What size memory is most often bought and why?

[WitchOneSalem]

At first I chose the 32GB IPad. Then I decided I need more room for storage so I purchased me this 64 GB

Sent from my IPAD 1st generation. WIFI only. 64GB

 

[Kaykaykay]

What an odd article. To wit...

"...The research was done by Context in Western Europe and it found that more than half of all iPad buyers would choose either the 64GB 3G model (also the most expensive), which accounted for roughly 33% of sales, or the 16GB Wi-Fi-only model (curiously the least expensive model), which received 22% of sales. On that evidence, as TheAppleBlog points out, consumers are going “all or nothing” – and many more seem to be saying “all”...

Although the title of the article is technically accurate, the numbers actually imply that the most popular model is neither the most expensive nor the cheapest. It's the 32 G model with 45% of sales. Arithmetic is apparently a challenge for some tech writers.

From my read, they're separating popularity among 3G and wi-fi models, not just GBs. So their math seems fine to me.

 

[s2mikey]

I feel that the 32gb version would satisfy a majority of the users out there. It's kind of like the Goldilocks and the three bears issue: The 16 is a little too small, the 64 is a little too pricey and big, but the 32gb is just right.

 

[AQ_OC]

The article says this:

Research firm Context (via V3) compiled a report about the state of the tablet market in western Europe, and found that the 64 GB 3G iPad 2 has accounted for a third of all iPad 2 sales since launch. The next closest model is the 16 GB WiFi-only iPad 2, which was responsible for 22 percent of all sales

.

So I'm not sure how you can say that 45% of sales is the 32GB model. Note that I added the bolding. They are looking across all memory and wifi vs 3G, so that 45% includes breakdowns over more than just memory.

 

[jsh1120]

Seems to me that reporters/writers of all shades aren't exactly at the head of their class when it comes to arithmetic or veracity.

Well, I did spend one frustrating semester trying to teach statistics to journalism majors at large university. Interestingly, the figures cited in the article above could have been headlined in a variety of ways. For example...

"Most iPad Users Go For Expensive Models" or "Most iPad Users Reject Most Expensive Model"

 

[Kaykaykay]

Well, I did spend one frustrating semester trying to teach statistics to journalism majors at large university. Interestingly, the figures cited in the article above could have been headlined in a variety of ways. For example...

"Most iPad Users Go For Expensive Models" or "Most iPad Users Reject Most Expensive Model"

I'm guessing that the headline writer wrote to reflect what the report suggested, in which case both the math and the thrust of the headline would've originated from non-journalists.

 

[jsh1120]

The article says this:

.

So I'm not sure how you can say that 45% of sales is the 32GB model. Note that I added the bolding. They are looking across all memory and wifi vs 3G, so that 45% includes breakdowns over more than just memory.

Good catch. My apologies. I checked the original article cited and unfortunately there is simply no way to determine just what the storage breakdown is from the information provided since there are no figures given for 64GB wifi, 16GB 3G, or any breakdown for the 32GB models. I'd dig further but since the article is based on a survey of Western Europe soon after introduction of the iPad 2, I'm not sure what it would tell us.

BTW, in a previous life I made a living doing market research and will only say that without access to the raw data upon which articles like this are based, it's almost impossible to figure out what's going on. And even then the conclusions are frequently heavily qualified. For example, market research firms like Context (in Western Europe) and NPD (in the US) get much of their information from retail channels with whom they have agreements to supply sales figures. Unfortunately for any reasonable analysis, Apple refuses to divulge just how many (and which) iPads they sell through their own retail stores (or via the internet) though such information is available from resellers. Thus, although the actual sales of Android tablets (for example) can be relatively accurately estimated by checking with a sample of retail outlets and internet sites (because they are the major channels), the same is not true for iPad sales. The only way around these problems is to survey consumers directly. But that sort of research is far more expensive than monitoring retail channels and isn't conducted very often.

There's no question, of course, that Apple dominates the tablet market at the present time. But apart from Apple's own press releases, there is almost no reliable source of just how extensive that domination is. The same, by the way, is true of the Kindle Fire from Amazon. There is little question that it is selling very, very well. And in some retail channels where both the Kindle Fire and iPad are both available (e.g. Best Buy, Target), the KF appears to be a strong competitor. But since Amazon, like Apple, doesn't release figures about its own direct sales and those sales constitute a large portion of all sales, it's very difficult to derive precise estimates of total sales for either the iPad or the KF.

Sorry for the tangent.