[pivo]

I used to work for Gazelle, a company that buys used iPhones, iPads, etc. from consumers. We found that the iPads we bought were generally in much worse shape than the iPhones. We believed this suggested that people were using their iPads quite a bit. Anecdotally, among my friends and family iPads are in almost constant use. So even if we don't know what iPads are good for we seem to use them a lot.

I wonder how much of this is just that people are not upgrading their iPads as often as they upgrade their phones. I'm still relatively happy with my iPad 2 and I've had three different iPhones during the time I've owned it. A lot of my friends are in similar situations. I think we all kind of agree that iPads are too expensive to justify frequent upgrades, especially when they're still useable.

I bought an iPhone 6 Plus thinking it would replace the iPad but found that, while I still really like the 6 Plus' size, it doesn't really work that well for prolonged reading or the lazy internet surfing the author mentions in the article.

[digikata]

I think your observations re: Gazelle point to the situation that telecom companies drive shorter upgrade cycles for phones, often hiding their cost and allowing three year upgrades. In contrast people generally pay full price for tablets, and upgrade less frequently.

[pivo]

Yes, that's definitely true. Plus iPads are not essential in the way phones are. They're luxury items.

[JoeAltmaier]

The market for pads has peaked, right? Means people are using other things, not upgrading/replacing pads. Maybe because phones are bigger?