I think the lesson you're looking for is that cheaper = sells more. Not that less dpi = sells more. ...And since less dpi = cheaper, you jump to the wrong conclusion.
So since you want a cheaper, less-DPI ipad3, you and all those people you talk about should therefore go buy an ipad 2, because that's what you want.
ipad 3 IS the retina display. That's the whole point of the device. Not wanting a retina display in your ipad 3 is like saying you want chocolate cake, except without the chocolate.
The retina display is like one of those things that in some ways you may not really notice unless pointed out to you, but in other ways you don't really notice it when you have it, but you DO notice it when you don't have it. It's an ethereal quality, it's not really something that jumps out and screams HEY HEY LOOKATME!, you know?
Have you tried an ipad3 yet? I've used one for just a few minutes, and the display is really quite something to behold.
No, the conclusion I drew is exactly the one I made. You cannot seperate out one thing and then say such a thing will be a grand success.
Obviously a low PPI display will, in general, be cheaper to manufacture. Hence, lower PPI displays will be cheaper and people will be more willing to pay for one. With more people willing to buy one the cost can then futher be decreased, leading to even more cost savings over a high PPI display.
So we've come full circle. BTW - I'm not even remotely interested in an iPad, whether it's the new one or old one. This whole discussion offshoot has been about the viability of high PPI displays supplanting the current PPI displays in the computer market.
Hence, people point to how popular the new iPad is with its retina display.
But if you go to your average Joe Schmoe consumer buying an iPad, are they buying the new iPad because of the display or are they buying it because it's the newest iPad?
The more technically oriented people are obviously drawn to the display. If there's anything that could make me want to buy an iPad, it's certainly the display that the new one has.
But I'd argue that if the new iPad had been offered with a lower PPI display and hence been cheaper with longer battery life or less weight (smaller battery) in addition to the current one with the high PPI display, the low PPI iPad would have sold far more units than the iPad with the high PPI display.
It doesn't even matter if the new iPad was exactly the same as the old iPad except for the display. Your average consumer would still buy the new iPad just because it's the new iPad.
Hence, people using the new iPad as an indicator of future wide adoption in the computer space are looking at a very fundamentally flawed example of consumer demand.
Your average consumer has shown that presented with a choice between a high PPI display and a low PPI display, they'll generally go with the lower PPI display as it is generally cheaper. That's how it has been in the notebook/laptop space for well over half a decade now. So no surprises there.
I see no indications that things will drastically change in the computer display market to change that, unless we see the influence of HDTV making a certain resolution cheap and affordable to manufacture as we did with 1080p.
Regards,
SB