Apple's October 23 Event | We've got a little more to show you.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rookje said:
I have the first iPad and want to upgrade. Should I get the new iPad, or the iPad Mini?
Click to expand...
Do you want a smaller tablet or are you happy with the current size? If you're happy, buy an iPad 4.

If you pine for a smaller form factor, buy a mini.

If I was you, I would get a 4. Mini is after on-the-go customers and competing with Android for market share. Less power, and resolution is amazing on the new iPad.
 
numble said:
Why does being thin matter? Anyway, you're listing tradeoffs, not things that are equal except the display being different.
Click to expand...

I don't think it does matter, but that's what consumers went for. The quality of the display was better in Plasma, but people chose other factors whether informed or uninformed to select LCD over it. The point is the quality of the display didn't matter as much as long as it was good enough.

Your lists of things are all about tradeoffs. They are lower quality but people accept them for convenience. Buying a movie off iTunes, or streaming sports, NetFlix takes less than a minute, and you can do it while you are doing something else in another window. Going to buy a BluRay or ordering one online is less convenient.
Click to expand...

I'm listing out examples of where the quality of the video shows it's not of high importance to them because they choose other things over it. It's not a priority nor importance to them. I choose Blu Ray because the video quality is important to me. Again, the key factor here is the visual quality isn't a high priority for them. It's not purely trade offs. You seem to have dropped the example of people buying an HDTV, watching SD content and were under the belief that they were watching HD content.

There is no trade-off to replacing the fat iMac display with one that is thinner, has the display laminated to the glass, supports a fuller color profile and is less reflective. I can see a stickler old man insisting on going to the store to buy a Blu-Ray for better resolution, but I don't see someone whining that the iMac is using a better thinner display instead of a fatter one.
Click to expand...

But there's no choice here. Nobody can decide if they want it or not. Apple doesn't give them that option. So I don't see how you can point any type of trade off. You either buy the new iMac with it or you don't.

It's not the right analogy because I am saying that people notice the quality of displays, especially when it comes to lamination, IPS and high DPI. I don't think many people notice audio quality.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't understand how analogies work. It's not about the type of content, it's about what the person thinks is true. Someone who pushes Super Audio CD will claim how much better it is, and how everyone should notice it. You're claiming how much better the quality of the display is and how everyone should notice it. The analogy works. You're having trouble looking beyond audio versus video here when it's not the point. The point is the quality and what the person perceives is true.

I think people notice the difference between a laminated display and a non-laminated display--you don't. You also don't seem to think people notice retina/high-dpi displays and IPS displays. I think people do. We can just agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

I think evidence shows that this stuff isn't as obvious as tech geeks would think it is. Again going back to the example of people buying HDTVs and thinking their content was automatically HD and were perfectly happy with it. When in reality going from a CRT, it's quite possible their content was even worse in quality. It's all about perception rather than reality and there is plenty of evidence that people either don't care, think it's good enough, or just simply can't see it.
 
Marty Chinn said:
I don't think it does matter, but that's what consumers went for. The quality of the display was better in Plasma, but people chose other factors whether informed or uninformed to select LCD over it. The point is the quality of the display didn't matter as much as long as it was good enough.



I'm listing out examples of where the quality of the video shows it's not of high importance to them because they choose other things over it. It's not a priority nor importance to them. I choose Blu Ray because the video quality is important to me. Again, the key factor here is the visual quality isn't a high priority for them. It's not purely trade offs. You seem to have dropped the example of people buying an HDTV, watching SD content and were under the belief that they were watching HD content.



But there's no choice here. Nobody can decide if they want it or not. Apple doesn't give them that option. So I don't see how you can point any type of trade off. You either buy the new iMac with it or you don't.



You clearly don't understand how analogies work. It's not about the type of content, it's about what the person thinks is true. Someone who pushes Super Audio CD will claim how much better it is, and how everyone should notice it. You're claiming how much better the quality of the display is and how everyone should notice it. The analogy works. You're having trouble looking beyond audio versus video here when it's not the point. The point is the quality and what the person perceives is true.



I think evidence shows that this stuff isn't as obvious as tech geeks would think it is. Again going back to the example of people buying HDTVs and thinking their content was automatically HD and were perfectly happy with it. When in reality going from a CRT, it's quite possible their content was even worse in quality. It's all about perception rather than reality and there is plenty of evidence that people either don't care, think it's good enough, or just simply can't see it.
Click to expand...

Your analogy doesn't work because I have consistently acknowledged that people will choose trade-offs, I'm not going on and on about Blu Ray or Super Audio CD--I acknowledge that people will choose more convenient options, and old people will stick to their AV Club roots.

I think people notice better quality--they would notice a retina iMac's quality. I wouldn't think an iMac with Retina display but being 4x fatter and 2X more expensive would be worth it, though. I think there are no trade-offs to offering an updated display that is thinner and better quality compared to the old one.

If you want the old iMac, you should hurry up and buy one.
 
numble said:
OYou seem to be indicating that people actually are willing to choose inferior displays when given the choice, and without any downsides, I don't think so.
Click to expand...
The point is people's choices are primarily not based on objective qualities (let alone do research to learn about them).

Just take your own example: LCDs have been premium priced for over 4 years (and the premium was as high as 2x in some cases) and you still believed PDPs are the expensive model.
 
Fafalada said:
The point is people's choices are primarily not based on objective qualities (let alone do research to learn about them).

Just take your own example: LCDs have been premium priced for over 4 years (and the premium was as high as 2x in some cases) and you still believed PDPs are the expensive model.
Click to expand...

I said that there is a heavy premium. If PDPs have gone down to the same weight as LCDs, I guess I was wrong.
 
kame-sennin said:
Yea, I don't like that at all. Are there any pics out there that show the iMac from different angles?
Click to expand...

I haven't been able to find a larger picture but here's a decent profile shot.

evolution_today.jpg


Edit:

One more from the verge

2012-10-23imac_copy_verge_super_wide.jpg
Click to expand...
 
So I'm overdue for an upgrade, and after the release and price point of the New rMBP 13inch with educational discount: I fail to see why I would pay 1,899USD for a 13inch Retina as I can get the low end model of the 15inch Retina for 1999USD with better performance, and a discrete GPU...

What do you guys think?
 
numble said:
Your analogy doesn't work because I have consistently acknowledged that people will choose trade-offs, I'm not going on and on about Blu Ray or Super Audio CD--I acknowledge that people will choose more convenient options, and old people will stick to their AV Club roots.
Click to expand...

Wow you really don't understand how analogies work. You're still going on about convenience and all that jazz. I'll state it one more time and maybe it'll click, but probably not. A person who advocates the quality of Super Audio CD thinks the difference is obvious and that people should notice. Forget the business model, form factor and all that, just purely on quality. To a normal person, they likely won't hear a difference. Now to apply the correlation to you. You're making the claim that a high quality display such as a laminated screen should be obvious to most people where as the reality is, they won't see a difference. That is the analogy, and the analog works but you seem to not understand analogies or have a comprehension problem.

I think people notice better quality--they would notice a retina iMac's quality. I wouldn't think an iMac with Retina display but being 4x fatter and 2X more expensive would be worth it, though. I think there are no trade-offs to offering an updated display that is thinner and better quality compared to the old one.

If you want the old iMac, you should hurry up and buy one.
Click to expand...

There are trade offs though. People have listed trade offs to the thinner aspect early in the thread if you want to get detailed about it. However, I guess this works in your favor but you have no choice about the screen because Apple doesn't give you a choice to get one all things being equal. You're forced to get it if you want to get a new computer. You keep saying if all things are equal, people would pick the better quality, but that is never the case. I'm saying there is evidence, and plenty of it, that the quality of the display is neither obvious nor as high priority as you and some tech geeks might think. They don't always see the things that people claim are so obvious to them. Again, we need not look any further than people thinking they were watching HD content when it was SD simply because it was on an HDTV. They liked it, they were happy with it, but the perception was far from reality. Plasma screens being beaten by LCD is another example. There is plenty of examples were the visual quality that they perceive with their eyes isn't as noticeable as you think. The problem you have is you think with all things being equal, that people always go for the better item. It's not true. The best thing doesn't always win.
 
I still think the price on the iPad mini is a misstep. They are going to sell tons still it won't affect buyers IMO, but the gap over competitors is a little big. 299 was the sweet spot IMO. Excited to see these in person.

Also:
If Steve Jobs were alive he'd be rolling over in his grave

If Steve Jobs weren't dead, he'd be alive
 
Liquid_015 said:
So I'm overdue for an upgrade, and after the release and price point of the New rMBP 13inch with educational discount: I fail to see why I would pay 1,899USD for a 13inch Retina as I can get the low end model of the 15inch Retina for 1999USD with better performance, and a discrete GPU...

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

If you can deal with the 15in form factor I would def grab the 15in as it is more worth it if you really want the retina. For only 100$ more you are getting a lot better specs.
 
Liquid_015 said:
So I'm overdue for an upgrade, and after the release and price point of the New rMBP 13inch with educational discount: I fail to see why I would pay 1,899USD for a 13inch Retina as I can get the low end model of the 15inch Retina for 1999USD with better performance, and a discrete GPU...

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

The pricng of the high end 13" sku makes no sense to me. I would also skip it and get the 15" base model for only 100 more.
 
LCfiner said:
The pricng of the high end 13" sku makes no sense to me. I would also skip it and get the 15" base model for only 100 more.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I just added it to cart and even with tax included and educational discount, the difference is merely 111USD, and I not only get better specs but a bigger screen. I just don't understand why I would spend the same amount of money for an "inferior" product if you will...
 
Marty Chinn said:
Wow you really don't understand how analogies work. You're still going on about convenience and all that jazz. I'll state it one more time and maybe it'll click, but probably not. A person who advocates the quality of Super Audio CD thinks the difference is obvious and that people should notice. Forget the business model, form factor and all that, just purely on quality. To a normal person, they likely won't hear a difference. Now to apply the correlation to you. You're making the claim that a high quality display such as a laminated screen should be obvious to most people where as the reality is, they won't see a difference. That is the analogy, and the analog works but you seem to not understand analogies or have a comprehension problem.

There are trade offs though. People have listed trade offs to the thinner aspect early in the thread if you want to get detailed about it. However, I guess this works in your favor but you have no choice about the screen because Apple doesn't give you a choice to get one all things being equal. You're forced to get it if you want to get a new computer. You keep saying if all things are equal, people would pick the better quality, but that is never the case. I'm saying there is evidence, and plenty of it, that the quality of the display is neither obvious nor as high priority as you and some tech geeks might think. They don't always see the things that people claim are so obvious to them. Again, we need not look any further than people thinking they were watching HD content when it was SD simply because it was on an HDTV. They liked it, they were happy with it, but the perception was far from reality. Plasma screens being beaten by LCD is another example. There is plenty of examples were the visual quality that they perceive with their eyes isn't as noticeable as you think. The problem you have is you think with all things being equal, that people always go for the better item. It's not true. The best thing doesn't always win.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not like a person going on about Super Audio CD because there tons of tradeoffs that limit your ability to notice Super Audio CD quality to begin with, most noticeably the new equipment you need to use to play it.

If I give you 2 displays with which you can take home today, one being thinner, less heavy, laminated, draws less glare, and has better colors, and the other being heavier, fatter, with a lower color profile and more glare, I think you'll notice the better display easily, and you'll choose to take home the better display.

If I say, want to listen to my album? I'll give you a Super Audio CD, CD, or iTunes promo code right now. Which one do you take? That depends on a number of factors, including convenience and type of equipment you own.

Again, you mentioned a lot of things why LCD won out, thinness and weight being one of them--all things are not equal. People being ok with SD quality does not mean people prefer SD quality. If you give me the option for a plasma screen at the same weight and thinness of an LCD, I'll go for it.

If you want to buy the old iMac, hurry up, there's a big discount on Amazon.
 
numble said:
No, I'm not like a person going on about Super Audio CD because there tons of tradeoffs that limit your ability to notice Super Audio CD quality to begin with, most noticeably the new equipment you need to use to play it.

If I give you 2 displays with which you can take home today, one being thinner, less heavy, laminated, draws less glare, and has better colors, and the other being heavier, fatter, with a lower color profile and more glare, I think you'll notice the better display easily, and you'll choose to take home the better display.

If I say, want to listen to my album? I'll give you a Super Audio CD, CD, or iTunes promo code right now. Which one do you take? That depends on a number of factors, including convenience and type of equipment you own.
Click to expand...


Yep, you don't know how analogies work. That much is clear now.

Again, you mentioned a lot of things why LCD won out, thinness and weight being one of them--all things are not equal. People being ok with SD quality does not mean people prefer SD quality. If you give me the option for a plasma screen at the same weight and thinness of an LCD, I'll go for it.
Click to expand...

It's not that people were ok with SD, it's that they didn't see the difference. They were ignorant rather than it being obvious to them. You keep saying it's going to be obvious to everyone yet you ignore all the examples of where it's not obvious to people. You keep trying to skirt around the fact that all these tiny little things are reasons that plasma didn't beat out LCD when the obvious point is that the quality of the display didn't matter to them and was a lower priority than other things. That just further proves the lack of the importance of the quality of display.
 
numble said:
You think that someone who thinks the new iMac display is better than the old iMac display is properly analogous to "someone trying to argue in favor of Super Audio CD"?
Click to expand...

I think someone who is arguing what a big factor and difference the quality is and how obvious it should be to everyone when the reality is it won't be is analogous.
 
numble said:
You think that someone who thinks the new iMac display is better than the old iMac display is properly analogous to "someone trying to argue in favor of Super Audio CD"?


Wut.
Click to expand...

Let me rewrite it, it's full of typos. I was doing something else while typing.

That just further proves the lack of importance of the quality of the display.

That's what I meant to type.
 
The thing Apple really fucked iPad 3 owners on is resale value. Thanks to this bullshit iPad 4 upgrade, when I want to sell my 3 (probably when the 5 comes out) I will now get substantially less.

I used to defend Apple when people bitched about them making shit seem old after a year. In my opinion, yearly upgrades make sense. But literally just a few months ago they were on stage hyping up the iPad 3 as the new hotness, and now this shit. It's really unbelievable.
 
LyleLanley said:
I haven't been able to find a larger picture but here's a decent profile shot.

evolution_today.jpg


Edit:

One more from the verge
Click to expand...

Thanks. Also, holy shit that's amazing. My rage has been disarmed. Apple should be showing that off more.

sc0la said:
I still think the price on the iPad mini is a misstep. They are going to sell tons still it won't affect buyers IMO, but the gap over competitors is a little big. 299 was the sweet spot IMO. Excited to see these in person.
Click to expand...

I think by this time next year the iPad mini will hit that price. I think they need time to get component costs down in the iPod touch so they can drop the price on the 4 inch to 250 and phase out the 3.5 inch. That will create space in their lineup for a 299 iPad mini.
 
numble said:
I said that there is a heavy premium. If PDPs have gone down to the same weight as LCDs, I guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...
They have gone down to 20-40% below LCD price over 4 years ago (which was also the time LCDs started getting rebranded as LED and other crap inflating the prices). LCD remained the premium/expensive type of display ever since.

The pricing disparity is just another example of how display-properties are not a major factor in perceived value of such devices.
 
Fafalada said:
They have gone down to 20-40% below LCD price around 4 years ago (which was also the time LCDs started getting rebranded as LED and other crap inflating the prices).
Click to expand...

So they weigh 40% less than LCDs? How many lbs/kg are big screen plasmas weighing these days? I always thought they were a lot heavier than LCD.
 
Liquid_015 said:
Yeah, I just added it to cart and even with tax included and educational discount, the difference is merely 111USD, and I not only get better specs but a bigger screen. I just don't understand why I would spend the same amount of money for an "inferior" product if you will...
Click to expand...

For some people 'size' matters. It doesn't matter at all for me, but for some people it really does.
 
Karish said:
The thing Apple really fucked iPad 3 owners on is resale value. Thanks to this bullshit iPad 4 upgrade, when I want to sell my 3 (probably when the 5 comes out) I will now get substantially less.

I used to defend Apple when people bitched about them making shit seem old after a year. In my opinion, yearly upgrades make sense. But literally just a few months ago they were on stage hyping up the iPad 3 as the new hotness, and now this shit. It's really unbelievable.
Click to expand...

I think that it was quickly made to catch up with the new lighting connector, they just put a new processor on the same hardware and call it a go. let's wait if it'll have poor battery performance or overheating.
I was looking to jump from Ipad 2 to Ipad 4, but this is another big NO. I'll wait for the Ipad 5
 
I'm so unsure about what to do! I've currently got an iPad 3 and use it every day but have always wanted something just a bit smaller for when I leave the house... I was so excited to see the iPad mini but it doesn't have a retina display.. I'm not sure that i'll be able to go backwards now that i've had a retina for 6 months..

Then there's the colour dilemma.. I love the white but that silver back would get scratched much easier than the black..
 
Shancake said:
Then there's the colour dilemma.. I love the white but that silver back would get scratched much easier than the black..
Click to expand...

Nope. The black pigment will scratch and show the silver metal underneath, while the finish on the white is far closer to the underlying aluminium. This was mentioned in many of the iPhone 5 reviews; the white is certainly more "durable" in that sense.
 
I wonder if Apple is moving the iPad reveals from the spring to the fall, so that they can announce something different this spring?

Like








The TV?
 
Karish said:
The thing Apple really fucked iPad 3 owners on is resale value. Thanks to this bullshit iPad 4 upgrade, when I want to sell my 3 (probably when the 5 comes out) I will now get substantially less.

I used to defend Apple when people bitched about them making shit seem old after a year. In my opinion, yearly upgrades make sense. But literally just a few months ago they were on stage hyping up the iPad 3 as the new hotness, and now this shit. It's really unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Well in your example, you are upgrading 2 generations higher instead of just 1. Sell the 3 right now and upgrade to the 4. It's the same shit you were planning to do in April or whatever.
 
The rear of the iMac really does remind me of the first gen iPad. Looks really nice, but I'm worried about how much of the internals you can get to. It looked like they'd even moved the RAM up from the bottom slot.
 
I bought an ipad 3 from the apple store three weeks ago today. If I had bought it anywhere else I would be fine.

I went in three days ago and plunked down two hundred bucks to get a larger one and apple care+, so I'm hoping they'll cut me some slack, but I'm not optimistic. Feelin' the burn.

Edit: though she rang it up as a fresh transaction so maybe I'll get lucky...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

HBO Announces More Cast of Upcoming Harry Potter TV Show
34
2K
scoobidoo112 replied
Apple is losing more than $1 billion a year on streamer Apple TV+ according to a new report
News  2
69
3K
clarky replied
  • Poll
UFC 308: Topuria vs. Holloway - Abu Dhabi - October 26
Poll Event  2
77
3K
DGrayson replied
More hype than you expected.
34
1K
MaestroMike replied
Apple Event | It's Glowtime | iPhone 16 models, Apple Watch and AirPods refresh
Event  2 3 4 5 6
256
23K
Soodanim replied
Top Bottom