Linked by David Adams on Wed 17th Aug 2011 17:46 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Ars Technica is reporting that US Retailer Best Buy has been able to sell less than 10% of the TouchPad tablets that it ordered from HP, and now wants HP to take them back. Similarly, deal-a-day site Woot offered TouchPads at a very aggressive price, and only managed to sell 612 of them. This is for a site that often sells out goofy tech widgets in hours. When the TouchPad was gearing up for release, there seemed to be a fair amount of interest among geeks. Is it just that it hasn't resonated the same way with the general public, or have people just been disappointed once they've put their hands on one?
Order by: Score:
Comment by kovacm
by kovacm on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:12 UTC
kovacm
Member since:
2010-12-16

And Apple has a long history of getting too greedy, controlling, and complacent, which will eventually give competitors an opening.


once upon a time Apple used PowerPC processor (had SIMD 3 years before Intel) = more expansive.
once upon a time Apple used NuBus (had PnP 5 years before PCI) = more expensive.
once upon a time Apple used SCSI (15 years before SATA) = more expensive.
... Apple always used high end technology for its products.

today Apple use same components as rest of PC industry (but always BEFORE rest of PC industry like Gigabit Ethernet, 802.11n, Thunderbolt...) and todays Apples prices are so low because of this that rest of PC industry can hardly compete!

first sign of this, long before TABLET market, was Dell XPS One: All-In-one, iMac like PC. If you had compare this Dell to Apple iMac in ~2008.(Dell discontinued XPS One series coz could not compete) you will see that Apple offer more for less $! That was first sign that PC industry can not compete at same level of quality and price with Apple. Dell can only compete in segments of market where Apple is not present.

UNFORTUNATELY, Apple is today only company that control both: software and hardware; and no other company can achieve same level of quality or price for their products. ;) I will say again: UNFORTUNATELY!

(we should all thanks to Microsoft for this.)

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by kovacm
by MOS6510 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:23 UTC in reply to "Comment by kovacm"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, in this case HP controls both the hardware and the os (WebOS).

So does Google now (Android & Motorola Mobile) and in a way Nokia/Microsoft.

But in the tablet space Apple does have an enormous lead and advantage. And other companies are indeed rushing whereas Apple had years to prepare for their product.

So it strange a lot of people on this site claim Apple just copies stuff, while it's the entire industry that's trying to catch up. Their iPad copies don't sell very well.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by kovacm
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by kovacm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Their iPad copies don't sell very well.


It's remarkable how similar all this sounds to the earlier days of Android on phones. Back then, I was ridiculed by Apple fanatics for even *suggesting* the idea that Android could grab even 10% market share, let alone dominate the industry the way it does now.

Let me assure you - the same will happen to tablet. You'll be surprised to see what the tablet landscape looks like 12 months from now.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by MOS6510 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:45 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, when the iPhone was announced Steve Jobs was aiming for 1% of the market, but even that would be huge. Right now any Android phone maker would happily trade places with Apple.

The situation now is different.

The iPhone entered a market that had some big players that have been around for years. It had to fight its way to the top and probably won't capture the biggest share as long as Android is around, unless Android implodes following the Motorola Mobile acquisition by Google.

Now the iPad entered a market that didn't really exist. Most people didn't know what a tablet was and the few that did wish they didn't. Right now the iPad is the tablet market. It doesn't matter what specs or price another product has (like VHS vs Betamax and V2000), you'd be a fool to buy anything else than an iPad because each non-iPad tablet could be pulled of the market any time (Dell Streak for example). The iPad has by far the most apps, accessories, support, etc...

However 12 months is a long time, certainly in tech, so anything can happen. I just don't think it's very likely Apple will loose much market share to any other tablet, Android, WebOS or other. Did they ever lose their iPod dominance? They even keep selling more and more Macs while the PC market is shrinking, during a financial crisis!

If the iPad 3 arrives and it sells like the iPad 1 and 2 did it may be game over for the rest for a long time.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by leos on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

Did they ever lose their iPod dominance?


This is a good point. There are dozens of different MP3 players out there, but basically the iPod won out permanently there.

However it is a much more limited device where the iPod can basically perfect the task. Less so for a complex device like a tablet. There is more room for different approaches here, but the big missing factor on all the other devices is continuity. You invest $700 in a tablet you want some assurance that apps, accessories, and support will continue to be available for the forseeable future. None of the other tablet manufacturers have that kind of commitment.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by aldo on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:24 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
aldo Member since:
2010-02-17

Now the iPad entered a market that didn't really exist.


Apple's true creative genius with the iPad has been convincing the world that, screen size aside, the iPad is actually any different from the iPhone and iPod Touch. It's not a new market, it's just an extension of the iTunes ecosystem.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by r_a_trip on Thu 18th Aug 2011 07:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

It doesn't matter what specs or price another product has (like VHS vs Betamax and V2000), you'd be a fool to buy anything else than an iPad because each non-iPad tablet could be pulled of the market any time (Dell Streak for example).

Say hello to the fool. I wouldn't want to be caught dead with an iPad. The whole Apple culture, both corporate and user, just rubs me the wrong way.

That's why I'm very happy with my "inferior" Acer Iconia A500. I'm pretty sure that Android will still run very well on it even if Acer discontinues the A500 and the Android Market will still provide me with apps.

Besides, iPad 1 is obsoleted by iPad 2 and iPad 2 will be obsolete on release of the iPad 3. The only significant continuous factor in this succession is iOS and the App Store (apart from the periferal connectors). Would this be a reason not to buy an iPad?

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by MOS6510 on Thu 18th Aug 2011 07:42 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Why is the iPad 1 obsolete? I have one and still use it. There is nothing wrong with it, so I didn't by an iPad 2 as I don't like video chat nor would I use it to make pictures.

People still buy the iPhone 3GS, for some people it's still a fine phone.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by r_a_trip on Sun 21st Aug 2011 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Obsolete as it is not the #1 flagship product in Apple's stable anymore.

Doesn't make it any less useful, but I used it to illustrate that a tablet that isn't produced anymore isn't useless overnight.

Too much hysteria going on about the imagined lack of continuity in the Android space.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by leos on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

It's remarkable how similar all this sounds to the earlier days of Android on phones. Back then, I was ridiculed by Apple fanatics for even *suggesting* the idea that Android could grab even 10% market share, let alone dominate the industry the way it does now.


Dominate the industry? How exactly? The iPhone is still by far the most popular smartphone. It's true that all the hundreds of different models of Android devices that can be roughly categorized as "smart" phones sell more than the iPhone, but a huge chunk of those aren't even in the same category.
The iPhone does not compete in the sub $50 subsidized cost market. Most android devices are competing with Symbian, Windows Mobile, lower spec blackberries, and dumb phones. They are certainly not dominating the high end smartphone segment by any means.

Let me assure you - the same will happen to tablet. You'll be surprised to see what the tablet landscape looks like 12 months from now.


I think it is you that will be surprised. I have yet to see a tablet that competes with the iPad 1, despite it's limitations. Impossible to predict further than a year out, but I don't think anything is going to change significantly. The cheap Android tablets are junk, and the somewhat decent ones are expensive. Not to say they don't have a market, there are plenty of people with blind apple hatred or a niche need that is not addressed by the iPad that are buying Android tablets, but they aren't anywhere close to making a product that is at the same level.

PS. I don't own an iPad.. Too expensive for the marginal utility it would give me over my phone, but playing with other tablets makes me realize how far behind they are.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:48 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

We'll see. Bookmark the comment, and we'll revisit this topic next year.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by MOS6510 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:51 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Can't you make a OSNews poll and have us guess the iPad market share one year from now?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by fretinator on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

You are right Thom. If you were any righter, you would be the wart on the right side of Michelle Bachman's right knee.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by kovacm on Fri 19th Aug 2011 14:13 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
kovacm Member since:
2010-12-16

We'll see. Bookmark the comment, and we'll revisit this topic next year.


Here Thom, you have another "bookmarked" link 12 months old ;)

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/05/07/what-will-hp-do-with-palms...

oh, no! it's Daniel ! ;) ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by _txf_ on Wed 17th Aug 2011 21:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17


Dominate the industry? How exactly? The iPhone is still by far the most popular smartphone. It's true that all the hundreds of different models of Android devices that can be roughly categorized as "smart" phones sell more than the iPhone, but a huge chunk of those aren't even in the same category.


What do you mean by "roughly"? Android phones ARE smart phones. Yeah, they span the breadth from shitty to excellent but even the rubbish ones are smartphones.


The iPhone does not compete in the sub $50 subsidized cost market. Most android devices are competing with Symbian, Windows Mobile, lower spec blackberries, and dumb phones. They are certainly not dominating the high end smartphone segment by any means.


No, they aren't dominating the high end. But still are doing pretty darned well.

Edited 2011-08-17 21:00 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Neolander on Wed 17th Aug 2011 21:02 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

High-end only ? You mean like Mac hardware, I assume. This approach has failed in the past, I'm not sure reproducing it is such a good idea.

Apple would never have the place they currently have in the DAP market if they hadn't learned to manufacture low-end devices. Things like the iPod Nano and the iPod Shuffle. Stuff that normal people are massively interested in, because it's cheap and good enough, even if it's objectively a good ol' piece of junk.

Edited 2011-08-17 21:12 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Moredhas on Wed 17th Aug 2011 21:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

I have yet to see a tablet that competes with the iPad 1, despite it's limitations.


Two words: Asus Transformer.

I've commented to this effect in other threads, so I'll keep this brief. I had an iPad, I got tired of it's limitations, it's not adequate for replacing a computer for any of my portable needs. I sold it, bought an Asus Transformer (For about $200 AU less than I spent on the iPad, including shipping from the US, AND the optional keyboard dock), and honestly there's no contest. The only good thing to come of me buying an iPad is the legitimacy it lends my opinion: nobody needs a giant iPod Touch, Android tablets, at least Honeycomb ones, are very usuable tablets; there is no functional difference between an iPad or an iPod.

Reply Score: 6

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by Netfun81 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:15 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
Netfun81 Member since:
2008-03-25

not true anymore...most of the apps for ipad are improved apps taking advantage of the larger screen with side bars and other gui improvements. And the screen size makes the ipad much more useful than the ipod touch.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by phoenix on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

The iPad is nothing more than a large-screen iPod Touch. All the same limitations are in place, making it really nothing more than a glorified portable-DVD player. Perhaps iOS 5 will change things, but we'll see.

Until Apple makes it easy to get files onto/off the damned thing, they'll remain mostly consumption devices. We've scrapped our plans to use them in board meetings instead of paper minutes due to this issue (we're going to build diskless stations into the desks in the board room instead).

Sure, there's over 100,000 "apps" for iOS, how many of those are actual applications for creating and modifying files? Compared to how many are games and just links to websites?

Android tablets don't have these limitations. Linux tablets don't have these limitations. Windows tables don't even have these limitations (although they have plenty of others).

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by kovacm
by leos on Thu 18th Aug 2011 01:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by kovacm"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

The iPad is nothing more than a large-screen iPod Touch. All the same limitations are in place, making it really nothing more than a glorified portable-DVD player. Perhaps iOS 5 will change things, but we'll see.

Until Apple makes it easy to get files onto/off the damned thing, they'll remain mostly consumption devices.


Bingo. You think this is a disadvantage. It isn't. In fact I would say it is precisely why the iPad has been so incredibly successful. We do a staggering amount of content consumption, especially in our free time. We do so much that it really does deserve a dedicated device tuned just for this purpose.

Firstly, we already have plenty of devices that create content. Our desktops and laptops in all their forms are optimized for creating content. And we pay the price for that.

To create content efficiently we need high resolution screens, we need full keyboards, we need mice, we need hundreds of buttons and controls on screen, we need large hard drives, we need blazingly fast processors.
You can try to fit all those things into a tablet, and many companies have tried, but you will fail miserably (and they have). The resulting device might be capable of creating content (like the old Microsoft tablet PCs) but it will be so hopeless at consuming content that no one will want it.

Sure, there's over 100,000 "apps" for iOS, how many of those are actual applications for creating and modifying files? Compared to how many are games and just links to websites?


Again, a focus on content consumption is not a bad thing when that is the majority of what people do.

Android tablets don't have these limitations. Linux tablets don't have these limitations.


Of course they do! Can you run a full office suite on your Android tablet? Can you edit HD videos? Can you do CAD? Can you program, design, paint, hook up all your peripherals?
No. Android tablets don't do even a fraction of what you can do on a regular laptop.

Windows tables don't even have these limitations (although they have plenty of others).


Windows tablets have a full OS, so in theory they can at least run full featured applications, but at the expense of usable touch interaction.

The point is not to make a laptop replacement, the point is to focus on one thing, and do it well. Apple is good at that. Android is getting better, but the focus needs to be sharper (which will alienate some of the very users it first attracted).

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by kovacm
by ecruz on Thu 18th Aug 2011 18:49 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by kovacm"
ecruz Member since:
2007-06-16

Just reading the comments. But I have to tell you that if you truly were going to board meetings, you would not be here posting in this very geeky site. You would have much better things to do.

Me, I am retired now and can do anything I want!!!

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by leos on Thu 18th Aug 2011 01:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

"I have yet to see a tablet that competes with the iPad 1, despite it's limitations.


Two words: Asus Transformer.

I've commented to this effect in other threads, so I'll keep this brief. I had an iPad, I got tired of it's limitations, it's not adequate for replacing a computer for any of my portable needs.
"

I heard the Asus Transformer is good, but it wouldn't come anywhere close to replacing a laptop. No closer than the iPad does. The iPad at least does not pretend to try to replace a computer.

So I can type on a real keyboard on the Asus. Great, that's nice but it doesn't come close to the utility of a laptop. I can't run Word, I can't run Outlook, I can't program, I can't run any of the software I need at work. So it still is no replacement for a laptop and it's bigger, bulkier, and more fragile than a one-piece design. Given I still need my laptop I would much rather have an iPad in addition than an Asus Transformer.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by MrWeeble on Thu 18th Aug 2011 12:21 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
MrWeeble Member since:
2007-04-18

The iPad at least does not pretend to try to replace a computer.


Really? http://www.google.com/search?q=ipad+post-pc

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Laurence on Thu 18th Aug 2011 08:29 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Dominate the industry? How exactly? The iPhone is still by far the most popular smartphone. It's true that all the hundreds of different models of Android devices that can be roughly categorized as "smart" phones sell more than the iPhone, but a huge chunk of those aren't even in the same category.
The iPhone does not compete in the sub $50 subsidized cost market. Most android devices are competing with Symbian, Windows Mobile, lower spec blackberries, and dumb phones. They are certainly not dominating the high end smartphone segment by any means.

I love how people (and even Job himself) continually move the goal posts when boasting about market share.

As much as you might try to convince yourself otherwise, Windows Mobile, Blackberries and Symbian are not dumb phones - they /are/ smart phones. In some cases they might not always be aimed at exactly the same target audience as the iPhone is but that change what they are.


You're whole argument sounds like the time Jobs was lumping MacBooks and iPods into the same category as the iPhone when boasting about sales just prior to the launch of the original iPad.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by leos on Thu 18th Aug 2011 14:27 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

" The iPhone does not compete in the sub $50 subsidized cost market. Most android devices are competing with Symbian, Windows Mobile, lower spec blackberries, and dumb phones.


As much as you might try to convince yourself otherwise, Windows Mobile, Blackberries and Symbian are not dumb phones
"

You fail at reading. Read again.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by Laurence on Thu 18th Aug 2011 22:11 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

That doesn't change my point nor yours though.

You can't ignore huge chunks of sales figures just because it's targeted at a different demographic.

Edited 2011-08-18 22:16 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by Adurbe on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:54 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

to be fair, the last time Apple truly invented a market wasnt the iPhone, it was the iPod. This was the last time their brand became the ubiquitous name for the product;

People buy a phone (not an iPhone)
People buy an iPod (not an MP3 player)
People buy an iPad (not a tablet PC)

this is general vernacular in the UK, I would be interested if its the same in other countries

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by MOS6510 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:02 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I was just thinking of this. Sony managed this too with the walkman, every portable cassette player was called a walkman.

If have come across one person who claims her Android phone is an iPhone. And I see a number of non-iPads for sale on the used market being called iPad.

And indeed, people using non-iPods call it iPods. But I don't think they invented this market, MP3 players were already being sold and the first iPods were Mac-only. iPods took off when PC users could use them too. The revolutionized it by raising the bar and setting the standard, like the did with the iPhone. The iPod never got challenged, while the iPhone did by Android.

All tablets are really iPad challengers. They all aim to be better or cheaper, but they only manage to sell less, far less. It makes you wonder why anyone still bothers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by Mellin on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
Mellin Member since:
2005-07-06

walkman was launched as Freestyle in Sweden

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Dryhte on Thu 18th Aug 2011 08:21 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Dryhte Member since:
2008-02-05

Belgium: phone, iPod, tablet ;) (well, translated of course)

Actually, I don't know anyone who owns any kind of tablet, and most people I know have either an Android phone (HTC mostly) or a dumbphone/feature phone.

And while hardly anyone I know owns an actual iPod (as in: Apple's mp3 player) most people say iPod when they refer to mp3 players in general.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Laurence on Thu 18th Aug 2011 08:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

to be fair, the last time Apple truly invented a market wasnt the iPhone, it was the iPod.


Apple didn't invent that market either. In fact I have an MP3 player that predates the iPod by a few years.

What Apple did was make an existing market sexy enough to gain mainstream appeal (which is still impressive, but it's still not inventing said market)

This was the last time their brand became the ubiquitous name for the product

That is a pretty meaningless comparison really. Catchy brand names often become house-hold terms with non-techies because it's simply easier to remember. It doesn't mean that said brand was the 1st to market nor the best selling product on the market.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by spiderman on Thu 18th Aug 2011 10:34 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

In France, you buy a phone, an ipod and a tablet.
I believe that because Archos tablets were somewhat popular before the ipad.
I just went to my mobile operator and they are subsidizing the galaxy tab. If the carriers start subsidizing Android tablets, I am positive the writing is on the wall for the ipad here, unless they get their subsidies.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by Tony Swash on Thu 18th Aug 2011 10:52 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

In France, you buy a phone, an ipod and a tablet.
I believe that because Archos tablets were somewhat popular before the ipad.
I just went to my mobile operator and they are subsidizing the galaxy tab. If the carriers start subsidizing Android tablets, I am positive the writing is on the wall for the ipad here, unless they get their subsidies.


As of January 2011 iPad sales were at 85% of the tablet market in France. That was before the iPad 2. Anyone seen any more recent stats on the French tablet market?

http://www.telecompaper.com/news/ipad-wins-85-tablet-market-share-i...

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by spiderman on Thu 18th Aug 2011 11:29 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

It's very recent. My carrier certainly didn't subsidize a tablet in january, although it did subsidize netbooks.
Apple will probably get subsidies too, that I don't know. Today they only had the galaxy tab. I do know that the subsidies will radically change the market.
The phone market is almost exclusively driven by the subsidies and has been constantly shifting since the last 15 years.

Reply Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

There was a rich vibrant mobile mp3 player market long before St Steve blessed it with a casual brush of hiw turtleneck. Apple "invented" the mp3 player market with the Ipod? Not even a little bit close to how it went down.

What Apple did do was a fantastic job at marketing though. Your own comment demonstrates that success.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by Windows Sucks on Wed 17th Aug 2011 20:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

Big difference is people need phones, they don't need tablets. So people if they are going to spend a "grip" on a good tablet they might as well get the best.

And yes Android is outselling the iPhone by sheer numbers cause there are like 350 different phones on the market to the 1 iPhone. And After all those sales Apple makes 70% of profits! So as is fact lots of sales but in reality only HTC and Sammy make profits and the two of them together do not outsell the iPhone.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 17th Aug 2011 20:26 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

And yes Android is outselling the iPhone by sheer numbers cause there are like 350 different phones on the market to the 1 iPhone.


"So, in order to make a level playing field, let's disregard one of the core strengths of Android, so that Apple has at least one thing left going for it."

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by Windows Sucks on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:17 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

"And yes Android is outselling the iPhone by sheer numbers cause there are like 350 different phones on the market to the 1 iPhone.


"So, in order to make a level playing field, let's disregard one of the core strengths of Android, so that Apple has at least one thing left going for it."
"

I didn't say disregard anything. But its funny that all those so called sales don't seem to be adding up to money though. Android has all the sales (Its claimed) but yet Apple has all the money. If you selling way more then how are you making like %50 less money with Apple making about %70 of smartphone profits and Android maybe making %20 and out of that having to pay Microsoft a nice chunk (HTC, Sammy, soon Amazon and Sony etc)

But tablets won't go like that. Phone companies are not subsidizing tablets like phones, tablets are not needed like phones, you are not locked into a contract or phone company with the iPad like you are with the iPhone. This is going to go just like iPods.

Apple will have like 40 or 50 percent of the market and then there will be everyone else.

I really suspect that in 6 months though Android will just be something Googlerolla will be selling cause everyone else will be running from Microsoft and Oracles tin cups. But that is just my opinion on why a company would pay 12.5 billion for something (Patents) that are weak and could of been licensed!

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/judge-denies-googles-witness-complain...

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by itanic on Thu 18th Aug 2011 08:52 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
itanic Member since:
2008-08-03

Android has all the sales (Its claimed) but yet Apple has all the money. If you selling way more then how are you making like %50 less money with Apple making about %70 of smartphone profits and Android maybe making %20 and out of that having to pay Microsoft a nice chunk (HTC, Sammy, soon Amazon and Sony etc)

You do realize that any money Apple has is money that their customers no longer have, right? And this is a benefit to Apple customers how exactly?

Reply Score: 4

RE[7]: Comment by kovacm
by Windows Sucks on Thu 18th Aug 2011 12:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by kovacm"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

"Android has all the sales (Its claimed) but yet Apple has all the money. If you selling way more then how are you making like %50 less money with Apple making about %70 of smartphone profits and Android maybe making %20 and out of that having to pay Microsoft a nice chunk (HTC, Sammy, soon Amazon and Sony etc)

You do realize that any money Apple has is money that their customers no longer have, right? And this is a benefit to Apple customers how exactly?
"


First you make it sound like they robbed people. LOL!

But how it helps us (The customers):

1. Plenty of retail locations so if I have an issue I can just drive over and get it taken care of, replaced and or fixed.

2. Great 24/7 customer service, which is rated best in the business at this time.

3. Money to invest in making better products and to keep prices down by investing bulk purchases.

In the end my statement had nothing to do with customers and more to do with the fact that Android is over blown, companies are really not making money and it will be easy for them to roll out. At the same time Google isn't making much money ether off Android, $1 billion last year. Selling their own phones and devices will make them much more money. And having the patents are a nice side bar but we know that Motos patents are weak so that is not Google's reason for spending 12 billion for the company.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by Sabon on Wed 17th Aug 2011 20:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
Sabon Member since:
2005-07-06

Actually the difference between smart phones (Apple and Google) is VERY different than tablets.

The main difference is that tablets are not subsidized like phones are. Android phones have been given away while Apple phones haven't.

Most people will take something that is free if they THINK it is close to be as good as something that costs money.

If you look at surveys where people are asked how much they like their phones, the iPhone easily comes out on top.

Another way to look at this is that people buy a lot more games, paid games, not just free ones, on iPhones than on Adroids.

Part of the reason for this is that when people get a free Android phone, more often than not, based on stats that are put on sites just like this, most of those people do not use the Android phone to buy anything on them. They use them to make phone calls and search the internet and apparently not much else.

Meanwhile, Apple is currently raking in over 50% of NET profits in the mobile industry.

Again, tablets aren't subsidized. It's all over the place lately how other companies are not able to compete against Apple on price and they don't have as good of hardware and they definitely don't have as good of an on-line store with anywhere near as many apps as there are with idevices.

Summing it up, I don't think Android tablets are going to take over very quickly. Not unless someone can figure out how to drastically drop the price of Android tablets without reducing what they can do and at the same time with drastically improving the on-line store, meaning a lot more good apps need to be in the store and easy to find and buy and compatible with all devices.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by ccraig13 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 21:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
ccraig13 Member since:
2011-05-31

Let's not forget that the iPhone's acceptance has been held back by only being officially allowed to run on one US carrier ( which was their own doing ) up until this year. I imagine we'll see growth in the iPhone market once more carriers are allowed to offer it. I personally don't care who has more market share, as long as I get the phone I want. Did you take into account the market share of the car you drive? Unfortunately, there are too many who think only one company can win and the rest have to go out of business.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 17th Aug 2011 21:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Let's not forget that the iPhone's acceptance has been held back by only being officially allowed to run on one US carrier ( which was their own doing ) up until this year.


Nonsense argument. Not only has the arrival of the iPhone on Verizon done zero-nada to stop Android's insane growth in the US, Android is growing just as fast in countries where the iPhone has always been available on all carriers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by kristoph on Wed 17th Aug 2011 23:49 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

Android will certainly dominate the market for phone devices. There is no question about that. I think that in 12 months we'll see the demise of the feature phone and the bulk of phones will be Android 'smart' phones (unless Microsoft manages to exact their $15 fee or whatever then I think WinPhone 7 has a shot at that market too).

Interestingly, even though Android is already much more dominant then the iPhone the App Store has about twice the monthly app downloads of the Google Market.

I don't know what that says about the industry or the people buying phones or whatever but I don't think Apple is too worried. At 142% y-o-y growth with a 14 month old device their doing exceptionally well.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by Windows Sucks on Thu 18th Aug 2011 00:54 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
Windows Sucks Member since:
2005-11-10

Android will certainly dominate the market for phone devices. There is no question about that. I think that in 12 months we'll see the demise of the feature phone and the bulk of phones will be Android 'smart' phones (unless Microsoft manages to exact their $15 fee or whatever then I think WinPhone 7 has a shot at that market too).

Interestingly, even though Android is already much more dominant then the iPhone the App Store has about twice the monthly app downloads of the Google Market.

I don't know what that says about the industry or the people buying phones or whatever but I don't think Apple is too worried. At 142% y-o-y growth with a 14 month old device their doing exceptionally well.


http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/08/17/samsung_seeks_to_stre...

Think not.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by aldo on Thu 18th Aug 2011 11:10 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
aldo Member since:
2010-02-17

Anecdotal and far from scientific, I know, but what I've noticed here in the UK, broadly speaking, is:

- School kids have Blackberrys (and are constantly messaging with them);
- University/college students have Androids;
- 9-5 office drones have iPhones.

So Apple have the customers with the money to spend at the moment. However, the next generation of office drones/people with money already own smartphones and they're not iPhones.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by kristoph on Thu 18th Aug 2011 02:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

I know right, those Verizon customers would simply never buy an iPhone once they tried Android.

Oh but wait ...

As discussed by Ryan Cavanagh last week, Verizon’s share of iPhone traffic continues to increase, but it seems that Verizon is gaining market share in Apple’s prominent smartphone at the expense of its other, Android-running devices.


http://insights.chitika.com/2011/android-market-update-verizon-decl...

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by kovacm
by aldo on Thu 18th Aug 2011 11:06 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by kovacm"
aldo Member since:
2010-02-17

The USA is not the world.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by Tony Swash on Thu 18th Aug 2011 09:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

"Their iPad copies don't sell very well.


It's remarkable how similar all this sounds to the earlier days of Android on phones. Back then, I was ridiculed by Apple fanatics for even *suggesting* the idea that Android could grab even 10% market share, let alone dominate the industry the way it does now.

Let me assure you - the same will happen to tablet. You'll be surprised to see what the tablet landscape looks like 12 months from now.
"

If I remember rightly people were predicting this time last year that this time this year the non-iPad tablet sales would be surging. It didn't happen. Why it didn't happen is a very interesting and complex question but it seems as if the tablet market is not behaving like the phone market and why should it as it has a completely different structure.

I get the feeling that the tablet market may be much more like the mp3 player market where the early iPod success was greeted by endless declarations that it's dominance would soon come to an end and that this or that new iPod competitor would be the 'iPod killer' - the one that never arrived.

Maybe the Android adventure is the anomaly brought about by the conjunction of the post-iPhone incumbents panic and the offer of an apparently free OS. That adventure has now also utterly changed with the Google acquisition of Motorola and in a year it may be that it is the phone market that looks completely different rather than the tablet market.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by kovacm
by Joy_Division_Lives! on Thu 18th Aug 2011 12:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kovacm"
Joy_Division_Lives! Member since:
2011-07-29

It's remarkable how similar all this sounds to the earlier days of Android on phones. Back then, I was ridiculed by Apple fanatics for even *suggesting* the idea that Android could grab even 10% market share, let alone dominate the industry the way it does now.

Let me assure you - the same will happen to tablet. You'll be surprised to see what the tablet landscape looks like 12 months from now.


Oh...boy. The old "just wait in 12 months..." chestnut that you guys have been touting for the last TWO YEARS! And Android dominates the smartphone industry? Do you even know the difference between market-share and profit-share?

Keep reading. http://www.asymco.com

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by kovacm
by spiderman on Thu 18th Aug 2011 13:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by kovacm"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

oh boy! You have your head in the sand. Of course Android currently dominates the industry. Look around you! I can count 10 Android phones for 1 iPhone here.
You confuse Google's advertizing profits with Android success. Of course Apple does more profits from phones than Google. But then Apple does more profits than Dell and nobody ever argued that Apple dominated the PC industry.

Reply Score: 5

RE[5]: Comment by kovacm
by MOS6510 on Thu 18th Aug 2011 16:56 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by kovacm"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Well, Michael Jordan dominated the NBA, yet was outscored by the opposing team in every single game he played. He did make more money than the other team.

Who doesn't want to be like Mike.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by kovacm
by galvanash on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:00 UTC in reply to "Comment by kovacm"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Its more than that though. The key thing I think is that they simply don't have a whole lot of products - they only really sell 3 computers:

1. Air, Macbook, Mini, iMac - These are fundamentally all the same computer... In the same generation they share virtually all of the same major components, they only differ in PCB design (if that) and packaging. Same processors, same graphics, same chipsets, same everything. Its just a few different options here and there.

2. Mac Pro - Low Volume, High end, high margin - they can afford to splurge on components here and they do. They are also very expensive so this product is excluded from my argument.

3. iPhone, iPad, iPod, AppleTV - Again, same physical product, just different packaging.

They have the advantage of being able to amortizes their R&D and manufacturing for each of these 3 "systems" across the entire lineup. They control manufacturing from top to bottom, so they can buy components at low prices because they get the volume discounts for the entire lineup combined.

So in reality, Apple makes 3 things. They make a consumer computer, a professional computer, and a mobile computer. But the R&D and manufacturing for these is spread across a small number of very distinct skus that target very different markets, so they get the benefit of wide market penetration with minimal investment. No other computer maker has been so successful at doing this.

Reply Score: 8

RE: Comment by kovacm
by Neolander on Wed 17th Aug 2011 20:53 UTC in reply to "Comment by kovacm"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Believing that hardware is so important is precisely what killed IBM and turned Apple into a niche in the early days of the desktop/laptop.

Computer hardware is a generic heap of electronic components, that is trivially cloned and replaced every few years. Software is the only thing that lasts, the only thing which can trap people on a platform also. Which is why controlling the software stack that runs on the greatest amount of future hardware is what counts.

And this conflicts with integrated HW/SW ecosystems, in my opinion, as unless you have the sheer manpower in R&D it takes to produce lots of different devices (like Apple with iPods), it mean less hardware on the market.

Well, we'll see what the future will be like... Frankly, I'd rather see a stable equilibrium between several big players, just like we had before in the feature phone world, than watch Windows' history repeat itself all over again. I just think it's probably not going to happen, unless players other than Android don't get a clue about how huge of an asset hardware diversity truly is.

Edited 2011-08-17 21:11 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by kovacm
by joe_tester on Thu 18th Aug 2011 14:42 UTC in reply to "Comment by kovacm"
joe_tester Member since:
2011-08-16

I compared XPS all-in-one and imac few years ago. Dell for the same guts was about 50-100 dollars cheaper and they were giving wireless mouse and keyboard for the price.

And it wasn't white! ;)

I think it was very competitive.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by kovacm
by aliquis on Sat 20th Aug 2011 08:58 UTC in reply to "Comment by kovacm"
aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

and todays Apples prices are so low because of this that rest of PC industry can hardly compete!
That's why an Apple laptop cost twice as much as a comparable generic laptop?

Reply Score: 2

Android tablet too
by Babi Asu on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:19 UTC
Babi Asu
Member since:
2006-02-11

According to analysis by Gruber, Android is only slightly better. From reported 4.6m sold, actually only 1.35m at users' hand or merely 29%.

http://daringfireball.net/2011/07/ipad_dominance

Edited 2011-08-17 18:20 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Android tablet too
by aldo on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:33 UTC in reply to "Android tablet too"
aldo Member since:
2010-02-17

Gruber's not really what you'd describe as a reliable source, though, is he?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Android tablet too
by aesiamun on Thu 18th Aug 2011 13:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Android tablet too"
aesiamun Member since:
2005-06-29

but anti apple, pro android news is more reliable?

Pick your poison, you're getting subjective news either way.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Android tablet too
by aldo on Thu 18th Aug 2011 13:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Android tablet too"
aldo Member since:
2010-02-17

but anti apple, pro android news is more reliable?


What anti-Apple, pro-Android news?

Anyway, the answer to your question is yes. If Apple had employees come round to the house of every iDevice owner and smear them in shit then beat them senseless with sticks, Gruber would find a way to argue that this was a positive move by Apple. Quoting him in support of an argument actually harms the argument.

Reply Score: 1

Announced to early, released to late
by Adurbe on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:49 UTC
Adurbe
Member since:
2005-07-06

I Really wanted a HP TouchPad when it was announced. Set the money aside and was simply waiting for it to be released in the UK.

Sadly, by the time they got around to it I was no longer comparing the TouchPad to the iPad, I was comparing it to an iPad2. Against this, it simply didnt compete anymore!

If HP had announced and released within a month or two, people Would have bought them in droves (_I_ think).

The TouchPad2 will now have to compete with the iPad3, not the iPad2. I hope they learnt from their mistake as I still have the money set aside!!

Reply Score: 2

Quite a stock
by libray on Wed 17th Aug 2011 18:55 UTC
libray
Member since:
2005-08-27

BestBuy has over 1100 stores worldwide. If HP shipped 270k devices to BestBuy that should mean there is on average a stock of ~245 Touchpads per store. I guess that is possible if HP shipped the Touchpad on a soft launch not expecting to move much, then lower the price after the 3.0.2 update and hard launch. I doubt all that happened though.

Reply Score: 2

Buzz only lasts for so long...
by CaptainN- on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:02 UTC
CaptainN-
Member since:
2005-07-07

HP is a slow moving giant. I really wanted them to be competitive with WebOS - but they did the WebOS announcement last February, way too long after acquiring Palm, then didn't get around to releasing the tablet for way too many months - Apple by comparison never ever makes that mistake. Buzz only lasts for so long (about 2 months at the outset).

Then there's the gap in their phone lineup - where is the Palm Pre 3 (or whatever they call it). The Veer doesn't count.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Buzz only lasts for so long...
by MOS6510 on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:07 UTC in reply to "Buzz only lasts for so long..."
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

The Palm Pre 3 is on pre-order.

http://www.everythingpre.com/

(edit: url added)

Edited 2011-08-17 19:08 UTC

Reply Score: 2

CaptainN- Member since:
2005-07-07

That just adds to my point - 6 months later, no renewed buzz. I don't get what HP is trying to do here.

Reply Score: 1

MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Samsung made a serious marketing effort for the Galaxy S, it was hard not to hear about it or see a picture of it and it paid off. HTC also has a marketing campaign going. Both are the best selling Android phone makers. I don't see any commercials from other vendors and they don't sell much.

It's strange HP didn't do this with the Pre 3. Most people won't mention HP as a phone brand, so they really need to show their face.

Reply Score: 1

The developer kit has big flaws.
by tomz on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:02 UTC
tomz
Member since:
2010-05-06

I was wondering why there was no Barcode reader - I have written many QRCode routines, so it should be simple like other things, right. Well not really (and this was over a year ago - nothing has changed).

From the FAQ today:

----

Can I access the microphone from a PDK app?

Not at this time.


Can I access the camera from a PDK app?

Not directly. If you create an app that includes both JavaScript and PDK components (see JavaScript and Plug-in Interface ), you can use the Camera API from your JavaScript code to capture an image to the device storage, then load and process the captured image in your plug-in code. However, you cannot currently access camera data directly from plug-in code.

Reply Score: 1

Sluggish?
by Zaitch on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:05 UTC
Zaitch
Member since:
2007-11-23

I had a short prod with a touchpad in a Staples ( i guess it was the same one mentioned ) in the UK and I must say I was terrifically underwhelmed. Even for a display unit, it was sluggish, stuttering, with noticeable delays between actions. Not at all smooth. Or was it just me?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Sluggish?
by wazoox on Thu 18th Aug 2011 10:48 UTC in reply to "Sluggish?"
wazoox Member since:
2005-07-14

Apparently HP did a big blunder by shipping a demo OS which is buggy and slow. The 3.0.2 version of webOS is supposedly way better, but ISN'T installed on the demo systems!

Reply Score: 1

Best Buy
by BeOSJim on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:12 UTC
BeOSJim
Member since:
2010-01-20

I was in Best Buy recently and asked the clerk why the "Table Central" section of the store didn't include the number one selling tablet, the iPad. He pointed to the Apple section (I knew it was there) and said that they are over there. I said that if the number one selling tablet isn't in your "Table Central" area, it isn't much of one is it.

I know it is marketing on their part (and Apple's), but it was still fun to do.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Best Buy
by WorknMan on Wed 17th Aug 2011 20:18 UTC in reply to "Best Buy"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

I was in Best Buy recently and asked the clerk why the "Table Central" section of the store didn't include the number one selling tablet, the iPad. He pointed to the Apple section (I knew it was there) and said that they are over there. I said that if the number one selling tablet isn't in your "Table Central" area, it isn't much of one is it.


Went to Best Buy about a week ago, and they had a pretty sizable display for the HP Touchpad, with 4 of these tablets on it, so it's pretty sad that they didn't sell well. However, it's not surprising either, since it was outclassed by not only the iPad2, but the Asus Transformer and Galaxy Tab 10.1 as well.

I was tempted to pick up the Galaxy 10.1, but they have it priced $100 too high - $500 vs the $400 for the Asus, which has more ports, but the Galaxy is a helluva lot lighter.

Reply Score: 2

software,hardware
by fran on Wed 17th Aug 2011 19:30 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

What might work is a drive towards an end to end full feature software experience and $200 ish pricetag.

BlackberryOS might be on the right track.
http://www.intomobile.com/2011/07/22/rim-acquires-online-video-edit...

Also licensing it might keep the projects alive.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/29/hp-in-talks-to-license-webos-—-b...

Reply Score: 2

RE: HP Touchpad
by Sabon on Wed 17th Aug 2011 20:36 UTC
Sabon
Member since:
2005-07-06

I really wish the HP Touchpad was doing well. Just the idea of an OS not tied to MS or Google or Apple is a great thing.

The problem for HP, as well as Android and any other tablets, is that they can't do what Google did with Android phones and that is give them away.

Plus, when you ask 94% of people out there what tablet they want to buy they said, "iPad".

HP and the others have to figure out how to market their devices in such a way that actually intrigues users. So far they haven't figured it out.

Of course it would be great if companies would just stop looking to see what is successful out there and find a new category of something they would love to have for themselves. Something cool they thought of that is missing in their life.

Steve Jobs did that with the iPad. And no, it is not like previous tablets. It is the right size, the right amount of speed, the right amount of things it can do.

It was the right new device at the right time at the right price. It completely took the rest of the industry by surprise and they are still reeling, trying to figure out what to do to catch up.

As far as previous tablet pcs, like Microsoft's for instance. It was like taking a 16 oz hammer and trying to turn it into a pen by drilling a hole in the handle of the hammer and pushing the internals of a BIC pen inside. For 99% of people out there, MS tablets suck big time.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: HP Touchpad
by BallmerKnowsBest on Thu 18th Aug 2011 02:49 UTC in reply to "RE: HP Touchpad"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

Plus, when you ask 94% of people out there what tablet they want to buy they said, "iPad".


Allow me to respond to that by quoting the response of every Apple fanboy ever when confronted with the overwhelming dominance of Windows:

"Clearly that's just because they're too ignorant to realize that there are alternatives."

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: HP Touchpad
by Clinton on Mon 22nd Aug 2011 06:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: HP Touchpad"
Clinton Member since:
2005-07-05

Allow me to respond to that by quoting the response of every Apple fanboy ever when confronted with the overwhelming dominance of Windows:

"Clearly that's just because they're too ignorant to realize that there are alternatives."


I don't know, in my case I do know there are alternatives, but I think the iPhone and iPad provide the most consistent and polished user experience (with the exception of turn-based GPS on my Droid--when it worked).

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: HP Touchpad
by Lennie on Thu 18th Aug 2011 07:38 UTC in reply to "RE: HP Touchpad"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

I have a feeling that for HP it is important to sell to consumers because they need their software/hardware stack to be good.

But consumers is not their main focus, the business users are.

Apple is not used by businesses as much and the walled garden of the iPad, I think, might not be what businesses want.

HP wants one platform that works on PC, tablet, printer and mobile. Businesses might like that.

Reply Score: 2

the shy king
by fran on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:03 UTC
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

If you actually want a tablet that can work and play this thing is fantastic.

Dell Inspiron Duo convertible tablet PC

http://www.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/global/products/landi...

Reply Score: 2

RE: the shy king
by leos on Thu 18th Aug 2011 01:08 UTC in reply to "the shy king"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

If you actually want a tablet that can work and play this thing is fantastic.

Dell Inspiron Duo convertible tablet PC

http://www.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/global/products/landi...


Have you actually used it? I;ve tried a couple tablets with Windows 7 and they are hopeless for touch interaction. Like seriously so bad that I can't imagine who would actually chose to use one over a regular laptop.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: the shy king
by Clinton on Mon 22nd Aug 2011 06:02 UTC in reply to "RE: the shy king"
Clinton Member since:
2005-07-05

Agreed! I have hated every mobile device I've ever touched that had Windows on it.

Reply Score: 2

Price and Advertising
by deathshadow on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:21 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

It was priced too high as it didn't have the magical shiny Apple logo fanboys line up to buy... advertising for it was effectively nonexistant with ZERO push for it on TV, radio or even on the web...

You don't advertise, you don't gut the price compared to the competitor, where's the sales? WHAT SALES!

It's why Droid is such a threat -- you can't turn on a TV without seeing a 10:1 ratio of Droid adverts to Apple ones. (even if you do sit there going "what the hell does this ad even have to do with the product?!?)

Though I still keep asking this -- how is something with a smaller mass storage, an anemic processor, a smaller display, half the ports and no keyboard MORE EXPENSIVE than a netbook?!?

Just saying.

Reply Score: 7

RE: Price and Advertising
by phoenix on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:31 UTC in reply to "Price and Advertising"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

HP has been blitzing the airwaves with ads for the Veer 4G and TouchPad ... at least up here in Canada. Can't turn on a Canadian station for more than 20 minutes before seeing an HP ad.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Price and Advertising
by deathshadow on Thu 18th Aug 2011 00:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Price and Advertising"
deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

Market specific then? I've Never even seen a print ad, much less radio or TV one for it... No ad banners on any websites other than theirs... Admittedly I run an adblock being a Opera user, but droid ones still get through from time to time ...

Lemme guess, market specific throwing money away like Opera's buying a billboard in Redmond? Both here in NH and at the office in Boston -- Nothing.

I also don't watch network TV though -- lemme guess? ABC?

Probably like when Circuit City advertised looking for "technical minded" people in the Boston Area about eighteen years ago and were aghast that nobody in the area had ever heard of them, and that they had people with decade+ experience as technicians with masters and doctrates in IT related fields applying when what they were actually looking for were glorified cashiers. That particular job fair went over like a lead balloon with NOBODY leaving particularly happy -- but then so did their west-coast style Sears wannabe stores where nobody could find anything resembling a register.

Know your markets... or your lack of presence in them. What goods a marketing campaign in Canada when nobody on the eastern seaboard of the US has even heard of your product?

Edited 2011-08-18 00:45 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Price and Advertising
by aesiamun on Thu 18th Aug 2011 13:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Price and Advertising"
aesiamun Member since:
2005-06-29

They have a couple, one with Russell Brand and another with another women. Both are TV commercials where they are holding the Touchpad in front of their faces and swiping between applications.

I'm not one to fall for advertising so it felt rather lackluster.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Price and Advertising
by phoenix on Thu 18th Aug 2011 19:01 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Price and Advertising"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Yeah, there's one with a boxer, one with some British guy and an ostrich, one with a female athlete? or some such, and one other one that I can't recall now (was the first one shown, I think).

They're semi-interesting commercials, but don't really show off what the TouchPad/Veer/WebOS can do. That's one thing that Apple's iPad commercials do well ... show you what you can do with it (showcases some apps in action).

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Price and Advertising
by aesiamun on Thu 18th Aug 2011 13:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Price and Advertising"
aesiamun Member since:
2005-06-29

History Channel has then, as does Discovery...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Price and Advertising
by ecruz on Thu 18th Aug 2011 19:00 UTC in reply to "Price and Advertising"
ecruz Member since:
2007-06-16

I guess you must have missed all the ads I saw on TV regarding the HP Tablet.
It was there quite often, so do not blame advertisement for lack of sales. I do not care about what company sells more of this or that, but at least, for you guys that do, be honest with yourself!

Reply Score: 1

Touchpad
by tonymus on Wed 17th Aug 2011 22:29 UTC
tonymus
Member since:
2006-01-15

I've had my Touchpad just over a week, and I'm pretty happy with it overall (wifey took the iPad).

If you look at the reviews, user reviews are considerably more positive than the 'experts'. That's because the Touchpad is really configurable. I've modded mine to 1.5ghz from 1.2, and added tweaks which pretty much eliminate any stuttering or freezing. It feels pretty darn quick now. The latest version of the OS, 3.0.2, also helps.

I guess the key here is to see how deep the commitment will be by HP to support the WebOS platform. They have a winner here, but it will take some time (look how long it took Microsoft to compete in the video game market).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Touchpad
by bels on Wed 17th Aug 2011 23:35 UTC in reply to "Touchpad"
bels Member since:
2011-08-17

Was it a preware homebrew patch that allowed you to overclock your touchpad or from somewhere else? I love how there is an active homebrew community and a user can actually config/mod their touchpad however they want without fear of a company coming after you.

Reply Score: 1

love my touchpad
by bels on Wed 17th Aug 2011 23:21 UTC
bels
Member since:
2011-08-17

As I write this from my touchpad I have to say most reviews of the touchpad are a bit harsh. I will admit that before the 3.0.2 update there was the occasional stuttering but the update removed those problems. This thing is fully functional and is slowly replacing my laptop as my main work device. As soon as I can get git compiled on here it will (assuming I can get that to work but at least I can try to get it compiled and running which is more than I can say for anyone who has an iPad and hasn't paid apple their extortion money to be able to use the device that they purchased as the user sees fit).

HP's biggest problem is people seem to want an iPad and not a tablet. I think things will get better for them as people realize all the things an iPad can not do that a touchpad can do and as their app store catalog grows. Probably would not hurt for all the in store models to get the 3.0.2 update to get rid of the stuttering problem either.

Edited 2011-08-17 23:24 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Come On,People...
by Yoko_T on Thu 18th Aug 2011 02:01 UTC
Yoko_T
Member since:
2011-08-18

The reason those tablets aren't selling is that *THEY COST TOO FREAKING MUCH*

You can buy a laptop at the same Best Buy store that's faster,cheaper and more all around useful from around $250-$400 as compared to $399-$600 those tablets are going for.

Quite frankly tablets shouldn't cost more than the cheapest laptop to begin with since you aren't getting that much for your money to begin with.

A $400-$600 tablet is a sick joke.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Come On,People...
by kristoph on Thu 18th Aug 2011 02:23 UTC in reply to "Come On,People..."
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

There are about 50 million people in the world who disagree with you ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Come On,People...
by WorknMan on Thu 18th Aug 2011 02:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Come On,People..."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

There are about 50 million people in the world who disagree with you ;-)


You're right about that. When I want to surf the web while lying in bed or kicked back on the couch, I don't want to do that with a f**king laptop or tiny smartphone screen. Plus, if you are a keyboard player and use a lot of softsynths, you can use the iPad's touch screen as a MIDI control surface, then it becomes all kinds of useful ;) Hell, some synth makers (both hardware and software) are building iPad apps just for this purpose.

Oh, but I thought you couldn't use tablets for anything but content consumption ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Come On,People...
by unclefester on Thu 18th Aug 2011 12:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Come On,People..."
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

Billions of people eat McDonalds "food".

Your point is?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Come On,People...
by deathshadow on Thu 18th Aug 2011 03:06 UTC in reply to "Come On,People..."
deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

That was part of my point up above -- when I can get a 1.6ghz Atom powered 10.1" netbook with a 250 gig hard drive and a gig of RAM for $250, what the devil is making these crappy little 1.2ghz ARM powered devices with the same RAM (or sometime half) and a crappy little 16 gig SSD (a $50 part if that) come in at $400?!? I can aftermarket mod a netbook to have a touchscreen, twice as big a SSD and flip the panel around and STILL come out under-price.

Not that I would -- I like having the screen propped up by the bottom half of a laptop when lying down so I can use my trackball with it without the hassle of reaching over to the screen. That's what I really don't get -- it's a much more inconvenient form factor (for me at least), and no keyboard just makes it a toy. MAYBE if they build one with two displays that hinged in the middle so you could hold it like a book in the crook of your thumb. I tried out the apple one and these oven mitts I have for hands can't even hold onto the bugger... Probably why I'm not a big fan of todays phones either. Stuff's getting so small it's like it's designed for a five year old -- and someone who's only 5'4" tall should NOT have to be saying that.

Type of thing that in a year or two should end up in the sock drawer next to the AMD Geode powered thin client, the Atari Portfolio, and that Altoids Mint tin from 1984.

Edited 2011-08-18 03:11 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Come On,People...
by leos on Thu 18th Aug 2011 03:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Come On,People..."
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

That was part of my point up above -- when I can get a 1.6ghz Atom powered 10.1" netbook with a 250 gig hard drive and a gig of RAM for $250, what the devil is making these crappy little 1.2ghz ARM powered devices with the same RAM (or sometime half) and a crappy little 16 gig SSD (a $50 part if that) come in at $400?!? I can aftermarket mod a netbook to have a touchscreen, twice as big a SSD and flip the panel around and STILL come out under-price.


Uh.. 10 hour battery life vs 2. Capacitative touch screen. Thinner, lighter. 2 cameras. Way better graphics chips than in that POS netbook.
The market has shown the iPad isn't really overpriced. If it was, we'd have a dozen Android tablets with the same specs for cheaper right now.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Come On,People...
by vitae on Thu 18th Aug 2011 03:59 UTC in reply to "Come On,People..."
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

Of course they do. EVERYTHING at Best Buy is overpriced. It's a joke. Best Buy is for people who simply refuse to shop online.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Come On,People...
by jack_perry on Thu 18th Aug 2011 04:16 UTC in reply to "RE: Come On,People..."
jack_perry Member since:
2005-07-06

Okay, find me an HP Touchpad online that comes in significantly under the Best Buy price. :-)

I know what you're getting at, and fundamentally, you're right. But unless you can produce an example with the TouchPad, this is the wrong context to make that argument.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Come On,People...
by vitae on Thu 18th Aug 2011 05:39 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Come On,People..."
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

Well just for the sake of conversation, atm I will probably have to be satisfied with being fundamentally right. However, if these things actually get sent back to HP, are they not likely to end up at some online outlet at wholesale prices? So somebody who has their heart set on one of these would be best to wait, no?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Come On,People...
by kaiwai on Thu 18th Aug 2011 13:19 UTC in reply to "Come On,People..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

The reason those tablets aren't selling is that *THEY COST TOO FREAKING MUCH*

You can buy a laptop at the same Best Buy store that's faster,cheaper and more all around useful from around $250-$400 as compared to $399-$600 those tablets are going for.

Quite frankly tablets shouldn't cost more than the cheapest laptop to begin with since you aren't getting that much for your money to begin with.

A $400-$600 tablet is a sick joke.


The price in NZ isn't expensive - the Touch Pad in NZ is being sold on average $200 cheaper than the iPad 2 of similar storage size.

What is the real problem? the only reason I know about the problem is because I am part of the 'geek subculture' where I know about these sorts of things but for the average user they only know what is easily accessible and marketed to them - if HP sit on the side lines playing with themselves instead of promoting their product then who is really to blame for the crappy sales? when HP fails to send out representatives to train shop staff and get people fired-up and excited about the product are you surprised that the Touch Pad isn't being pushed to consumers.

I swear HP secretly want to fail because it is the only way to describe how almost every time they seem to be hell bent on sabotaging every opportunity they have to make it big.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Come On,People...
by Yoko_T on Thu 18th Aug 2011 14:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Come On,People..."
Yoko_T Member since:
2011-08-18

"The reason those tablets aren't selling is that *THEY COST TOO FREAKING MUCH*

You can buy a laptop at the same Best Buy store that's faster,cheaper and more all around useful from around $250-$400 as compared to $399-$600 those tablets are going for.

Quite frankly tablets shouldn't cost more than the cheapest laptop to begin with since you aren't getting that much for your money to begin with.

A $400-$600 tablet is a sick joke.


The price in NZ isn't expensive - the Touch Pad in NZ is being sold on average $200 cheaper than the iPad 2 of similar storage size.

What is the real problem? the only reason I know about the problem is because I am part of the 'geek subculture' where I know about these sorts of things but for the average user they only know what is easily accessible and marketed to them - if HP sit on the side lines playing with themselves instead of promoting their product then who is really to blame for the crappy sales? when HP fails to send out representatives to train shop staff and get people fired-up and excited about the product are you surprised that the Touch Pad isn't being pushed to consumers.

I swear HP secretly want to fail because it is the only way to describe how almost every time they seem to be hell bent on sabotaging every opportunity they have to make it big.
"

That's still a joke when you compare to a netbook or a laptop in the $250-$400US price range.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Come On,People...
by kaiwai on Fri 19th Aug 2011 10:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Come On,People..."
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

That's still a joke when you compare to a netbook or a laptop in the $250-$400US price range.


And yet the iPad 2 is flying off the shelf without much effort at all (there is no advertisement on television in NZ yet every man and his dog wants one). The reason for the lacklustre sales is HP crap effecting at pushing the product - once again we have a product that could have been great has been undermined by the company who bought it to you. Quite honestly I'll be laughing to myself when the CEO announces that they'll be writing off the Palm acquisition - once again MBA wizkids running a company into the ground because they don't want to do the hard work required.

Edited 2011-08-19 10:04 UTC

Reply Score: 4

unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

Apple can't afford to have a dud product because they have such a narrowly focused business. HP can afford to have 1 or even 10 dud products because they sell just about everything from printer cartridges to rack servers and support contracts.

HP simply have to take take the tablets back and sell them cheaply through an overstock company. A few million dollars lost, a lesson learned and no real harm done to the HP brand.

Reply Score: 2