ChangeWave surveyed nearly 3,000 U.S. consumers to see which tablets they would be buying in the next three months, and a whooping 73% of planned tablet buyers (which was about 7% of the sample) said they would be getting an iPad, compared to a meager 8% of projected Kindle Fire purchases and 6% of those getting a Samsung Galaxy Tab. Looking back at the first quarter of 2012, ABI Research has confirmed the trend, claiming that Apple had claimed 65% of the market.
Existing owners also reported on satisfaction. 81% of third-generation iPad owners were "Very Satisfied", compared to 71% of iPad 2 owners, 46% of Samsung Galaxy Tab owners, and 41% of Kindle Fire owners. 11% of Samsung Galaxy Tab owners reported being "Somewhat Unsatisfied" with their device, compared to 2% of both iPad model owners.
Finally, the poll probed interest in a smaller iPad, which is a rumor we've been hearing floating around for some time now. 3% of respondents said they were "Very Likely" to pick up an iPad Mini for themselves or a friend, while 14% said they were "Somewhat Likely" to do so.
Even though the iPad is slowly dipping in its overall command of the landscape, it's still safe to say that there isn't so much of a "tablet market" as there is "an iPad market". Even among mobile PC manufacturers, the iPad has been trouncing the likes of Acer, Lenovo, HP, and ASUS. Right now, it seems like the biggest competition for the iPad will be Windows 8 machines that offer a big-boy operating system in a tablet form factor with a keyboard dock for those times when you want a laptop experience, but those are still a ways off, and even once they come out, the iPad will likely maintain a lead on price point.
On that note, my interest in the rumored iPad Mini is directly proportional to its price. If it actually does launch at $200 - $300, sign me up - especially if it manages to keep the Retina display resolution. Would you be interested in a smaller or iPad, or do you find the current size portable enough? Have you ever been interested in a Kindle Fire for its portability?
Source: ChangeWave, ABI
Reader comments
iPad crushes expected Kindle and Samsung tablet sales in U.S.
I have both an iPad (gen 1) and a Kindle Fire, and this is not too surprising. I like both, but use them for different things. The Kindle Fire really has two main advantages -- price, and easy access to Amazon content. For most Amazon content, this is not much of an issue -- if Apple chose, they could eliminate the Fire's advantage overnight by reversing its stupid in-app store rule. All that would remain would be access to Amazon Video, which the iPad cannot do (not sure if it is Apple or Amazon's "fault" here), which is significant to Amazon Prime members in the US, but nobody else.
There is zero indication the franken OS Windows 8 tablet will be competition for the iPad.
I would buy an iPad Mini in a heartbeat. Nook Color is great as an eReader but only middling at everything else and the hardware is wonky. An iPad Mini would be ideal for portability, reliability and doing everything else on the go.
I have both a new retina iPad and a Kindle Fire (and am an iPhone 4 owner) and I can say I DO NOT like the 7" form factor at all. Its too big to fit in a pocket. So for me the next step up is a backpack/book bag and that's comfortable for the iPad to move around in.
The KF is a bit too big to try and hold one handed like a phone but with its size, its a bit too small to two hand. Apple has hit the sweet spot with both their phone size and their tablet size.
On top of it, the KF's User Interface is not pleasant to use.
Re: "... I can say I DO NOT like the 7" form factor at all. Its too big to fit in a pocket."
BOOM. I think that's the real killer. The 7"-ish form factor is the worst of both worlds: too big to fit in a pocket and stuck at the small end of the usability scale.
Say what you want about smallness, lightness, and cheapness. It's just plain awkward in all ways.
Mini for adults? Yes, too small. But for kids? Not so much.
I have three little ones and if they came out with a mini, done! If offered at a $200-250 price point? Would be the death of Fire, Color et. all........and would keep my blasted kids off my device!
What I would rather have is a pocket sized iPhone with a big enough screen to use for most things. Keeping the same aspect Ratio about 4.5" would be just right. If they changed the aspect ratio to 16:9 then you would have to go to 5" to get a decent width device and then it would be to tall.
I don't want any tablet. I already have a nano sized one that fits in my pocket; two of them actually.
Try and iPad and you'll think different.
You are reporting the statistics incorrectly.
2,893 consumers were surveyed. Of those, 7% said they would buy a tablet in the next 90 days. That's about 202 people. Of the 7% that said they'd buy a tablet, 73% responded they would buy an iPad. That's just over 5% of the total, or about 147 people.
Re: 3% of respondents said they were "Very Likely" to pick up an iPad Mini for themselves or a friend, while 14% said they were "Somewhat Likely" to do so.
3% isn't a compelling slice of the market. Neither is 17% for the "very" and "somewhat" likely slices combined.
Now that the Kindle Fire is tanking, and there seems to be little demand for a smaller iPad, there's less incentive for Apple to release an iPad mini. Maybe selling 1- and 2-year old iPad models at a discount is the better tactic. Let's say that next year, when the 4th generation iPad is released, Apple sells the low-end 3rd generation iPad for $100 less. $399. And let's say they sell the low-end iPad 2 for $200 less. $299. Think about that.
All Retina displays. All 9.7" screens. Starting at $299. Would Apple really ever need an iPad mini? I don't think so. But whatever. We'll all just have to wait and see.
iPad2 doesn't have a retina display
You're telling me that 20% of consumers being at least "somewhat likely" to purchase an iPad mini isn't compelling for Apple?! I'd imagine any manufacturer would love those numbers.
Big surprise here. Two different products for two different markets. Samsung not making any headway isn't a surprise, do to the legal battle between them and Apple.
there can be no replacement for the iPad!
Follow me on instagram! @theonewho_eats
There are 2 Nook tablets: the Nook Color which came out first and now what they call the Nook Tablet. I currently own a Motorola Xoom and would be interested in an iPad that would be about 8 inches. 7 inches would be too small for the iPad.
As someone with a degree in Marketing and with plenty of marketing research and statistics courses under his belt, a sample size of 3,000 is nothing to sneeze at.
It adds a high degree of validity to the survey, and Apple would be wise to take careful note of the survey's findings.
What should be taken away from the findings is that Apple should ~NOT~ release some sort of less capable iPad "junior."
Apple haters in the press had a good laugh when the Amazon Kindle Fire rocked the charts during the 2011 holiday sales period. But those same people weren't exactly laughing when Amazon Kindle Fire sales tanked in 2012 as would-be Kindle Fire customers bought iPads instead – this, despite the iPad's much higher price tag. It was "iPad or bust."
Apparently, consumers get it: there is a vast difference between price and VALUE.
Right now, the iPad owes much of its success to the razor sharp focus and clarity as to what an iPad is, what its form factor is and what its mind-blowing capabilities are, in the mind of the consumer.
Employing a not-very-thought-through strategy of "blocking" or "answering" offerings from ostensible competitors (there is no proof that Kindle Fire sales came at the expense of iPad sales. Consumers may see these products as very different – apples and oranges).
Are what are thought to be competitors to the iPad truly competitors? That seems to be the assumption, right or wrong.
If Apple comes out with a smaller iPad "junior" or iPad "nano," the iPad concept will become diffused and lose its razor sharp clarity. "iPad" would now stand for a product line "family" that includes a smaller form factor iPad that is less powerful and capable than the iPad everyone knows and loves.
Cheapening the iPad brand identity will hurt higher-end iPads.
Again, after the 2011 holiday buying season, the more expensive iPad "ate the Amazon Kindle Fire's lunch," proving that no $299 "iPad nano" was at all necessary.
Apple should pick its battles with the utmost care; let Amazon, Microsoft, Samsung and others slug it out at the low-end, while Apple stays above the fray and keeps its eye on the ball with a single, focused, powerful, and yes, higher-priced iPad.
Dell and HP/Compaq can tell you many a tale of the perils of entering the low-cost, low-end competitive fray. And were he alive today, Steve Jobs can tell you the bountiful benefits of stubbornly refusing to compete in that cutthroat arena. Remember when the Dell brand had an air exclusivity, of a more expensive yet higher quality, premium product? (I wouldn't blame you if you don't.) Dell was once a sterling brand, and the company was for long the #1 PC seller EVEN AS the market was flooded with cheaper PCs – Dell PCs were NEVER the cheapest, but they were #1 despite this
But they forfeited "a brand worth paying extra for" when the decision was made to enter the sub-$1,000 market. Yet a cutthroat competitive price war would ensue instead, turning the sub-$1,000 market into the sub-$600 market and then a sub-$400 market. That's why HP/Compaq is the #1 PC seller yet can't make any money off this position.
This is the scenario Apple faces as the always-wrong industry analysts insist Apple MUST "block" the anticipated flood of $199, 8GB, 7" "tablets" or it will be doomsday for Apple. (The same was said about the more expensive MacBook Air in the face of competition from $300 NetBooks, yet the pricier MacBook Air continues to eat their lunch(es).)
Again, refer to my earlier comments about how consumers seem to "get it." I don't think a buyer of a $300 NetBook believes s/he's getting the same quality and power of a $999 MacBook Air.
My vote is against an iPad "junior" or "mini" or "nano."
Diluting the sharp concept the iPad presently holds in the mind of the consumer will hurt sales of ALL iPads – "juniors" and "seniors" alike.
Let the boneheads like Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Sony, Microsoft, Samsung, Asus, Acer, Toshiba, Google, et al, slug it out in the $199, 8GB "tablet" market and try to squeeze out a profit margin at the same time.
Steve Jobs is on record opposing a 7" iPad. (The "filing down your fingers with sandpaper" remark.)
The article said the large-scale survey found that "3% of respondents said they were "Very Likely" to pick up an iPad Mini for themselves or a friend, while 14% said they were "Somewhat Likely" to do so." Not especially compelling numbers.
As Steve Jobs said, you have to DECIDE and sometimes say NO to portions of the market.
Rather than reduce size, capability and price of the iPad, Apple should instead continue to focus on adding compelling capabilities to the iPad that consumers are willing to pay for.