"Nothing new, no one will buy it"
and
"It's too radical, no one will buy it"
Like all tech companies, Apple needs to be able to do subtle iterations and improvements, and their marketing teams are left to try to add an "r" to every evolution.
"At 7.9 inches, it’s perfectly sized to deliver an experience every bit as big as iPad"
It's "perfectly sized" for the role it's filling (one hand, more mobile, like a pulp novel, whatever), and iPad is "perfectly sized" for it's own role (around the house, larger games, magazine reading, whatever). They can both be "perfectly sized" in a marketing world, and I'm sure the design team fussed over the exact dimensions for a LONG time.
It's "an experience" "as big as the iPad" to emphasize that it will run all the existing apps, vs their comparisons to a "scaled up phone experience". The marketing here emphasizes that the compact experience is 'just as good'. I do wonder how well UI elements will scale down, but in a marketing world it makes a certain kind of sense to me.
Yes, these claims are a bit silly, especially in a literal sense, but recall that the original iPad was "magical". It's pretty typical marketing phrasing, especially for Apple.
That said, I frequently find the phrasing funny too.
Unless they are designed for different usage scenarios.
While I agree some of the texts on the iPad mini page could have been better written, it's as usual just marketing speak designed to push interested customers that extra cm they need to do a purchase.
They said it about the iPod too- claiming that having less capacity than the creative nomad and no built in radio made it "lame" (CmdrTaco famously said this.)
They said it about the iMac as well, calling it a toy computer that looked like candy. Funny how in 2 years all the other manufacturers were making their computers colorful, and the bondi-blue design aesthetic was adopted by a wide variety of products around the world.
Now I'm sure somewhere there are people who were not even 10 years old when the iMac was being put down are saying the iPad mini is lame. For the same reasons.
Then when the product strikes a nerve with the public, and sells 100 million units, they decide that the people buying it must be stupid and persuaded by slick marketing, because obviously its "lame" or "doesn't have the specs" of the competition (though they never detail how it lacks specs and usually they're completely wrong and ignoring the terrible usability of the competition.)
It's the standard issue mythology of the apple hater:
Apple products are inferior (even when they aren't.) Apple products are more expensive (even though they aren't.) Apple buyers are stupid and easily persuaded by slick marketing (even though it should be obvious that people buy Apple products because they work better for them.)
Consequently, EVERY Apple product introduction is "underwhelming".
That said, Apple are inviting some of these comparisons. "More expensive", for example. The iPad Mini is more expensive than a Nexus 7, by a significant margin. Apple invited the comparison by comparing the two devices themselves on stage.
No amount of competitive marketing seems to have brought the two product families into competition beyond "well I heard the iPad has books too but my friend loves her Kindle".
I'm not sure why, given the sales of the "mini" form factor. I kind of suspect they're more concerned with positioning themselves against jumbo phones, which -are- selling in volume and have already invited a major design change in the iPhone line.
I don't know if this is necessarily the right conclusion.
The only reason the Galaxy Note gets a pass is because it's still mentally categorized as a big telephone.
For me what it comes down to in the end is the same, which is easier to hand off to a relative and not worry about.
Answer : the iPad.
I provided many family members with PCs over the years all the while using Apple products. Why? Because I knew they could just pop into a local store and buy software for it. Because I knew Windows was common and they most likely had it at work. Because I knew if their machine had an issue either I could solve it quickly or Dell's support would. Heck Dell even sent someone to my parents house to fix the unit!
Well something similar is happening here. I know if I give them an iPad they won't be lacking for software. It is a packaged experience with a dearth of support.
So, yeah they cost a bit more upfront, but for me the lack of having to "fix" something is worth the premium. It also means they know what it is and understand the intrinsic value. If I hand them a Google Nexus the first questions will be to compare it to an iPad... and well, why bother.
Neither is "better" than the other, it entirely depends on your circumstances- what you want your tablet to do, how much money you have, etc. etc.
Turns out it became the best selling iPod of all time.
Same for iMacs. Don't compare an iMac with a clone in a tower. Compare it to a similar form factor: all in one, quiet, low power consumption.
If you buy it over an Apple, you get what you deserve. The quality from Lenovo has been declining since they bought the brand from IBM. Thinkpad's are a SHADOW of their former glory, sadly.
Here's something people don't factor in when buying laptops: Your expensive MacBook Pro is having issues? Well, visit an Apple store and get it fixed!
Your expensive Lenovo is having issues? Well... mail it back...
But you still didn't make the comparison, you told other people to do it. Until you make the comparison, I'm still betting that the Lenovo cuts corners in a variety of ways to make the product cheaper, and as a consumer you have to accept those cost-cutting trade offs.
For example, while there are laptops much cheaper than the Air, the ultra books with similar specs, weight, battery life, and build quality aren't really cheaper. Another way to look at is that while Apple doesn't sell a $500 laptop, you don't get less in a $1,200 MBA than comparable $1,200 PC laptops.