Quote:
Originally Posted by leebase
It's not valid at all. It's not valid because the iPad mini represents quite a bit of innovation.
It's not valid because all successful companies take successful products and branch them out. Various flavors of the iPod. Various laptop screen sizes, weights, builds. Colors. This is standard behavior and all successful companies follow it.
It's not valid if you actually consider a 7" android tablet counting as "innovation" and the iPad mini as not. Without the iPhone Android phones would be clones of Blackberry. Without the iPad there would be no Android tablets. The reason Android tablets championed the 7" form factor had to do with the inability to match the iPad's price at the large size.
Mind you, I do think there's plenty of innovation with the Android tablets. Just pointing out that if the iPad mini doesn't count as innovative just because 7" Android tablets preceeded it, then there's nothing that could be credited as innovative in the tablet space outside of the original iPad.
|
Ok, back for the third time and I will speak in caps to emphasize (not scream): no it is not innovative in that it DOES NOT EVEN MATCH COMPETING TABLETS' FEATURES that were there before and it DOES NOT EVEN MATCH APPLE'S OWN STANDARD (Retina), and that for a device category that has previously, by Apple and followers (in answer to patent claims, "big ipod argument" etc) been labeled as being "ONLY SCREEN"... so yes, I think this is not innovative, heck it's not even a very good product, it falls below 100$ cheaper competition... There is NO WAY TO JUSTIFY ITS PREMIUM PRICE!