Tech writers don’t get the 128 GB iPad 4 or are being idiots on purpose
Yesterday, Apple announced the 128 GB iPad 4. I reckon it’s a good idea, giving those who need it extra storage capacity. In my post, I noted that Apple was (not necessarily intentionally) promoting a culture of discarding digital media, purely on the basis of how little heavy users could keep on a device. Although music, movies and TV are increasingly well catered for by the cloud, other content isn’t. Magazines can often (although not always) be redownloaded, but doing so is slow and could impact on capped broadband allocations; anyway, the advantage of digital is having a collection you can rapidly search, which is no good if most of the items aren’t immediately accessible. Elsewhere, apps and games continue to mushroom in size, due to devs doing increasingly complex things on iOS and also the demands of the Retina display. Years back, I thought iOS games approaching 500 MB were going a bit far; now, it’s relatively commonplace for titles to unpack to well over 1 GB. If you’re a keen gamer, you won’t just have one or two such titles on your device—you’ll have dozens, and you’ll be forced to delete some—including all your progress, unless you’ve manually backed it up.
What’s amazing is how few tech journalists get any of this. Tap! magazine deputy editor noted on Twitter that many of them are now making comparisons between the most expensive iPad option (the 3G 128 GB version) and the cheapest MacBook Air (which, note, lacks 3G):
If I am looking at the top-end iPad, then I’m clearly seriously in the market for an iPad. Switching to an entry-level PC won’t tempt me. “If you’re spending $800 dollars, why not spend $200 more?” …on something twice the weight that runs different apps on a non-Retina screen
It’s also extremely clear from some of those criticising Apple’s decision that they don’t use iOS all that much, presumably having dismissed it as a toy, unfit for any ‘real’ work (countered, of course, by the many companies now using iPads for real work in medicine, design, music, and so on). Bolton continued:
In one article, the author says they can kind of understand if you have loads of music or movies. Apps and games completely ignored. Lots of tech writers seem not to care about how people who actually use devices think, only about how the internet responds to announcements.
A big chunk of the tech journalism (and I use that word loosely) industry has yet to enact a much-demanded New Year’s resolution of thinking before typing, rather than just spewing their own opinion into your eyes as fact. Just because something isn’t for you, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s pointless or stupid, nor does it mean those considering buying it are crazy. To my mind, with the iPad increasingly used by all manner of professionals and consumers alike, it would have been inconceivable had Apple not bowed to the inevitable and offered a larger capacity. But then I actually use iPads rather than just write about them.
My only beef is if Apple use this as an attempt to move the iPad’s price bands around.
What should really happen is the bottom end model gets discontinued and the storage shifted around appropriately.
Apple make obscenely insulting margins on their storage bump and the iPad 5 (or whatever it will be) could be the tipping point if they use the storage doubling metric to shift the base iPad price up by $50-100/equivalent because it may start at 32GB.
My guess is that the iPad 5 will see the bands revert price-wise, which will look like a price reduction. As it is, the shifts are quite odd anyway. For the first $100, you get an extra 16 GB. Then you get an extra 32. Then you get another 64. Perception of value not unlike at a McDonald’s, when supersizing.
But yeah, I largely agree. I’d have been happier had Apple just shot the 16 GB model and dropped the others down a rung; as someone mentioned on my other 128 GB iPad 4 article, this could be an attempt to increase margins again. Still, if it sets some kind of precedent for iOS, that’s broadly a good thing long-term.
I had this debate with some others just yesterday who don’t understand how useful to some people this volume of space could be. With really trying I can think of multiple use cases where this new iPad could be useful.
On top of the uses you’ve listed their is now an AutoCAD app as well, renders for which can often be in the multiple-gigabyte area.
For those using one as a laptop replacement this volume of space is vital for keeping music, videos and documents on hand. Having everything in the cloud is all good, until your 3G connection isn’t good enough to stream or you’ve run out of data for the month.
Personally I think this a good move from Apple.
I’m less swayed by the ‘Why not buy a laptop instead?’ argument, and more swayed by the ‘Why buy an Air now there’s a 128Gb iPad?’ argument. As a ‘power user’, there are things I do that can’t be done on an iPad YET. But a regular joe could now go for an iPad instead of the laptop, further cannibalising the shrinking desktop market.