3 ms·

Steve Jobs must be rolling in his grave. 4 separate iPad lines, plus extra screen size variation? How is an "Air" variant useful? Why does the iPad Pro have a

by hopler 8y ago

Steve Jobs must be rolling in his grave. 4 separate iPad lines, plus extra screen size variation? How is an "Air" variant useful? Why does the iPad Pro have a screen size choice, but the mini is a separate line? It should be iPad and iPad Pro, with screen size choices in each line.

dmicah 8y ago
Not to mention two Apple Pencils, with different 'new' iPads working with different editions of the Pencil - these new devices announced today won't work with the refreshed Pencil announced last fall...
fori1to10 8y ago
Or better, no screen size choices.
gpmcadam 8y ago
Arguably you could group them as Pro and Consumer. - Pro: iPad Pro (11" and 12.9" - FaceID, Bezel-less) - Consumer: iPad mini, iPad Air and iPad (TouchID, Bezel) I don't see how this differs too much from Steve's approach?
- jsgo 8y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkVs4ZqWgN8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkVs4ZqWgN8 I don't think he aimed for 4 products in a specific line, so he'd probably be miffed about how many variants there are between each. I think the 4 iPads would be forgivable if there was consistency between the various product lines naming. iPhone _ Plus vs iPad Pro vs iPhone XS Max? That by itself is 3 different "descriptors" for their big screen devices (granted, Pro is less about big screen and more about spec stuffing, but non-tech consumers I know think iPad Pro = big screen iPad = expensive iPad).
- Someone1234 8y ago
  If iPad Mini, iPad Air, and "iPad" were part of the same line I'd agree. You've basically grouped them as if they were (they aren't). The Apple website is a mess: https://i.imgur.com/iGnlSUl.png https://i.imgur.com/iGnlSUl.png A more Jobs approach would be more akin to this: https://i.imgur.com/R15IcVS.png https://i.imgur.com/R15IcVS.png The Mini would simply be another "iPad" size.
Tepix 8y ago
Confusing indeed. It seems like "air" now means "faster". They introduced the "air" model (550€) to fill the gap between the 350€ iPad and the 880€ iPad Pro 11". They should have just released it as "iPad (2019)" with the new CPU at a higher price and kept selling the 6th gen. iPad (2018).
- CoolGuySteve 8y ago
  In the US the iPad is perpetually on sale for $250 if you look for it. I suspect it's either not selling well or overpriced.
kirykl 8y ago
And their compare tool only lets you see 3 at a time [0]. Its too much work/thinking needed to tell the models apart. [0]https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/ https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/
snuxoll 8y ago
> 4 separate iPad lines, plus extra screen size variation? Yup, confusing, I agree. They could do three which wouldn't be terrible, and I'll explain why: because [cont] > How is an "Air" variant useful? the "basic" iPad went back to an older design for the display to cut costs, it has a non-laminated display that can really bother you if you are accustomed to the more recent iPad models. If they were still selling the 1st/2nd gen iPad Pro models this wouldn't be an issue, but the 3rd gen iPad Pro had a massive price jump that puts some quality of life features like a laminated display behind said price jump. Bringing the "Air" line back let's Apple have a middle tier of high quality tablets between the entry-level and (for most) overkill. Ultimately the iPad Mini remains as it always has, the 7.9" variant of the larger standard iPad (Air) Model. If Apple wanted they could simplify down to three product lines: iPad (9.7"), iPad Air (7.9", 10.5"), iPad Pro (11", 12.9"), but I guess marketing research probably suggests that keeping the Mini separate is good for product awareness.
- jak92 8y ago
  > the "basic" iPad went back to an older design for the display to cut costs, it has a non-laminated display that can really bother you if you are accustomed to the more recent iPad models. I have an ipad air 2 and our screen is cracked. I went to have it replaced and I believe the cost was $299 which was more than I paid for it BF a few years back. I am very much looking forward to purchase a new ipad with laminated display (on sale).
Theodores 8y ago
Couldn't agree more, it is confusing to the consumer. They should be given model and year designations like how cars had them in the 1980's. There was cachet to having a 'GL' ford instead of a base 'L' model and you didn't have to know the engine size. The model year and the badge enabled you to know what you needed to know. Nobody 'needed' anything better than the 'L' model to go from A to B but you had to have the 'GL' or better and didn't have to know what 'GL' stood for, all you knew was it was better. These naming schemes changed with the times, probably because the likes of Citroen started complicating it with things like 'GLDTI16' that were getting silly. Some sports variants just had a spoiler and speed stripes tacked on to get an extra 'S' on the badge. They still had the stock lame engine and brakes. The 'GTi' version had real performance benefits. By this way of thinking, Apple could do a 'sports' iPad that just comes in a rugged case. People would fall for that. Same with the 'GTi' moniker, people would pay for a red line around the bezel, the black anodised body and a top yield CPU that was notionally faster. The 'eco' model could be the lame version without the RAM and pixel density and maybe a plastic case, only saving grace being battery life. 'pro' could be the 'air' variant, the base model merely 'deluxe'. 'Max' could be the big screen variant of all the above. I think customers could relate to the auto-analogy names and spend accordingly. Henry Ford only ever wanted the Model T, no GM style built in obsolescence and variations beyond necessary with fancy names. He has probably been rolling in his grave for decades now.
scarface74 8y ago
Yes because “when Steve Jobs was alive”, they didn’t have the iPod shuffle, Nano, regular iPod and the iPod Touch....
- qalmakka 8y ago
  You have to admit they were vastly different products, both in appearance and functionality. A random person could understand quite easily their differences without going deep in technical details: the classic was bulky, with lots of storage and the original interface; the touch had a touch screen, the nano was small and compact, while the shuffle had no display and no way to select music. What really characterizes the two different iPad lines? Numbers and technical features. The Pros support USB-C, have different pens which do the same thing as the old ones, but are not compatible, plus a slew of other features that a total noob won't and does not want to understand. I don't see how this is not bad; it's arguable that Apple wouldn't have done this a decade ago, and that it's getting closer to the disastrous naming schemes used by companies such as Dell (and in some ways Apple itself in the nineties).
  - scarface74 8y ago
    The differences are the price. You choose how much you can spend and the features you want. A total noob is going to spend the least possible

by hopler 8y ago

dmicah 8y ago

Not to mention two Apple Pencils, with different 'new' iPads working with different editions of the Pencil - these new devices announced today won't work with the refreshed Pencil announced last fall...

fori1to10 8y ago

Or better, no screen size choices.

gpmcadam 8y ago

Arguably you could group them as Pro and Consumer. - Pro: iPad Pro (11" and 12.9" - FaceID, Bezel-less) - Consumer: iPad mini, iPad Air and iPad (TouchID, Bezel) I don't see how this differs too much from Steve's approach?

jsgo 8y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkVs4ZqWgN8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkVs4ZqWgN8 I don't think he aimed for 4 products in a specific line, so he'd probably be miffed about how many variants there are between each. I think the 4 iPads would be forgivable if there was consistency between the various product lines naming. iPhone _ Plus vs iPad Pro vs iPhone XS Max? That by itself is 3 different "descriptors" for their big screen devices (granted, Pro is less about big screen and more about spec stuffing, but non-tech consumers I know think iPad Pro = big screen iPad = expensive iPad).
Someone1234 8y ago
If iPad Mini, iPad Air, and "iPad" were part of the same line I'd agree. You've basically grouped them as if they were (they aren't). The Apple website is a mess: https://i.imgur.com/iGnlSUl.png https://i.imgur.com/iGnlSUl.png A more Jobs approach would be more akin to this: https://i.imgur.com/R15IcVS.png https://i.imgur.com/R15IcVS.png The Mini would simply be another "iPad" size.

Tepix 8y ago

Confusing indeed. It seems like "air" now means "faster". They introduced the "air" model (550€) to fill the gap between the 350€ iPad and the 880€ iPad Pro 11". They should have just released it as "iPad (2019)" with the new CPU at a higher price and kept selling the 6th gen. iPad (2018).

CoolGuySteve 8y ago
In the US the iPad is perpetually on sale for $250 if you look for it. I suspect it's either not selling well or overpriced.

kirykl 8y ago

And their compare tool only lets you see 3 at a time [0]. Its too much work/thinking needed to tell the models apart. [0]https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/ https://www.apple.com/ipad/compare/

snuxoll 8y ago

> 4 separate iPad lines, plus extra screen size variation? Yup, confusing, I agree. They could do three which wouldn't be terrible, and I'll explain why: because [cont] > How is an "Air" variant useful? the "basic" iPad went back to an older design for the display to cut costs, it has a non-laminated display that can really bother you if you are accustomed to the more recent iPad models. If they were still selling the 1st/2nd gen iPad Pro models this wouldn't be an issue, but the 3rd gen iPad Pro had a massive price jump that puts some quality of life features like a laminated display behind said price jump. Bringing the "Air" line back let's Apple have a middle tier of high quality tablets between the entry-level and (for most) overkill. Ultimately the iPad Mini remains as it always has, the 7.9" variant of the larger standard iPad (Air) Model. If Apple wanted they could simplify down to three product lines: iPad (9.7"), iPad Air (7.9", 10.5"), iPad Pro (11", 12.9"), but I guess marketing research probably suggests that keeping the Mini separate is good for product awareness.

jak92 8y ago
> the "basic" iPad went back to an older design for the display to cut costs, it has a non-laminated display that can really bother you if you are accustomed to the more recent iPad models. I have an ipad air 2 and our screen is cracked. I went to have it replaced and I believe the cost was $299 which was more than I paid for it BF a few years back. I am very much looking forward to purchase a new ipad with laminated display (on sale).

Theodores 8y ago

Couldn't agree more, it is confusing to the consumer. They should be given model and year designations like how cars had them in the 1980's. There was cachet to having a 'GL' ford instead of a base 'L' model and you didn't have to know the engine size. The model year and the badge enabled you to know what you needed to know. Nobody 'needed' anything better than the 'L' model to go from A to B but you had to have the 'GL' or better and didn't have to know what 'GL' stood for, all you knew was it was better. These naming schemes changed with the times, probably because the likes of Citroen started complicating it with things like 'GLDTI16' that were getting silly. Some sports variants just had a spoiler and speed stripes tacked on to get an extra 'S' on the badge. They still had the stock lame engine and brakes. The 'GTi' version had real performance benefits. By this way of thinking, Apple could do a 'sports' iPad that just comes in a rugged case. People would fall for that. Same with the 'GTi' moniker, people would pay for a red line around the bezel, the black anodised body and a top yield CPU that was notionally faster. The 'eco' model could be the lame version without the RAM and pixel density and maybe a plastic case, only saving grace being battery life. 'pro' could be the 'air' variant, the base model merely 'deluxe'. 'Max' could be the big screen variant of all the above. I think customers could relate to the auto-analogy names and spend accordingly. Henry Ford only ever wanted the Model T, no GM style built in obsolescence and variations beyond necessary with fancy names. He has probably been rolling in his grave for decades now.

scarface74 8y ago

Yes because “when Steve Jobs was alive”, they didn’t have the iPod shuffle, Nano, regular iPod and the iPod Touch....

qalmakka 8y ago
You have to admit they were vastly different products, both in appearance and functionality. A random person could understand quite easily their differences without going deep in technical details: the classic was bulky, with lots of storage and the original interface; the touch had a touch screen, the nano was small and compact, while the shuffle had no display and no way to select music. What really characterizes the two different iPad lines? Numbers and technical features. The Pros support USB-C, have different pens which do the same thing as the old ones, but are not compatible, plus a slew of other features that a total noob won't and does not want to understand. I don't see how this is not bad; it's arguable that Apple wouldn't have done this a decade ago, and that it's getting closer to the disastrous naming schemes used by companies such as Dell (and in some ways Apple itself in the nineties).
- scarface74 8y ago
  The differences are the price. You choose how much you can spend and the features you want. A total noob is going to spend the least possible