
32GB is $599
and the 64GB is $699

and maybe the 128GB? probably $799, and would probably be $899 or $949 with the either 3G/4G LTE(?)
 
poloponies said:
An 8GB iPad? Not ever. If Apple were to release a lower-cost iPad it may be something for the educational market but never limited to 8GB. Will never happen.
Click to expand...
Your opinion is based on nothing whatsoever. My opinion is based on existing patterns. The iPod Touch is nothing more than a small-screened iPad, and its base model is 8GB. Apple clearly has no problem putting only 8GB in a current generation iOS device. iPhones are also the same basic device, and when Apple kept the last generation for sale alongside the current generation, they dropped the capacity to 8GB.

Now I admit that I am not necessarily any more correct than you, but at least my guess is the result of pattern recognition and carrying the sequence out to the next logical step.

I agree that 8GB is really limiting. The 8GB iPod Touch feels like a joke, and the 8GB iPhone 3GS isn't really for anyone that wants to use their phone as a full-featured smartphone. But both exist and are bought.

If Apple keeps the iPad 2 for sale alongside the iPad 3, it will be for one purpose only: lower price point. It will target the price conscious buyer very specifcally, and that buyer may not even comprehend what the real impact of 8GB means. They certainly won't care, and they might not even be buying the device for themselves. There is no reason at all for Apple not to put 8GB in it and keep their profit margin a wee bit higher since it won't impact the sales in the market it'll be aimed at.
 
Last edited:
redscull said:
Your opinion is based on nothing whatsoever. My opinion is based on existing patterns. The iPod Touch is nothing more than a small-screened iPad, and its base model is 8GB. Apple clearly has no problem putting only 8GB in a current generation iOS device. iPhones are also the same basic device, and when Apple kept the last generation for sale alongside the current generation, they dropped the capacity to 8GB.

Now I admit that I am not necessarily any more correct than you, but at least my guess is the result of pattern recognition and carrying the sequence out to the next logical step.

I agree that 8GB is really limiting. The 8GB iPod Touch feels like a joke, and the 8GB iPhone 3GS isn't really for anyone that wants to use their phone as a full-featured smartphone. But both exist and are bought.

If Apple keeps the iPad 2 for sale alongside the iPad 3, it will be for one purpose only: lower price point. It will target the price conscious buyer very specifcally, and that buyer may not even comprehend what the real impact of 8GB means. They certainly won't care, and they might not even be buying the device for themselves. There is no reason at all for Apple not to put 8GB in it and keep their profit margin a wee bit higher since it won't impact the sales in the market it'll be aimed at.
Click to expand...

Given your devotion to observing patterns maybe you noticed that 8GB was the existing low-end for those devices. Apple didn't halve the memory. Another observation of note is that HD apps have larger file sizes than those made for phones. 8GB simply makes no sense for such a device.
 
macmastersam said:
i just think 8GB is too small for something this is... just big, to be honest with you. im kind of surprised as to why 32GB is the standard for an ipad 2 at the moment, and i will be even more surprised if apple don't do this on the ipad 3, but then again, that just raises prices, and from what i have seen here it seems to be viewed negatively. 128GB would be quite nice if you consume a lot of apps, music and movies/TV programs, but what would it's price be?

16GB is $499 as it is
32GB is $599
and the 64GB is $699

and maybe the 128GB? probably $799, and would probably be $899 or $949 with the either 3G/4G LTE(?)
Click to expand...

I wish Apple would make 32GB the base capacity for the iPad 3, but I don't it's going to happen until iPad 4. I also think 128GB is going to be next year.
 
I'm so excited for the iPad 3 :) I have the original iPad and it's so sluggish. Say the announcement is march 7th how soon after you think it'll be out.
 
poloponies said:
Given your devotion to observing patterns maybe you noticed that 8GB was the existing low-end for those devices. Apple didn't halve the memory. Another observation of note is that HD apps have larger file sizes than those made for phones. 8GB simply makes no sense for such a device.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Has Apple ever reduced the storage on a device? And I'd say the fact that the iPod touch has an 8gb minimum is an argument against it, since like you say the same app optimized for iPad vs iPod is quite a bit larger.
 
redscull said:
Your opinion is based on nothing whatsoever. My opinion is based on existing patterns. The iPod Touch is nothing more than a small-screened iPad, and its base model is 8GB. Apple clearly has no problem putting only 8GB in a current generation iOS device. iPhones are also the same basic device, and when Apple kept the last generation for sale alongside the current generation, they dropped the capacity to 8GB.
Click to expand...
As much as Apple is into money, they also value the experience. 8GB is possible on a phone because many iPhone users aren't App buyers, never change apps around and simply bought one for the basic functions.

iPads are a different story because IF you are buying one then most likely it is more about doing something on it beyond web surfing. Buying books, viewing movies, playing games, portable workstation, displaying pictures or whatever all require storage space and with Apps often being much much bigger for the iPad version then 8GB won't get you anywhere. And also, if this were to be anywhere near the EDU market it would be a disaster since iTextbooks are huge (3-4GB).

I dont mean to be rude by saying this, but you are way off on this one. 8GB has no place on an iPad since they can make their money simply by selling previous generation 16GB iPads (1 or 2) for much less IF they wanted to play lowball
 
My prediction is same price point as always for new iPads and they'll keep the iPad 2 Wi-Fi model around and reduce its price. I don't see them adding a 128GB option or anything like that as a new price tier. When the storage gets bumped I think the 16GB will be available on the discounted last-gen devices and the new default will be 32, 64 and 128. But I think that is at least a year away. Why would they bump storage AND introduce a killer new display the same year?
 
SilentLoner said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

What price range are you thinking the new iPads will be?
Click to expand...

The only thing that matters to Apple is the resulting profit that pumps up their bottom line, brings more headlines, and increases the amount of cash Apple can flaunt. They are seemingly unstoppable :)
 
M87 said:
My prediction is same price point as always for new iPads and they'll keep the iPad 2 Wi-Fi model around and reduce its price. I don't see them adding a 128GB option or anything like that as a new price tier. When the storage gets bumped I think the 16GB will be available on the discounted last-gen devices and the new default will be 32, 64 and 128. But I think that is at least a year away. Why would they bump storage AND introduce a killer new display the same year?
Click to expand...

I agree. It would take a major competition to make Apple change their pricing structure. If anything it would make sense for them to slightly raise the prices. (there is inflation factor after all). Sale volume would take you only that far, if Apple would reduce prices on new iPads, their stocks will fall and San Jose bankruptcy lawyers would have their work cut out for them.
 
Peterson8765 said:
I wish Apple would make 32GB the base capacity for the iPad 3, but I don't it's going to happen until iPad 4. I also think 128GB is going to be next year.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Would be nice though if apple was generous lol. But they are also a business like all others and have 1 goal, money.
 
deeddawg said:
At least twice: iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4.

Both originally in 16GB & 32GB flavors.

Both re-released in 8GB versions when the next generation iPhone was released.
Click to expand...

And yet they didn't release an 8GB iPad 1 when the iPad 2 came out.
 
kevink2 said:
And yet they didn't release an 8GB iPad 1 when the iPad 2 came out.
Click to expand...

My post was not to suggest they will or won't, my point was in response to someone's suggestion that Apple had never released a reduced store of an extant iDevice. I cited two examples.

When the ipad2 came out, they had 18 SKU's to juggle. Seem enough, why add more?

I have no idea or opinion on what Apple may do when the ipad3 comes out. Either direction could be argued, and both are pretty pointless until the reality is announced.
 
M87 said:
My prediction is same price point as always for new iPads and they'll keep the iPad 2 Wi-Fi model around and reduce its price. I don't see them adding a 128GB option or anything like that as a new price tier. When the storage gets bumped I think the 16GB will be available on the discounted last-gen devices and the new default will be 32, 64 and 128. But I think that is at least a year away. Why would they bump storage AND introduce a killer new display the same year?
Click to expand...

Agreed. I HOPE they release 32 64 128 but it don't think it will happen.
 
Being a retina device. So far the highest quality of pixels in any of their devices (for now). I'd say they would have to release it in higher capacities for all the HD apps and a higher video quality, wouldn't you say.


Sent via the interwebz.
 
To everyone saying how they aren't going to release an 8GB iPad 2, I think you are completely wrong. With more things being stored in the cloud, I could totally see them releasing a much cheaper iPad 2. To many people, the iPad is a web surfing and email/social networking device, as it is to me. I have the 16GB model, and because I have so much space I do have a few songs on the device but I never play them. I use aol radio or pandora. I also have a phone and an iPod touch to have my full library on. If there was a $400 iPad 2 when I bought mine, I would have much rather had that. But, this is only my opinion. (not trying to offend anyone who thinks different)

----------
kevink2 said:
And yet they didn't release an 8GB iPad 1 when the iPad 2 came out.
Click to expand...

True, but they also didn't use the cloud as much when the iPad 2 came out. Netflix and music streaming services such as pandora keep me from having the "physical content" if you will on my iPad, just taking up space. I still respect your opinion though.
 
iPad 2 16GB $429 wifi only no 3G option.

iPad 3 32GB $499
iPad 3 64GB $599
iPad 3 128GB $699

And just add the usual $130 for 3G or LTE on the iPad 3.
 
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