Apple likes to slow roll features out. It's kind of a necessity when Wall Street expects you to put out a desirable hardware version every few years. Gotta protect that runway!
Hopefully as Apple's own N-series Wifi chips mature and get rolled into more products, they will include GPS/GNSS capabilities into the chips, as right now if you want that functionality you have to purchase the "Wi-Fi + Cellular" variant:
It's part of it. Another part of the reason is patent related royalties that they have to pay to the likes of Qualcomm, Nokia, etc. for any device that has a working 5G stack inside of it. Apple actually has had their own 5G modem implementation for a few years now; they clearly have the technology to deliver this with a clean full in house chip design.
But any device that has that embedded would have some royalty overhead added to the BOM. Which is why they've always had ipads with and without 5G and have so far never really bothered with adding this on laptops (which actually would make a lot of sense from a technical point of view). Operators would probably love that because it's a nice up-sell opportunity on monthly subscriptions. And with soft sims there would not be a need for a hardware sim card.
For the same reason, you don't see this feature on many other laptops either. There are a few obviously but it's a less common feature than you'd expect given how important good connectivity is to most laptop users.
So the reason they have not released a +cellular MBP is down to them not wanting to make royalty payments? What do they care? They just roll that payment into the +cellular price bump. It's not like they are dipping into their own billion dollar cash on hand balance.
Do you have a better reason? I think the price difference is probably too high to justify the feature. I don't see any technical reason why they wouldn't do this. But patent royalties and additional overhead related to device certification would definitely add some complexity and cost.
No, but there's a lot of examples of "I don't have a better reason" regarding Apple decisions. I know that there's a lot of bad blood between Apple and Nvidia hence AMD GPUs every where before the M-series chips. Clearly, they are tired of of their cellular vendors, otherwise they would not have developed their own chips. But they already have the cellular relation for the iPhone/iPads, so what would extending that to allow MBP inclusion mean that makes it a non-starter for Apple?
I can only speculate. But my guess is that they don't anticipate additional mac sales if they were to ship this feature. So, the only reason to do this for them would be if it would bring in more revenue. And given the cost overhead related to patents that I outlined, it might just not be that interesting. My guess is that a lot of the agreements they have for this might cover iphones and ipads but not laptops.
It's not just Apple. 5G stacks in laptop are just very uncommon. Most vendors seem to independently come to the conclusion that they are better off not bundling that. Of course the difference is that Apple now has their own modems and chips for this. Which might change things but so far hasn't.
The reasons Apple want to vertically integrate everything and own it are easier to grasp: chips, firmware and software made by them are easier to control and upgrade by them. With qualcomm, they are basically getting them, their development teams, their supply chains for chips on the critical path to shipping products. And they are outsourcing what is a pretty major part of the whole phone experience to a third party.
Apple has been working on their own 5G modem for many years before they shipped it. I don't know for sure but I would not be surprised if efforts for that started when Steve Jobs was still alive even. This was always the logical move for them to make as soon as they got the idea of doing their own chipsets for their phones.
I would say this is the main reason, given tethering has caps, but maybe also how cell tower capacity probably would not do great with a whole new product market segment that's also high-bandwidth during the LTE days. With 5G's promise of increased capacity and 6G on the way, maybe it'll be possible soon enough.
> The buyer is also signing up for a monthly payment. So clearly they have the cash to make an “extra monthly payment” or two up front.
I know of pilots who buy the +Cellular simply for GNSS and do not get a separate plan.
Charging more for the C-series hardware is understandable, but if there's enough of a 'transistor budget' it would be nice for the GNSS functionality to be more universal (since the N-series seems to be going into everything).
I would happily give up on the entire AI industry in exchange for more affordable hardware. No hesitation. The worldwide inflation resulting from the AI rollout is shameful to say it politely
It's especially bad if you're non-American with multiple TVs.
e.g. I've got three screens in my house (office TV, living room TV, basement projector) in Canada — upgrading to the latest Apple TV on each of them would cost me $1,287.
I have two televisions - living room TV with an AppleTV and bedroom TV with some Roku device. I'm going to buy the new AppleTV and put it in the living room, then move that AppleTV to the bedroom, then recycle the Roku (finally, I hate that thing).
It should be less expensive but I rely on it (cancelled cable TV and just have streaming now) and so I'm just happy they are still working on it.
Depending on what you subscribe to, streaming services are now as expensive (if not more) than cable was if you got premium channels. I hear also Disney will add ads to all tiers as well.
This is a disappointment. Apple has so much potential with iPad minis, but they consistently hold back simply because they don’t want to cannibalize their pro models.
That's the whole iPad line. No multi-user because they don't want families to buy only one iPad, no support for running apps outside of the app store, etc.
What isn't smooth is the separation between the iPad and iPhone teams. I'm pretty sure new things being visited on the Duo such as the split keyboard interface have already been tried on the iPad side.
The iPhone Air is larger than an iPhone 17 in height and width. Every non-plus/max iPhone since the 13 Mini came out is smaller than the Air in height and width. Wouldn't they be a more logical upgrade than the Air?
The main body of the iPhone Air is thinner, of course, but including the camera bulge, I think it's thicker than all non-pro iPhones up to the 16.
Is there something about making the main body thinner that makes the iPhone Air more comfortable to hold than other smaller phones? Is it the weight? The 17e is only 4 g heavier than the Air, and the 16e is only 2 g heavier.
I have never been interested in the Air because of the size, so I can't even remember if I have picked one up in an Apple Store.
Forget the dimensions and size on paper. I tried the iPhone 17 for two weeks, came running back to the Mini. Later on, I upgraded to the Air and I'm very pleased. Yes, it's slightly larger in hand but it's still delightful to use like the Mini. Even though its 25g heavier than the Mini, it feels lighter because it's less dense.
Interesting! Thanks for the opinion. I'm very skeptical that I'll feel the same way, but I'll check it out next time I'm near one.
I just replaced the battery in my Mini, and got the bonus free screen (I understand it is hard even for Apple to replace the battery without breaking the screen), so I'm probably set for a while, but it would be nice to have an upgrade path in the future!
It makes no sense to make the devices so thin and then having a fat camera. This requires a cover to equalize the size with the camera for haptic reasons. Better use this space for other stuff like larger batteries and make the device the same thickness everywhere.
I presume it is a flattering angle instead of a falsified image. The camera bump is near the one large button, which was furthest from the camera when they rotate it, so the iPad could have been angled slightly to hide the bump. Maybe someone can try to reproduce it after it comes out to see if it is a false image.
this is directly side-on. they've def removed the camera bump. In the initial animation at the top where the hand grabs it too. the bump is very clear in shots later!
wait... could they have hidden it under the hand? and why does that person's thumb seem extra long?! the more I look at this the less I understand it.
Perspective is still at play. At arms length, on my phone, if I make it so the flat surface is completely aligned with my center of vision, the bottom side covers at least 1mm of whatever is on the underside. The closer one gets to the phone, the more pronounced the effect.
The video keeps triggering my sense of seeing CGI, but the hiding effect on display can absolutely be accomplished in camera.
I would assume, however, that they didn't "fake" it - that they instead chose a filming position and lens such that camera was obscured behind the edge of the device (the edge facing the viewer is the far side from the camera). Bit of trickery for sure though.
> I would assume, however, that they didn't "fake" it - that they instead chose a filming position and lens such that camera was obscured behind the edge of the device
I’d suspect the same. From that angle, the camera bump is on the opposite edge; when I hold my iPad Air in the same position, the camera bump is also just about hidden.
Historically, Apple used real photos and video for marketing material, only lit and polished to perfection to create a sort of hyper-real effect. Nowadays, who knows.
I’ve seen enough parents at graduations and tourists to know people use it. Assuming they need the big screen because their vision is bad which undermines the need for a high res photo in the first place.
But don't you just need a big camera on your giant tablet? How will you ever manage if you don't have a nice camera on both sides of all your handheld devices? /s
If they put the tiny "front-facing" camera pointed out the back it would be enough for the vast majority of people I imagine.
That's the thing - I genuinely don't understand the user or usage Venn diagram : when and who will 1. Have an expensive ipad with them and require a good big camera, but 2. Not have an equivalently competent phone with them?
Don't get me wrong, I understand it happens - back when I did wedding photography, one of my massive pet peeves were the uncles and grandparents who stepped into the aisle with their massive tablets just as bride is starting her walk... But I do not understand it at all :-/.
I'd absolutely happily completely kill the rear facing tablet camera. I've had at least a dozen android and ipad tablets and I genuinely don't think I took a single photo with them - it'd feel weird and awkward and so ostentious.
(As always as a consumer, clearly I'm in minority here :-})
Note that the uncles and grandparents are all old. When you get to a certain age, your eyes don't like to focus on small things like cameras. The elderly prefer tablets, and they want to be able to take pictures of their nieces and nephews and grandchildren.
False. That is a false statement. You said that "no one" wants these to be heavier, when in fact, many people would gladly accept a few nanograms of extra weight for a better battery. Look at everyone with a Clutch or Anker attached to their phone.
Since basically everybody uses a case anyways, the important factors are weight and width with the case on. This design makes both of those significantly smaller than your suggestion.
The argument is most people use a case regardless, so if it were the same thickness across the device, the iPad would be considerably thicker once in a case. That and weight. I don’t use cases so it bothers me too, but it does make some sense.
It's still very strange how much work goes into the materials for the case and the ergonomics and weight of holding the devices without a case just to assume everyone will put it in a case. I'm with you on iPads, they get too heavy/thick for their primary uses once in a case. The phones I sort of get but I still think it ruins a lot of the aesthetic choices they make about the case design.
I find it annoying too, I assume it's because thin and light devices sell more (both in promo photos and when used in Apple stores).
My mum's Samsung S23 Ultra has a ridiculous camera bump and rocks back and forth when you use it, even with some thinner cases. You need a super thick case for it to stay stable.
I've always thought this too. An iPad with an integrated case would be able to fill the entire flat back area with a battery, and just have rubber on the edges where impact protection is needed. The existing design is really optimized around having an impressive experience in the store when holding an uncased product, before you inevitably cover it.
Why would you want an integrated case? The soft impact absorbing materials degrade much faster than the aluminum. Look at the average ipad users case and it's falling to pieces, you don't want that permanently fixed to the device.
There's also many users who don't need a case. A lot of ipads are POS systems that are fixed to the bench so they don't need a case either.
> Why would you want an integrated case? The soft impact absorbing materials degrade much faster than the aluminum.
Given that the impact-absorbing parts could be [0]
...rubber on the edges where impact protection is needed.
and could obviously be designed to be replaceable, either by a handy user or an Apple Technician, why wouldn't you want Apple to design the feel and balance of a device with a case that has built-in impact protection?
Apple's decision to make most of its handhelds out of various grades of "fragililum" has boggled my mind since they sold the first iPhone with an easily-shattered glass back. That choice makes sense for a conspicuous status symbol that people are going to take very good care of... but most folks either end up with one with damage that makes plain how theirs is not the kind of life that makes that possible, or they have installed some aftermarket shell that ruins the effect by covering up the conspicuously fragile part of the hardware.
Some people don't have iPhones though. Rare, I know. I have an iPad and my wife has an iPhone but I have never owned one at all and instead have always used Android right from the HTC G1.
Yeah it's infuriating. I love how even Apple are embarrassed by it, since in the first two animations of people holding and rotating the device they're left off the camera bump, making it look smooth flat.
If they levelled it out you could surely fit a far larger battery in it too. I'd far rather have a device 1.5mm thicker with a battery lifespan twice as long and no silly bump on it.
I have a hard time believing the camera bump isn't the result of intensive consumer psychology experiments. Setting a bare apple device down on a flat surface feels like chair with a leg sawed off. They need you to buy the accessories. This is part of making the ecosystem viable.
The correct answer. The camera bump is intentional and so is building phones that aren't resilient to drops out of the box. What do you mean I can't have a phone with rubber bumpers on the corners?
I would be content if they'd stop making phones slippier than a wet bar of soap. My Pixel 8a is ridiculous, I don't know how they do it. If you have dry hands, it's nearly impossible to hold on to.
Tangentially related: this is the funniest rant about this "devices with a fat camera bump that don't lay flat" rant that exists: "Why?" - Lazy Posy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP7lYuyGTmg
More material, bigger battery = heavier device. For something this size I figure people want something they can comfortably hold in one hand for a session.
Perhaps if they put a very small lip around the camera lens and a physical bump on the other side so the device doesn't rock, at least it would be symmetrical and the glass would be slightly less prone to surface contact.
I'm shocked Apple haven't acquired Procreate yet. It's nearly always in iPad marketing material. Personally I know so many artists who've bought iPads, and the only app they have installed is Procreate.
It’s possible they simply don’t want to sell. ProCreate parent company is extremely successful on its own, it’s possible being part of Apple wouldn’t bring anything to the table for them. Looking at some apps Apple acquired it’s not clear that being part of a mega corporation benefits creative tools.
The largest acquisition in Apple’s entire history is only 3 billion dollars (Beats). Apple doesn’t waste money like Microsoft, Google or Meta on large fit them in later acquisitions.
OLED is really good for media consumption, and IMO, this form factor is one of the best for carrying around in trips and watching movies on the car/plane/train/etc.
But the price is a bit high, that's the history of Apple though. On the other hand, I think this particular screen is probably going to be sourced by cheaper small android tablets at a much more competitive price, and if you're using it for media consumption, there's no difference between an Apple and an Android tablet.
How would an OLED screen be an improvement over an ipad 8th generation? I'm debating on what to upgrade to but I mainly use my ipad for reading comics nowadays. Movies/TV are for the big screen.
I own no iPads but all my screens are OLED and I would never buy anything else. The true black is an absolute killer feature. It makes the device just a glowing wonder at night, magical feeling, no way to overstate it.
OLED + dark mode after sundown are awesome. On Android we also get the extra dim mode which makes it perfect for lights-out.
I use GrapheneOS on my Pixel and it gets very dim. Also, I have the night mode (orange tint) cranked way up - something that the stock OS should allow you to do.
And furthermore Apple’s OLED screens tend to have more color reproduction issues. I don’t have an iPad any more but gather a group of people using OLED iPhones. Use light mode and open the Settings app at the same time. You will see that different OLED screens render the same white menu items differently. Some will have a yellowish tint, others an unpleasant green tint. This happens regardless of whether one turns on or off TrueTone. This has been going on since the very first OLED iPhones. The old LCD iPhones never had this problem. It is highly subjective but it bothers me way more than a 60Hz refresh rate.
In general display technologies are highly subjective. Besides LCD versus OLED, there are people who love nano texture and there are people who hate them. There are people who absolutely need 120Hz and there are people who can’t tell the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz. It’s a shame that we can’t customize the display technology exactly as we want.
Nano texture was the entire reason I upgraded to an iPad Pro M4. The camera on the long edge is a major regression as far as I am concerned, however. The only drawback is fingerprints are harder to remove,you really need that special microfiber cloth or one of the cheap Chinese clones.
It's not. OLED screens use PWM, i.e. they are switching to almost black 256 times a second. That's tiresome for the eyes. Especially when you read from it with artificial lighting which is dim, that makes those black periods long and noticeable. Yes, recent iPhones sometimes don't go full black, but that's only for near-100% brightness.
Last iPad Mini I bought in 2015 was 32gb for $379CAD, one today 11 years later is $949CAD for 128gb, 2.5x over 10 years, I know there is different tech, inflation and times are different but I always though the mini as the budget option, now with this recent releases Apple is just going for: it's expensive because that's the only way we can keep growing....
Their budget iPad I think got 70% increased in price a couple of months ago. I was planning to upgrade my iPad mini to the normal 11inch iPad and when I checked the price it was nowhere near the price I remembered I last saw it.
The mini is not the budget option, at least not anymore. The base 11" iPad starts at $450 in the US (and can often be found on sale for less). It is the cost-down with lower-spec components, and is probably a more compelling product for the consumer looking for the cheapest iPad option than a cost-down mini would be.
I wish this was somehow listed as a separate line item with the price, assuming prices will normalize at some point. I don’t want these prices to be considered the new normal, even after memory prices come down. I think transparency in the pricing would help with that.
I don’t see the homeview being worth it unless they allow app installs. $300 for a display that shows photos and smart home controls is kinda pointless. You can’t even put up your home assistant dashboard on it.
I think there will be be app integration, but hopefully no App Store. We know that apps can work on HomeView using CarPlay. Not sure that is sufficient long term, perhaps just to jump start things. They may need to enhance that library to allow more kinds of apps to work with HomeView.
Right now, I think they are bringing out an MVP and waiting to see how people react to it and what kinds of things turn out to be useful. When they launched the Watch, no one was sure what kinds of things we would want to do on it. It took a while to see what was useful. I think a model where apps on your phone provide HomeView widgets like the Watch might be better than writing apps specifically for such a device.
Sure, but it’s weird to consider a device to be good value when the reason for that value is features you hope will launch in future updates maybe years down the line.
The homeview is DOA, I'm sorry. Who is the target for this?
There is no app store. I mean maybe they will add one later, but still until that happens I really dont see any use case besides setting some kitchen timers.
Yes, smart home is a thing, but tons of people need apps like Hue or Shelly to control their setup.
> This will make sure my kids can FaceTime their grandparents whenever they want
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that charged iPads are not the primary constraint here. If you can't trust them to keep their iPads charged, there's a good chance that you'll come back in a year and the HomeView hasn't left the setup screen, or is sitting in a box somewhere.
207 comments
[ 0.19 ms ] story [ 16.3 ms ] threadnon-starter
* https://www.apple.com/ipad-mini/specs/ § Location
The buyer is also signing up for a monthly payment. So clearly they have the cash to make an “extra monthly payment” or two up front.
But any device that has that embedded would have some royalty overhead added to the BOM. Which is why they've always had ipads with and without 5G and have so far never really bothered with adding this on laptops (which actually would make a lot of sense from a technical point of view). Operators would probably love that because it's a nice up-sell opportunity on monthly subscriptions. And with soft sims there would not be a need for a hardware sim card.
For the same reason, you don't see this feature on many other laptops either. There are a few obviously but it's a less common feature than you'd expect given how important good connectivity is to most laptop users.
It's not just Apple. 5G stacks in laptop are just very uncommon. Most vendors seem to independently come to the conclusion that they are better off not bundling that. Of course the difference is that Apple now has their own modems and chips for this. Which might change things but so far hasn't.
The reasons Apple want to vertically integrate everything and own it are easier to grasp: chips, firmware and software made by them are easier to control and upgrade by them. With qualcomm, they are basically getting them, their development teams, their supply chains for chips on the critical path to shipping products. And they are outsourcing what is a pretty major part of the whole phone experience to a third party.
Apple has been working on their own 5G modem for many years before they shipped it. I don't know for sure but I would not be surprised if efforts for that started when Steve Jobs was still alive even. This was always the logical move for them to make as soon as they got the idea of doing their own chipsets for their phones.
I know of pilots who buy the +Cellular simply for GNSS and do not get a separate plan.
Charging more for the C-series hardware is understandable, but if there's enough of a 'transistor budget' it would be nice for the GNSS functionality to be more universal (since the N-series seems to be going into everything).
These prices are insane and there is no sign of things slowing down.
e.g. I've got three screens in my house (office TV, living room TV, basement projector) in Canada — upgrading to the latest Apple TV on each of them would cost me $1,287.
It should be less expensive but I rely on it (cancelled cable TV and just have streaming now) and so I'm just happy they are still working on it.
I say this as an Apple shareholder.
The iPad Mini started with a 7.9" screen, bumped today to 8.5".
The iPhone Duo inner display is 7.6", there are already rumors saying a gen 2 or gen 3 might be 7.9".
It's interesting how smooth the iPhone/iPad continuum is becoming.
Quick look at the Mini dimensions also seems like it barely got bigger overall since 1st gen.
when he goes "iphone small (big)" "iphone big (bigger)" and so on. He has a bunch of them.
The main body of the iPhone Air is thinner, of course, but including the camera bulge, I think it's thicker than all non-pro iPhones up to the 16.
Is there something about making the main body thinner that makes the iPhone Air more comfortable to hold than other smaller phones? Is it the weight? The 17e is only 4 g heavier than the Air, and the 16e is only 2 g heavier.
I have never been interested in the Air because of the size, so I can't even remember if I have picked one up in an Apple Store.
I just replaced the battery in my Mini, and got the bonus free screen (I understand it is hard even for Apple to replace the battery without breaking the screen), so I'm probably set for a while, but it would be nice to have an upgrade path in the future!
In reality the back was curved, and they took pictures from an angle that only showed off the edge of the screen and not how far back it curved
this is directly side-on. they've def removed the camera bump. In the initial animation at the top where the hand grabs it too. the bump is very clear in shots later!
wait... could they have hidden it under the hand? and why does that person's thumb seem extra long?! the more I look at this the less I understand it.
The video keeps triggering my sense of seeing CGI, but the hiding effect on display can absolutely be accomplished in camera.
I would assume, however, that they didn't "fake" it - that they instead chose a filming position and lens such that camera was obscured behind the edge of the device (the edge facing the viewer is the far side from the camera). Bit of trickery for sure though.
I’d suspect the same. From that angle, the camera bump is on the opposite edge; when I hold my iPad Air in the same position, the camera bump is also just about hidden.
A minimal camera bump means they've advanced the technology to make it small, but no camera bump makes it look like they're using a cheaper camera?
If they put the tiny "front-facing" camera pointed out the back it would be enough for the vast majority of people I imagine.
Don't get me wrong, I understand it happens - back when I did wedding photography, one of my massive pet peeves were the uncles and grandparents who stepped into the aisle with their massive tablets just as bride is starting her walk... But I do not understand it at all :-/.
I'd absolutely happily completely kill the rear facing tablet camera. I've had at least a dozen android and ipad tablets and I genuinely don't think I took a single photo with them - it'd feel weird and awkward and so ostentious.
(As always as a consumer, clearly I'm in minority here :-})
My mum's Samsung S23 Ultra has a ridiculous camera bump and rocks back and forth when you use it, even with some thinner cases. You need a super thick case for it to stay stable.
There's also many users who don't need a case. A lot of ipads are POS systems that are fixed to the bench so they don't need a case either.
Given that the impact-absorbing parts could be [0]
and could obviously be designed to be replaceable, either by a handy user or an Apple Technician, why wouldn't you want Apple to design the feel and balance of a device with a case that has built-in impact protection?Apple's decision to make most of its handhelds out of various grades of "fragililum" has boggled my mind since they sold the first iPhone with an easily-shattered glass back. That choice makes sense for a conspicuous status symbol that people are going to take very good care of... but most folks either end up with one with damage that makes plain how theirs is not the kind of life that makes that possible, or they have installed some aftermarket shell that ruins the effect by covering up the conspicuously fragile part of the hardware.
[0] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50247743>
Though I do hate that bump. I just tried a duo and the bump makes it awkward to hold as a tablet
The big examples are iPhone Air and iMac.
From my experience, the iPhone bumps are a lot more noticeable than their iPad siblings.
Too bad though, there's no way to put a scanned document onto iPad in Apple's ecosystem other than the otherwise useless camera.
To "b" or not to "b". Apparently the latter.
Also my favorite smartphone was a motorola with a cloth back (ballistic something) and a metal frame. No cover was needed for this one.
What year is it, 2012?
I would be content if they'd stop making phones slippier than a wet bar of soap. My Pixel 8a is ridiculous, I don't know how they do it. If you have dry hands, it's nearly impossible to hold on to.
Not really! The cover just follows the seam. And larger batteries will increase the weight as well, which Apple definitely doesn't want.
That being said, even with my Pixel in a case, the camera still protrudes.
It would be interesting to try a camera where the lens extends out when the camera is activated; and flat otherwise.
Perhaps if they put a very small lip around the camera lens and a physical bump on the other side so the device doesn't rock, at least it would be symmetrical and the glass would be slightly less prone to surface contact.
They came up with the plateau, just make the whole plateau flat already.
before you vote down, this is not a serious response
Why can't we have two product lines. Classic/Elegant and Pro/Chunky
But the price is a bit high, that's the history of Apple though. On the other hand, I think this particular screen is probably going to be sourced by cheaper small android tablets at a much more competitive price, and if you're using it for media consumption, there's no difference between an Apple and an Android tablet.
So I'm happy to see OLED on this model.
OLED + dark mode after sundown are awesome. On Android we also get the extra dim mode which makes it perfect for lights-out.
In general display technologies are highly subjective. Besides LCD versus OLED, there are people who love nano texture and there are people who hate them. There are people who absolutely need 120Hz and there are people who can’t tell the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz. It’s a shame that we can’t customize the display technology exactly as we want.
“Oh, ho, ho… you sweet summer child.” —Capitalism
- They never came back down.
- Diet soda and seltzer prices spiked too.
Keeping up appearances:
Lease from $14.99/mo. per month for 36 mo.months with Apple Upgrade Footnote ※
The iPad mini hasn’t been the budget iPad for quite a few years now. It is more like a small iPad Air now.
The homeview at $299 is the great value Apple product by far, compared to the price of new iPads
The 512 nano texture iPad mini with a case and pencil and Apple care and tax and tip in Canada is well over $2000!!!
Right now, I think they are bringing out an MVP and waiting to see how people react to it and what kinds of things turn out to be useful. When they launched the Watch, no one was sure what kinds of things we would want to do on it. It took a while to see what was useful. I think a model where apps on your phone provide HomeView widgets like the Watch might be better than writing apps specifically for such a device.
There is no app store. I mean maybe they will add one later, but still until that happens I really dont see any use case besides setting some kitchen timers.
Yes, smart home is a thing, but tons of people need apps like Hue or Shelly to control their setup.
I’m buying one for my parents and in-laws
They have iPads
iPads are never charged and in some random spot in their being empty houses
This will make sure my kids can FaceTime their grandparents whenever they want
That’s worth $300 to make my kids and my parents happy
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that charged iPads are not the primary constraint here. If you can't trust them to keep their iPads charged, there's a good chance that you'll come back in a year and the HomeView hasn't left the setup screen, or is sitting in a box somewhere.
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/ipad/ipadf97892b2/ipad...
Facetime / Signal will work fine over just data.
I was considering buying one, but will skip until the older model becomes unsupported or when Apple adds Face ID.
Luckily I didn’t buy a iPad Mini, but I really like the form factor.
It would be great if it can use fingerprint to unlock different profiles.