The Inevitability of OLED Displays on iPhones and iPads and Why You Should Care

First off, let me refer to this quote from a The New Yorker profile of Jony Ive from a few months back:

The Apple Watch is designed to remain dark until a wearer raises his or her arm. In the prototypes worn around the Cupertino campus at the end of last year, this feature was still glitchy. For Marc Newson, it took three attempts—an escalation of acting styles, from naturalism to melodrama—before his screen came to life. Under normal circumstances, the screen will then show one of nine watch faces, each customizable. One will show the time alongside a brightly lit flower, butterfly, or jellyfish; these will be in motion, against a black background. This imagery had dominated the launch, and Ive now explained his enthusiasm for it. He picked up his iPhone 6 and pressed the home button. “The whole of the display comes on,” he said. “That, to me, feels very, very old.” (The iPhone 6 reached stores two weeks later.) He went on to explain that an Apple Watch uses a new display technology whose blacks are blacker than those in an iPhone’s L.E.D. display. This makes it easier to mask the point where, beneath a glass surface, a display ends and its frame begins. An Apple Watch jellyfish swims in deep space, and becomes, Ive said, as much an attribute of the watch as an image. On a current iPhone screen, a jellyfish would be pinned against dark gray, and framed in black, and, Ive said, have “much less magic.”

One can infer from this quote that Jony Ive has a newly acquired affinity for OLED displays and he clearly views LCD displays as being slightly outdated. 

I believe iPhones and iPads, and possibly MacBooks will eventually feature OLED displays. And quite possibly, Samsung-made "Super AMOLED" displays. 

Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge and Apple iPhone 6 Plus
Which display do you prefer? 

I used to have a disdain for OLED displays as they featured inaccurate colours. Tim Cook, and I assume the guys at Apple thought so as well. Cook had this to say in early 2013 about OLED displays, "If you ever buy anything online and really want to know what he color is, as many people do, you should really think twice before you depend on the color from an OLED display." He added, "There are many attributes to the display, and what Apple does is sweat every detail." I think he was right. Displays on Apple devices have been known to be extremely colour accurate, with accurate White Point and right colour temperature. Simply put, displays on Apple devices are very well calibrated. You can refer to Displaymate's detailed analysis of the display on the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus. 

For years, other phone makers have tried to win over consumers with displays that feature oversaturated colours, with colours that appear "punchy". Sure, it looks attractive to some consumers but I have always preferred natural-looking colours. Even today, some phone makers are still oversaturating colours on even LCD displays - you just have to take a look at the LG G4's display. They are artificially enhancing colours on LCD displays to mimick those on an OLED/AMOLED display, even though LCD displays themselves tend to exhibit natural looking colours. 

It's important to note that OLED, AMOLED displays are a newer technology than LCD displays(what is currently being used in Apple devices, except Apple Watch), and for years, they were known to exhibit inaccurate colours. 

But OLED technology has improved through the years and with this advancement, one phone maker has recently started giving consumers the option of having accurate colours on their AMOLED displays and that phone maker is Samsung. Out of the box, Samsung's recent flagships(Galaxy S5, Note 4, S6) have come with the "Basic Mode", a screen mode for users that want accurate, natural-looking colours. Yes, OLED/AMOLED displays have advanced in a few short years and are now as capable of accurate colours as LCD displays. It is up to the phone maker to decide how they want to calibrate the display. In Anandtech's review of the Samsung Galaxy S6, Joshua Ho wrote, "with this generation, I suspect Samsung is either meeting or exceeding the best LCDs in quality and with the next generation of AMOLED it's highly likely that high end smartphones will have to migrate to AMOLED to stay competitive."

Couple this with Jony Ive's recent affinity with OLED displays, it seems obvious that future iPhones, iPads and possibly MacBooks will feature OLED/AMOLED displays. OLED/AMOLED displays will eventually eclipse LCDs in quality and if Apple intends to stay competitive, they have to equip their products with this newer display technology. And you can be sure that the OLED/AMOLED displays featured in Apple devices will have the same characteristics as the LCDs that are currently in use - well-calibrated, good viewing angles, natural-looking and sRGB accurate colours, at the same time combined with the benefits that OLED displays are known for. 

Question is: How soon can we see those displays on Apple mobile devices? The 2016 iPhone series(7, 7 Plus) perhaps? 

Xiaomi CEO reaffirms commitment to tablets

Xiaomi CEO, Lei Jun took to Weibo to reaffirm his company's commitment to tablets, denying rumours that the company is exiting the tough tablet market. More crucially, he was quick to add that he finds large tablets to be the best-suited device type for reading, watching movies and playing games. 

No word on a follow-up to the Xiaomi Mi Pad that was launched early last year though. 

My own take on this: Wow. This guy feels the same way I do regarding tablets. I assume he meant 9-10 inch tablets when he said "large tablets", and maybe ones even larger than that, like one that Apple is working on. I still find tablets to provide immense value to the end user, especially in certain key tasks where a notebook or smartphone can't come close to providing as good an experience. 
Based on his comments, I'd think the eventual follow-up to the Mi Pad will be a bigger tablet, with a screen size bigger than the 7.9" screen that the Mi Pad has. 

Lei Jun and by extension, Xiaomi, has always struck me as one of the few guys playing in the Android space that "get it". They sell their products here in Singapore and I follow them very closely. 
I bought the Xiaomi Mi Pad in July 2014, soon after it was first launched in China and have been using it on a regular basis ever since. I will be following up soon with a post about my experience with the Mi Pad, after using it close to a year. Stay tuned. 

You can read my previous two posts on negative iPad sales growth and my thoughts on tablet devices as a whole here and here.

The "iPad Decline" - Part 1

iPad seeing negative sales growth 

For many quarters now, Apple's iPad line, first launched in 2010, has seen negative sales growth. 

That's not to say that the iPad isn't a terrific device. It is, and I'm not the only one that thinks that. Just ask tech reviewers and millions of iPad users. iPad user satisfaction rates(%) are constantly in the high 90s.

So why are iPad sales in decline? Well, I think there are a couple of main factors at play here:

Longer Upgrade Cycles

People are generally happy with their iPads and don’t see the need to upgrade their iPad as often as they do their phones. I think the typical upgrade cycle for most people tend to stretch beyond 2 years. I still see tons of people carrying the iPad 2 around, and that was launched in early 2011. iPads tend to be very well built, last long and they are often able to support the latest software; case in point: iPad 2 can still run iOS 8. 

Apple CEO Tim Cook had this to say about iPad upgrade cycles, "It's longer than an iPhone, probably between an iPhone and a PC. We haven't been in the business long enough to say that with certainty, but that's what we think."

Cannibalisation

 

The iPad is in a strange place right now. It is sitting right in between the MacBook Airs/new MacBook, and the iPhone 6 Plus.  Tim Cook noted it himself when he said during the Q4 2014 earnings call:

"There are obvious cannibalisation things that are occurring. I'm sure that some people looked at the Mac and iPad and decided on a Mac. I don't have research to demonstrate that, but I'm sure that will be just by looking at the numbers and I am fine with that by the way." 

He added, "I am sure some people will look at an iPad and an iPhone and decide just to get an iPhone and I''m fine with that as well. But over the long arc of time, my own judgement is that iPad has a great future, healthy individual 90-day clicks workout, I don't know. But I'm very bullish on where we can take iPad over time and so we're continuing to invest in the product pipeline." 

Apple has always embraced self-cannibalisation. If you don't cannibalise your own products, someone else will. As an innovator, you can't fear cannibalisation. Apple knew the iPhone would cannibalise the iPod, yet it launched the iPhone anyway. 

Having said that, the landscape has changed. The lines between the iPad and large-screen phones are blurring and the same is happening between the iPad and MacBooks, made even more so with the recent introduction of the new MacBook.

A different landscape 

I feel the topic of cannibalisation should be discussed in tandem with that of a different landscape that Apple now faces, and for which it is partly responsible. These two factors are closely related. 

Consider this: In 2010, when Apple introduced the iPad, iPhone and most phone displays were relatively small. Most laptops were bulky and cumbersome to carry around. The iPad had a stronger use case, or "iPad advantage" if you will, back then. 

Now in 2015: iPhone and most phones have large displays, and MacBooks and Windows Ultrabooks are constantly getting thinner, lighter and more refined. As mentioned in my previous point: The lines between the iPad and devices of other form factors are blurring and there is obvious cannibalisation going on. 

Carrier subsidies

This is a smaller factor to consider: Some people buy their tablets without a carrier plan, especially so for Wifi-only tablets. Without carrier subsidies, there is less incentive to upgrade, as the up-front cost of a tablet is higher.

Why the situation isn't as bad as it looks 

Tim Cook appears to be pretty optimistic about the iPad's longer term prospects. "At some point it will stabilise," he said. "I'm not sure precisely when, but I'm pretty confident that it will... I believe the iPad is an extremely good business over the longer term."

Daring Fireball 's John Gruber pointed out that the iPad's cumulative shipments by months since launch is still, for now, doing better than the iPhone's. The iPad has seen much faster mass adoption than the iPhone since it's launch. 

It's important to note that, for the first three months of 2015, Apple sold 12.6 million iPad units. That is still a huge business for Apple, just not as huge as the iPhone business. Any other company would kill to sell 12.6 million units of a single product line. 

As John so eloquently put it, "I think the iPad is sort of like a young phenom in sports. It came on so fast, so strong, that many keen observers - including me - expected it to eclipse the iPhone. That isn't panning out. But I think we, collectively, are now judging the iPad's actual sales and success not for what they are but for what we expected they were going to be. It's a good, popular, much-used family of products that continues to sell really well. Not iPhone-well, but well. Being only the second-fastest selling product in Apple history, instead of the first, is nothing to sneeze at." 

Like Cook, I think the iPad is here to stay. I have an iPad Air and I use it everyday. It's just better than my phone and MacBook Pro for certain tasks. Tasks like reading an ebook, comics, web browsing, games. Apps tailored for the iPad just makes that experience all the more better. It's just more accessible and compelling than my MacBook for certain tasks. A large part of it comes down to convenience, where you can just pick it up and dive right in, wherever you are. You can't really use a laptop while walking around, can you?

Steve Jobs introduced the iPad as the "in between" device that's "far better" at some key tasks 

Therefore, I can relax, kick back and lounge around anywhere I want with my iPad in hand, something I can't do with my MacBook Pro. The MacBook also isn't as ideal for reading ebooks, as I often place it on a desk, as I am sure most people do, and I have to bend over to read.

Similarly, the iPad's screen is much more enjoyable for prolonged reading sessions than my phone, since it's so much bigger. I don't want to read a graphic novel on my phone, the experience just isn't as good. 

In Part 2, I will talk about how we should change the way we see the iPad and Apple's current product offerings. 

Opinion Piece: Why Portable Game Consoles Need To And Will Eventually Die - Part 1

Nintendo Finally Making Mobile Games 

Recently, during it's financial results presentation, Nintendo announced that they are going to release five games on mobile(iOS/Android) by March 2017. Nintendo president Satoru Iwata stressed that the games wouldn't be simply ports of existing titles that are currently on or in-development for 3DS and Wii U. Instead, they would be original games, tailored for mobile devices(smartphones, tablets). 

He was quoted saying, "You may think it is a small number, but when we aim to make each title a hit, and because we want to thoroughly operate every one of them for a significant amount of time after their releases, this is not a small number at all and should demonstrate our serious commitment to the smart device business."

So, we are not going to see the likes of Zelda, Mario and Pokemon on our iPhones and iPads. That's what Nintendo is saying. Those games will still be exclusive to its own consoles. 
But you know what? It's inevitable that first-party Nintendo IP(Mario, Zelda, etc) will eventually appear on smartphones and tablets. I predict, over time, even more of Nintendo's revenue will come from software, given how hardware sales are dwindling and it's recently announced push into mobile. 

The Current State of Portable and Mobile Gaming 

Credit: CNET.com

I thought this was a good time to zoom out and give you guys my thoughts on the current state of portable gaming, or at least my perspective and my predictions going forward. 

It's no secret that dedicated portable gaming consoles have been going through a sharp decline, notably starting with the Nintendo 3DS and Sony Playstation Vita. Much has been said about this. Portable games that you can carry around with you, are now dominated by casual, "flick, drag and swipe" games, a majority of them on smartphones and tablets. People just don't want to carry an additional device that just plays games. Casual games on smartphones and tablets are "good enough" for most folks and should they need a more traditional, complete and hardcore gaming experience, they can always turn to home consoles and PC gaming. It is because of this that I believe that the rise of smartphone gaming hasn't had that much an impact on home console and PC gaming. 

Games on dedicated portable consoles are much better than their counterparts on smartphones and tablets. They are more sophisticated, and have the added advantage of physical, traditional input methods(analog sticks, shoulder triggers, direction buttons, etc). But it doesn't matter for most people. When we look at the big picture, the dedicated portable console market is a niche market catering to a small audience. 

Although the current home console domination might change with a potential new Apple TV set-top box with a dedicated game/app store and support for third-party MFi(Made for iPhone) controllers, which will no doubt pave the way for newer, richer, deeper, more sophisticated games and attract even more developer support. I believe a new Apple TV with a dedicated app store and increased focus on gaming will upend traditional home console gaming. 

But that's a conversation for another day. Back to the topic at hand. 

I own a 3DS and Vita, and I find the user interface on both to be extremely poor and the user experience leaving much to be desired. For example, I have to jump through so many hoops just to get a game from the Nintendo eShop and the GUI is just not intuitive at all. I have probably been spoiled by the "seamless" user experience that Apple has been providing, and I bet many others feel the same way as I do. The ways in which the user interacts with the 3DS/Vita, outside of gaming, are extremely archaic.  

Some would argue that the 3DS and Vita are gaming machines first and foremost and all it matters is the gaming experience. But the technology landscape has changed so much in a few years and most people's perceptions have been altered by devices like the iPhone. It's no longer enough to just be good at gaming. The core gaming experience has to be extended,  and it has to be easy for users to for example, buy a game from the online store. 
Granted, Sony did try to keep up with the times with features like Near on the PS Vita, whereby you'd be able to see who's in your local area and what they are playing. But such features have never really taken off, and I suspect it all comes down to the user experience. Both Nintendo and Sony have also made games available as digital copies, but I find that the purchase experience that the eShop and PS Store provide to be sorely lacking. Too many hoops to jump through, too cumbersome. And it's pretty fragmented, in that some games are available in certain regions, adding to the headache that a lot of gamers experience. 

Major Game Publishers Are Already Making The Transition To Mobile, This Is The Beginning of The End  

Konami's president recently came out and said that his company would "pursue mobile games aggressively... our main platform will be mobile[translated]." And Konami isn't the only one. Geek.com reported that "using the 2007 release of the original iPhone as a point of reference, Square Enix has been involved with the release of over 70 mobile games in North America alone, and that number greatly increases if you count titles only released in Japan, as well as those released before the iPhone. In a new financial report, Square Enix has revealed that the company experienced  a 49% growth in profit in the year ending on March 31, 2015, even though it released fewer console games during that period. The growth was mainly attributed to Square Enix's mobile catalog and its MMOs." More importantly, Square noted that it feels "that the gaming industry is changing as smartphones and tablets become more prevalent. Meanwhile, it claims the console industry is becoming "increasingly competitive" and "oligopolistic", or dominated by just a few companies." You can read the full article here. Of course, publishers like Konami and Square are not abandoning home and portable consoles entirely. They are just making the transition to mobile and focusing more resources on that front."

Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun Confirms in Mi Note Pro Product Presentation That The Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 Does Have Overheating Issues

Hi all

In my previous post, I wrote about how the Snapdragon 810 has been confirmed to be a defective and compromised(in my view) chip. 

Xiaomi is one of the companies I follow pretty closely. They do business here in Singapore(where I live) and I own a few of their products. I came across Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun's presentation of the Mi Note Pro launch on Youtube. Lo and behold, during the presentation, Lei Jun talks extensively about the 810's overheating issues and how Xiaomi engineers have tried to work around the problem. Now, I understand Mandarin, so I will attempt to translate what he says into English for the benefit of those that don't. 

For those that understand Mandarin, I have attached the video below. Lei Jun starts talking about the 810's overheating problems and how Xiaomi has tried to deal with the issue at the 22.40 video mark. 

Here's what Lei Jun said regarding the SD 810's overheating issues and the company's solutions 

1. The chip does overheat, and this is a result of it being so fast

In my opinion, this is a BS excuse. The Exynos 7420 used in the Galaxy S6 also features the same octa-core big.LITTLE set-up as the SD 810. In fact, the 7420's A57 cores are clocked slightly higher than the 810's. The 7420's Cortex-A57 cores run at up to 2.1GHz, and the four Cortex-A53 battery-efficient cores running at up to 1.5GHz, while the 810's A57 cores run up to 2GHz (A57, slightly underclocked) and 1.5GHz (A53).

2. Xiaomi has optimised the entire chip in collaboration with Qualcomm, and the Snapdragon 810 used in the Mi Note Pro is an updated variant, different from both the 810 in the LG G Flex 2 and HTC One M9

3. Xiaomi has come up with a way to help the Mi Note Pro dissipate heat when the processor gets hot and they have filed five patents 

4. Xiaomi has built in four "cooling films" into the device to help the Mi Note Pro dissipate the heat and apparently, it's not cheap, factoring into the building cost of the device 

It appears that the Mi Note Pro still has issues with overheating. Phonearena has an article that documents this. During the presentation, Lei Jun referred to the Mi Note Pro as the "King of Android Phones". The Mi Note Pro might arguably be the most powerful Android phone at the moment, but so what? It's only the most powerful Android phone on paper. I still think the Galaxy S6 still holds the title of current best Android smartphone.
In my view, since the start of 2015, we haven't yet seen a really compelling Android phone, other than the Galaxy S6 and the value-for-money Asus Zenfone 2. I could also argue that most Android devices of 2014 weren't all that spectacular, save for a few, but that's a conversation for another day.

Hopefully Qualcomm does better with the Snapdragon 820. I hope they do.

Does the Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 Have an Overheating Problem? Why Yes, Yes It Does.

Much has been said about the Snapdragon 810 overheating. We have seen much back and forth debate about this.

So... does the Snapdragon 810 overheat? Does the overheating limit the performance of the 810, as aggressive CPU throttling often kicks in to deal with the issue?

Yes to all of the above. 

Need some evidence?

This article by the folks at Ars Technica goes pretty in-depth as to the SD 810's overheating issues.
They wrote, "In short, chips throttle, but the 810 throttles more than most, and it's severe enough that the 810 is actually slower than the 801 or 805 in some CPU-bound tasks over the long haul. The Exynos 7 Octa, which has similar specs on paper, is much better in practice."

It seems Qualcomm really did screwed it up with the Snapdragon 810. Well, why is that? Ewan Spence over at Forbes Tech has a pretty great write-up that I highly recommend. 

Read it here: 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2015/04/27/apple-iphone-5s-qualcomm-snapdragon-810/

Highlights:

"Why has Qualcomm dropped the ball and rushed the weak Snapdragon 810 to market? Why are manufacturers having to choose between clocked performance, delays to release dates, or having to look for solutions outside of the until-now-reliable Qualcomm?

Because of Apple."

"By pushing iOS to 64-bit at the ‘wrong’ time in Qualcomm’s product cycle, Apple created a fork of grandmaster proportions for the competition to deal with. Qualcomm’s new-design 64-bit chip (now labelled the Snapdragon 820) will not be generally available in handsets until the first half of 2016, so the manufacturers had to choose; stick with their roadmaps and release a 64-bit handset years down the line (handling a marketing advantage to Apple), or to do what Android does best and play ‘Specifications Trumps’ by matching the 64-bit marketing machine with solutions that had a hint of the MacGyver about them (handing a technical advantage to Apple)."

"Not only did Apple’s move increase the potency of the iPhone, it bounced Google into rushing the 64-bit version of Android, it pushed Qualcomm to disrupt its product roadmap, and it weakened the Android handsets going on sale during 2015."

The "iPad Decline" - Part 2

Neil Cybart: Apple's New Personalisation Product Analysis 

I think Neil Cybart has a pretty good reasoning for the current iPad situation. 

Quote from Above Avalon:

"Instead of product quadrants, a new type of analysis is needed to measure Apple's long-term objective and strategy. In Exhibit 4, I highlight how Apple views its current product line where screen size and mobility are the primary differences between products. Now each device can appeal to consumers in various segments of the market from education to enterprise to content creation and content consumption. Personalization is becoming a much bigger factor. In this table, the iPad's role is to serve as a placeholder for those who want technology with a slightly bigger screen than an iPhone or someone who wants a more simple and interactive device than a MacBook. While some may enjoy the iPad, there will be others that have no use for such a device. "

Exhibit 4

"Exhibit 5 depicts what I would call an Apple Product Screen Personalization analysis, which includes unit sales estimates for every major Apple product ranked according to screen size. Over time, while the peaks may shift left or right, I think the general shape will remain true as the iPhone remains the top seller and other devices fall in line."

Exhibit 5

My thoughts: 

The iPad is just a relatively new product and it's finding it's place. It will slowly settle down and a few things will become much clearer. Things like the typical user upgrade cycles. Sure, it's going through a "speed bump" right now, as Tim Cook calls it, but overall, the iPad has a long life ahead of it. People who think the iPad is going the way of the dinosaur need to get their head examined. The iPad plays an important role in Apple's ecosystem. Perhaps if we look at the iPhone as the centre or a large part of that experience, then the iPad plays a role somewhat similar as that of the Mac - an extension or another essential part/piece of the Apple experience. In other words, the iPad is a companion device to the iPhone or the Mac. And I believe that's the way Apple intended it to be when they launched it in 2010. 

In fact, during the October event last year, Tim Cook had this to say when concluding the presentation: 

"This is the strongest line-up of products that Apple has ever had. And we believe that each one of these play a very important role. People need different types of technology for the way they live their lives. We all do different things.

In fact, many of us and many of our customers use more than one of our products every day. Sometimes you want to sit at your desk in front of a huge beautiful immersive screen, packed with powerful technology. And we’ve made that much better today with the Retina 5K screen for iMac.Sometimes you want to take that powerful technology with you wherever you go, and we’ve made our notebooks even better this year with MacBook Air and MacBook Pro.Sometimes you want to be close to your content, touching it and we’ve made that experience even better today with the iPad Air 2, more powerful and incredibly thin.Sometimes you want to hold that powerful technology in the palm of your hand and there’s no better thing for your hand than the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus.And soon, you can wear that powerful technology right on your wrist...They are designed to be incredible products individually but they are also designed to work together seamlessly.”

Tim Cook's statement further reinforces my believe that the iPad is an essential part of the Apple ecosystem.

Going Forward - What's Next? 

The Current iPad Lineup

Apple's current iPad lineup since the October 2014 refresh has become very cluttered. 

The iPad Mini 3 and Mini 2 are essentially the same device. The only thing that separates them is that the Mini 3 has a gold colour option and Touch ID. In my opinion, the iPad Mini 3 is not worth the price premium over the Mini 2 and it is grossly overpriced. In fact, the base Mini 3 model - Wifi-only 16gb, costs the same as the base iPad Air model. I would recommend the iPad Air over the Mini 3 to most people. The Air has a larger screen, so by extension, I would argue it has added usability and a screen that has a larger colour gamut than the Mini 3. The Mini 3 uses the same screen as the Mini 2 and that particular screen has been criticised for not being up to mark as it has a poor colour gamut. 

Now having said that, I think with the October 2014 iPad refresh, it's been made pretty clear that Apple is pushing customers to the iPad Air 2 and previous-generation iPad Air. These two models just seem to be the most compelling out of the lineup of five devices. The iPad Air 2 got an A8X Chip, upgraded camera, laminated display, gold colour option and Touch ID. Meanwhile, the Mini 3 only got a gold colour option and Touch ID. It would seem customers would get more bang out of their buck buying either the Air 2 or Air. I suspect Apple's intent with the Mini 3 was to make the 9.7" iPads more compelling. 

Apple employed a similar strategy when it reconfigured iPhone storage options. By offering 16, 64 and 128gb options instead of the traditional 16, 32, 64gb options, Apple was essentially pushing people towards the 64gb model. And I suspect most people who purchase an iPhone 6 and 6 Plus would go for the 64gb option, since 16gb might seem too little and 128gb might be abit too much, and too expensive. 

The iPad Mini 1, together with the iPod Touch(Which hasn't had a major update since 2012) serve to be an entry point into the Apple ecosystem. 

iPad Lineup (October 2015 Refresh) 

Nothing is concrete yet, but it seems highly likely that Apple is working on a larger iPad model with a 12.9" screen size. People are dubbing it the "iPad Pro". Personally, I think it will most likely be called the "iPad Plus". 

You can read more about it here:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/05/03/apples-129-ipad-will-feature-bluetooth-stylus-force-touch-nfc-more-source-says

Apple is without a doubt also working on both an iPad Air and iPad Mini refresh. With these in mind, here's what I think the new iPad lineup should be like. 

iPad Pro(12.9")(High-end) - Enterprise, productivity-focused

iPad Air 3(9.7")(high-end) - Consumer-focused

iPad Mini 4(7.9")(Mid-to-High-end) 

iPad Air(9.7"")(Low-end, entry level) 

Both the Pro and Air 3 would serve as the flagship iPad models, with the Pro servicing enterprise users and being the enterprise and productivity-focused flagship. Apple would most probably charge a price premium for the iPad Pro, and this would serve to push up iPad ASP(average selling price), which has fallen over past few years. 

The Air 3 would be a high-end model for those that like the current 9.7" screen size(like me) and don't want anything bigger, yet want the best specifications that Apple has to offer. Thus, the Air 3 would be the consumer-focused flagship. 

Statistics show that most consumers prefer the 9.7" screen size. 

Current Breakout of iPad devices in Use as of January 5, 2015  

Note: 

9.7" screen size: iPad 1, iPad 2, iPad 3, iPad 4, iPad Air, iPad Air 2 

7.9" screen size: iPad Mini, iPad Mini 2, iPad Mini 3 

Having said that, there are customers that prefer the 7.9" screen size that the Mini line has to offer. Thus, I believe, and it appears so, that Apple will refresh the Mini line with a Mini 4. Leaks are indicating that Apple is working on an iPad Mini update: http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/04/07/chassis-allegedly-for-apples-a8-powered-ipad-mini-4-shown-in-new-pics-video 

I believe the Mini 4 will be mid-to-high-end, meaning it will have pretty high-end specifications, but one generation behind the Air 3 and Pro. It will most probably utilise the A8 or A8X processor, while both the Air 3 and Pro would like employ either the A9 or A9X. The Mini 4 should be the only 7.9" iPad in the lineup. 

Neil Cybart of Above Avalon argues that 

"Apple should stop selling the iPad mini. As a low-margin response to cheap Android tablets and given the lack of a large iPhone, the iPad mini served its purpose keeping Apple in the tablet game, but today there really aren’t many reasons to keep the iPad mini around.  Consensus seems to think Apple will add Touch ID to iPad mini later this week along with some other updates, but beyond that, unless sales trends improve (I wouldn’t expect them to), I don’t see the iPad mini staying in the line-up for too long and I think that is only for the better.  In order to keep product offerings in the same price range as iPad mini, Apple could work on lowering iPad Air pricing to approach that $299 level over time."

This was written before Apple's October 2014 event. We now know that the entry level iPad(iPad Mini 1) sells for USD$249. He was also right in hypothesising that the iPad Mini would receive a small update. I disagree with him that Apple should totally remove the iPad Mini from the lineup. I think Apple should keep one iPad Mini in the lineup to service those that like the 7.9" screen size. 

I however, agree with him that Apple should work on keeping the previous generation iPad Air in the lineup and to work on lowering the Air to entry level price point - $249. Thus my recommendation that the entry level iPad be the 2013 iPad Air. 

Conclusion 

I do not think that the iPad is going anywhere. Rather, we had a few years of explosive growth, so much so that now that's it's settling down, we see the current sales as disappointing. I don't think it's any cause for concern.

Over time, Apple will no doubt continue to refine the iPad lineup, bring us better iPads along with better software and services.