One link from DaringFireball and in less than a day this little blog has gotten more page views than it had gotten in the 5 years previous. Nice :)
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Better plug
A new connector is coming too.
Apple would know what percent of iPhones/iPads are returned because some little wire in the current 30 pin connection inside the device gets bent and doesn't connect anymore.
If the new connector can go in either direction, then they could have 2 sets of connections (one for each side of the plug) in the iPhone or iPad. If one ever failed, there's a built-in backup and you'd never even know. The odds of both sides failing for the same pin mean whatever the return rate is now, if nothing else changed about how pins connect and bend, this design could cut it to 1/8th that.
Apple would know what percent of iPhones/iPads are returned because some little wire in the current 30 pin connection inside the device gets bent and doesn't connect anymore.
If the new connector can go in either direction, then they could have 2 sets of connections (one for each side of the plug) in the iPhone or iPad. If one ever failed, there's a built-in backup and you'd never even know. The odds of both sides failing for the same pin mean whatever the return rate is now, if nothing else changed about how pins connect and bend, this design could cut it to 1/8th that.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Througherer
Going by this really good analysis...
But Apple's stuff is built more solidly than the Nexus: aluminum, steel, and glass rather than plastic.
Redoing Gruber's weight estimates by calculating the Grams per Cubic Millimeter, the iPod touch is 0.00215 g/mm³ and the iPhone 4S is 0.00223 g/mm³. Multiplying that by his estimated volume comes out with a weight between 416 and 432 grams if it had a similar weight-per-volume as an iPod touch or iPhone.
On this list, that puts it around the Kindle Fire.
Doing similar with the iPad 3, it's about 423,557 cubic mm. For 0.00154 g/mm³ (the iPad 2 gives a virtually identical number, which is another good confirmation on this weight-per-volume method.) Based on those two, it gives a potential weight of 298 grams.
I'd guess that just about 300 grams is a pretty safe estimate, and not far off from the Gruber's original 265 :)
(updated to show correct g/mm³ unit label.)
But Apple's stuff is built more solidly than the Nexus: aluminum, steel, and glass rather than plastic.
Redoing Gruber's weight estimates by calculating the Grams per Cubic Millimeter, the iPod touch is 0.00215 g/mm³ and the iPhone 4S is 0.00223 g/mm³. Multiplying that by his estimated volume comes out with a weight between 416 and 432 grams if it had a similar weight-per-volume as an iPod touch or iPhone.
On this list, that puts it around the Kindle Fire.
Doing similar with the iPad 3, it's about 423,557 cubic mm. For 0.00154 g/mm³ (the iPad 2 gives a virtually identical number, which is another good confirmation on this weight-per-volume method.) Based on those two, it gives a potential weight of 298 grams.
I'd guess that just about 300 grams is a pretty safe estimate, and not far off from the Gruber's original 265 :)
(updated to show correct g/mm³ unit label.)
Monday, July 16, 2012
Jobs on iPad 7.85
There are many examples of Steve Jobs adamantly saying one thing, then several months or years later, Apple would do the opposite. (Like no Video iPods, I haven't gone looking for more, but there's this nice quote that covers them all pretty well.)
The trick is in the past, it was Steve Jobs himself who'd get up on stage and hold up the new device that months or years before he said Apple would never make. More often than not, they'd figured how to do that thing the right way, and it took time or technology to catch up to what they wanted to build. Competitors were likely the only ones that ever made a big deal about it when he was alive, because they believed him the first time.
Now, people are using his comments about 7" tablets several years ago to say Apple will never make one. If he was alive, I bet he'd hold up a nearly 8" tablet and say how great it was...smaller to be even more portable than an iPad, but big enough to be a joy to use.
The current iPad is great for everything for me except reading in bed. The far lighter Kindle is what I use for that. But if a new smaller iPad is also much lighter, I may just change my reading habits.
The trick is in the past, it was Steve Jobs himself who'd get up on stage and hold up the new device that months or years before he said Apple would never make. More often than not, they'd figured how to do that thing the right way, and it took time or technology to catch up to what they wanted to build. Competitors were likely the only ones that ever made a big deal about it when he was alive, because they believed him the first time.
Now, people are using his comments about 7" tablets several years ago to say Apple will never make one. If he was alive, I bet he'd hold up a nearly 8" tablet and say how great it was...smaller to be even more portable than an iPad, but big enough to be a joy to use.
The current iPad is great for everything for me except reading in bed. The far lighter Kindle is what I use for that. But if a new smaller iPad is also much lighter, I may just change my reading habits.
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
iPod Updates
It's from AppleInsider, so taking with a large dose of salt, but that "dedicated new iTunes service" bit in the article got me wondering. iPods are well overdue for some updates, and rather than just a bump in GB, maybe finally something bigger.
The Kindle from the beginning had a 3G cell connection (later becoming an option to make cheaper models.) But it was only used for downloading books.
What if the new nano, and maybe a new iPod touch, includes a similar "free" built-in 3G cell connection, but only for downloading music. "Get a new song, anywhere." That seems like a very Apple thing to do.
Much like the Kindle, there's no choices of carriers, Apple makes a deal with one. Even at the high rates I'm paying for a connection on my iPad it's not that expensive for them: 2GB for $30, say that's 1000 songs = $0.03 per song. At the highest available iPad account (10GB for $80) it's even less at $0.016 per song. I'm sure with some huge deal it would be far less than that, tiny fractions of a cent for the bandwidth per song.
Especially for the nano, it probably wouldn't be upgradeable to do anything else. Maybe you could upgrade the iPod touch's one to use as a data connection, much like the iPad.
The Kindle from the beginning had a 3G cell connection (later becoming an option to make cheaper models.) But it was only used for downloading books.
What if the new nano, and maybe a new iPod touch, includes a similar "free" built-in 3G cell connection, but only for downloading music. "Get a new song, anywhere." That seems like a very Apple thing to do.
Much like the Kindle, there's no choices of carriers, Apple makes a deal with one. Even at the high rates I'm paying for a connection on my iPad it's not that expensive for them: 2GB for $30, say that's 1000 songs = $0.03 per song. At the highest available iPad account (10GB for $80) it's even less at $0.016 per song. I'm sure with some huge deal it would be far less than that, tiny fractions of a cent for the bandwidth per song.
Especially for the nano, it probably wouldn't be upgradeable to do anything else. Maybe you could upgrade the iPod touch's one to use as a data connection, much like the iPad.
Friday, July 6, 2012
More iPad 7.85" thoughts
More thinking on iPad 7
There's a report that compares current iPad 2 vs 3 build prices. For the lowest end WiFi model:
iPad 2 $245 to build, and iPad 3 $316 to build.
With Apple selling them at $399 and $499. So roughly 38% and 36% profit.
I've not found updated numbers, since it has to cost far less to make them as they go along. But the estimated costs to manufacture iPhones when they first went on sale.
iPhone 3GS, $178 (here, from 2009)
iPhone 4, $188 (here)
iPhone 4S, $188 (here) to $203 (here)
And those prices have to be higher than they are now, as they're years old in some cases. To make a 3GS it seems it would be down to well under $100 by now (by Moore's Law, given the time it could be close to $50 for the 3GS). That's presumably the screen parts they would be using in the first generation iPad mini.
If a 7.85" iPad with a 1024x768 screen cost between the price of an iPad 2 and iPhone 4S to build: I'll use the high iPhone price estimate and average to call it $220 to build. A bit lower 26% profit on that would make it sell for $299.
And the build cost could be far less without a retina screen, it could be between the 3GS price and iPad 2, which could get under $150 to manufacture, and could retail for $199 or $249. If that one had just 8GB, and the upgraded one for $249/$299 had 16GB (and higher margins) they would do 25% or more profit on them too.
And it could also be between the iPhone 4S and the iPad 3 and cost around $250 to manufacture--WITH a retina display (using the same screen panels as the iPhone 4/4S.)
It could even be a combination of them, $199 for one with 8GB and a non-retina screen (perfect for schools to get for students, books take less space than apps, movies, etc.) $299 for 16GB plus a retina screen. There would be less profit margin on some, but then they'd cover all price ranges, and not leave any openings for competing tablets at all.
There's a report that compares current iPad 2 vs 3 build prices. For the lowest end WiFi model:
iPad 2 $245 to build, and iPad 3 $316 to build.
With Apple selling them at $399 and $499. So roughly 38% and 36% profit.
I've not found updated numbers, since it has to cost far less to make them as they go along. But the estimated costs to manufacture iPhones when they first went on sale.
iPhone 3GS, $178 (here, from 2009)
iPhone 4, $188 (here)
iPhone 4S, $188 (here) to $203 (here)
And those prices have to be higher than they are now, as they're years old in some cases. To make a 3GS it seems it would be down to well under $100 by now (by Moore's Law, given the time it could be close to $50 for the 3GS). That's presumably the screen parts they would be using in the first generation iPad mini.
If a 7.85" iPad with a 1024x768 screen cost between the price of an iPad 2 and iPhone 4S to build: I'll use the high iPhone price estimate and average to call it $220 to build. A bit lower 26% profit on that would make it sell for $299.
And the build cost could be far less without a retina screen, it could be between the 3GS price and iPad 2, which could get under $150 to manufacture, and could retail for $199 or $249. If that one had just 8GB, and the upgraded one for $249/$299 had 16GB (and higher margins) they would do 25% or more profit on them too.
And it could also be between the iPhone 4S and the iPad 3 and cost around $250 to manufacture--WITH a retina display (using the same screen panels as the iPhone 4/4S.)
It could even be a combination of them, $199 for one with 8GB and a non-retina screen (perfect for schools to get for students, books take less space than apps, movies, etc.) $299 for 16GB plus a retina screen. There would be less profit margin on some, but then they'd cover all price ranges, and not leave any openings for competing tablets at all.
iPhone 3GS?
To add to the pondering here, in 2009 according to reports at the time, it cost $178 to make the iPhone 3GS.
It has to be far cheaper to make them now. I'd guess it is well under $100. Going by Moore's law, halving the price twice given the 3 years would be under $50.
What if they start selling the 3GS without a contract, for pre-paid type phones. They might be able to sell it for $99 and still make a hefty profit. Update it so it works in China, and they might sell a billion of them.
It has to be far cheaper to make them now. I'd guess it is well under $100. Going by Moore's law, halving the price twice given the 3 years would be under $50.
What if they start selling the 3GS without a contract, for pre-paid type phones. They might be able to sell it for $99 and still make a hefty profit. Update it so it works in China, and they might sell a billion of them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)