Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

"Apple didn’t make an arbitrary decision to withhold Retina on the Mini to save money, upsell more buyers to the iPad 4, or “force” the first generation of iPad Mini owners to upgrade next year. They chose not to ship a Retina iPad Mini because it would be significantly worse than the previous iPads in very important factors."

Er, Apple Maps?




That Google Maps asked for a lot of money and gave them less functionality (turn by turn navigation etc).

Agreed they messed up the launch, but it had to be done eventually.

Every business makes mistakes, the fact that people are upset most by apple maps being crap and having to use a browser instead is actually not too bad considering how many things they are doing at the moment!


Apple Maps was a software decision, the iPad Mini Retina decision was hardware. These decisions were made by two different people; Scott Forstall and Jonathan Ive.

Hopefully I don't have to explain further.


Er, Maps is irrelevant to this point.


No, it's a perfectly valid example of a case where Apple shipped something that was worse than what it had been shipping.


Also, it's a good example of how Apple's management is still able to recognize mistakes and try new ways, even if that means slaughtering an employee who significantly contributed to their top position in the market (Forstall).

Microsoft's fallout with Sinofsky is an interesting parallel to say the least.


So what, this should have influenced their decisions on the iPad Mini ?

Even if there were some issues with Apple Maps, I don't see why that would have an impact on the feature set of the iPad mini.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: