Last week, HP killed its webOS devices unit. Over the weekend, the company slashed the prices on the TouchPad. The result? The TouchPad sold out completely in a matter of hours. This confirms what I’ve been hearing from friends and family: “I’d love a tablet, but I’m not paying laptop money for one.”
So, HP pretty much killed its webOS business last week, while the company is also seeking to get rid of its PC business. The additional purchase of Autonomy illustrates that the company wants to get ouf the consumer business, and focus on the enterprise, big-iron market instead. You know, the route IBM took years ago.
To get rid of existing TouchPad stock, the company slashed its price to a mere $99, which is an absolute steal. Suddenly, people are lining up to buy a defunct device with little to no future. There are actual lines at Best Buy for the $99 TouchPad, but Best Buy has already sold out. HP.com, too, doesn’t have any on offer.
This confirms a general sentiment I’ve been hearing around me. Friends and family are all very interested in tablets for use on the couch, but almost everyone I talk to simply finds them too expensive. The iPad 2 and similar tablets like the Galaxy Tab 10.1 all cost round and about $500/€500, which, for most people, is laptop territory, or at least near-laptop territory. That’s a huge amount of money for a device which is decidedly less useful and functional than a laptop, and is, in essence, nothing more than a web browser and email client with a large screen.
When it comes to smartphones, which sit in the same price category, things are different, since they are generally “free” on contract, meaning they are perceived differently. Tablets, however, are bought outright, for their full price, and at $500/€500, it’s not “a laptop and a tablet”, but “a laptop or a tablet”. This sentiment is a hugely limiting factor for tablet sales to truly take off in the way smartphones and laptops have.
Lower the price, and lots of more people are suddenly willing to spend money on a tablet. This price drop has demonstrated that there is a huge market for cheap tablets, and this market is currently not being served at all. The TouchPad’s $99 price is a sign of things to come for the tablet market.
This news would’ve been great had you guys posted it a couple of days ago when they dropped the price, instead of today, when they’re already sold out everywhere.
As for laptop vs tablet, I already have a desktop, so I’d much rather have a tablet more than a laptop for the few times I do travel. As for high demand for cheap tablets, how come nobody picked up those cheap $100-$200 iPad knockoffs that came out before Honeycomb was released? Oh yeah, that’s right… because they were all pieces of shit, with the possible exception of the Nook Color, which wasn’t exactly a tablet to begin with.
If phones running these kinds of specs cost $500-$600, I’m not sure why you think somebody can make a tablet (with an even bigger screen) and sell it for $200 less, and have it not suck. Possibly the only company that could do it is Apple, since nobody else makes money off of app sales, but Apple sure as hell won’t do it, so long as people are always lined up to purchase an iPad.
Edited 2011-08-22 21:37 UTC
I’ve checked, and the internet is open on week-ends.
But we do not all have a server farm with spiders crawling the web continuously. Some of us kind of rely on OSNews OSS feed to get interesting news.
I know Tom is not paid for this so I forgive him but I would like to get back in time just one day and have my Touchpad for €70.
Sorry for the sarcasm – I too rely on places like OSNews, Google News, Linux Today, Slashdot, Digg.com, etc. So, Thom, no more dalliances with school and all!
I wish I could have gotten a Touchpad, too. Even more, I wish Palm was still a company, and still evolving and growing. It’s a shame when a pioneer in computing like Palm goes down the drain. Rows and columns of icons on a touchscreen – yeah, that was certainly invented by Apple.
Yeah I know but I’ve pretty much just emerged from a masters thesis-induced coma. Back in the real world now. Done with university. FOREVAR.
Forever, Thom? Give it a year, then you’ll start thinking how “Dr Holwerda” has such a nice ring to it …
That’s so Euro, I love seeing everyone wave their titles over across the pond, not just on a diploma, but really get into it.
Booking a Lufthansa flight, the friggin’ drop-down for title actually offers Mr. Prof. Dr. as an option. Really? I’m booking a plane ticket, not trying to join a country club – though clearly the staff can’t show me the proper respect if I don’t fill in my titles. That’s Herr Prof. Dr. Mag. Dir. Senatsrat to you!
Sorry, pet peeve.
Uh, back on topic, I would have picked up a Prof. Dr. TouchPad myself for $99 just to have check out the UI and have one in the closet as a collectible.
At least the Europeans still take pride in education.
In the US it take four years of college to barely achieve the academic standards of high school graduates in South Korea or eastern Europe.
Many of the topics I covered in the second year of my Australian undergraduate science degree were Masters level subjects at leading US universities.
No Child Get’s Ahead.. er.. No Child Left Behind
No Child Gets Ahead.
There, fixed it for you. (incorrect apostrophe)
Some do, others take pride in never getting a job.
In terms of quality of education, I had the opposite experience. I had covered topics and had access to labs full of far better equipment by my sophomore year of university than people who had finished their ‘Magister’ degrees in Europe, though that didn’t stop them looking down on a 4 year bachelors from their 5 years-for-half-the-education programs. Amusing, and why would I question it when they put a Mag. before their names.
Title wanking is totally annoying. I guess when schools are all essentially free people can sit around and ponder what additional – often useless – Doctorate they can focus on next. No, the U.S. doesn’t offer that luxury, but given the large numbers of foreigners that come here for degrees – generally also without feeling the need to drop a title like it’s a 007 label – I’m not too concerned.
Congrats.
Hey that’s alright, Thom. Now that you’re out of school, I bet we can look forward to an assload of more patent-related articles
PS: Why can’t you guys use the f**king ‘quote’ tag like every other bulletin board system instead of ‘q’, or at least make both work.
Edited 2011-08-23 01:24 UTC
Congrats, I’ll hopefully be done myself, in a few months. Just have to stop surfing on OSnews, I guess
In other words, a matter of a year or so, tops. And who knows what Amazon might unveil soon… (especially since they won’t be afraid to make up the cost on media they will sell)
Check out, say, ZTE Blade; what can be had, since the beginning of this year, in a phone factor for half of the price you quote. And while tablet factor makes for more materials, more expensive screen and battery …some thing are probably easier, cheaper (no need for such extreme miniaturisation)
But overall, it would be still to much duplication for my taste; too close to smartphones. So I wouldn’t be surprised at all if we’ll eventually settle on “small tablets” or “large smartphones” (without their presently silly premiums), just one device (which would also finally give real purpose to Bluetooth headsets
)
The cheap chinese knockoffs right now have super crap resolutions (800×480) and resistive screens. Cheap soc’s however are getting better, the newer ones put the performance in the ipad1 range.
The 16GB version of the Touchpad is estimated $296 in quality materials. Totally different class of machine.
I think right now the LCD and touch screen dominate the costs, which of course is where the chinese tablets fail in providing the price.
You obviously know nothing about economics.
Most products retail for at least 10-20 times the manufacturing cost.
Those $500 phones almost certainly have a unit manufacturing cost of <<$50 each.
You do understand that the reason why HP is getting out of the TouchPad and the desktop PC business (which they currently dominate) is because the margins are like minuscule (5% at best).
Sure, premium clothing and accessories might sell for 10-20 their manufacturing cost but consumer electronics never had these type of margins.
You are completely confusing net profit with gross margins.
No manufacturing company ever operates on 5% gross margins.
If you think HP is paying $475 per tablet to the Chinese manufacturer you are hallucinating.
eg:
tablet per unit manufacturing cost:$50
trade price $100 (paid by HP)
wholesale price $400 (paid by computer store)
retail price $500 (paid by consumer)
At each stage about 10% net profit is made after costs.
BTW designer clothes and accessories typically sell for ~100x the manufacturing cost. Designer brand polo shirts cost $~0.8 to make in China. Top designer brand jeans $~2. Most of the retail cost is due to sponsorship and marketing.
The single largest cost for Nike at one stage was sponsorship of Michael Jordan. He was paid more than the entire combined wages bill of all the employees in the manufacturing division.
I feel slightly queesy now, thank you; as I hope Mr Jordan when he was informated of that fun fact.
P.S. Can we have a source if possible. You have my interest.
Edited 2011-08-23 14:14 UTC
Ok, first of all, you said 10-20x previously and now, in your example, it’s 4x which is more realistic cost of manufacturing.
However, that’s totally irrelevant, because someone has to actually design the thing, test it, have it built, manage QA, package it, ship it, market it, ,sell it, support it (and I’ve not even mentioned the software involved).
Just saying ‘x costs 1/4 to build and so it should be cheaper’ is meaningless because ‘building’ something ignores all the costs of getting the thing to a consumer.
tablet per unit manufacturing cost:$50
Can you provide a bill of materials to back up your number?
Like iSupply does.
The average cost of components of different tablets is around $300 by their estimate.
Edited 2011-08-24 20:26 UTC
That makes for a quick explanation but there are many other factors to consider:
1) Companies (and HP is certainly not the only one in this respect) expect a much quicker turn around for their investment than it used to be. For instance when Xerox funded the Palo Alto Research Center in the early 70s they were expecting a profit in 10 (ten) years! (see “Dealers of Lightning: Xerox Parc and the Dawn of the Computer Age” for some perspective).
2) HP’s CEO comes from SAP, a software colossus, and knows absolutely nothing about hardware — and probably doesn’t understand it either.
RT.
You’re wrong because nobody in their right mind is going to buy something off the internet from an outfit they’ve never heard of before, especially it’s hyped by people they know absolutely nothing about.
Can you say Ebay Scam? Most Likely.
The trouble with that hypothesis is that it seems there are tens of millions of people who don’t think the iPad is too expensive. We can tell that because Apple has sold over 30 million of them.
The Touchpad fire sale is an Interesting experiment.
It turns out there is no such thing as a ‘tablet market’.
Just an iPad market.
In order generate the same sort of enthusiastic sales demand that is common place for the iPad you have to sell competing devices at a fifth of the price of an iPad.
Good luck with that.
30 million isn’t that much, considering the hype and the calls for the death of the desktop. It’s comparable to the number of Linux users.
Yes it is comparable to the number of Linux users but Linux has been around for 20 years and the iPad 17 months.
Yeah and the rumor is that they will sell 22 million over holidays. This rate is faster then Apple sold iPods when they were at this point. And we know what happened with that. There are iPods and then everything else.
And iPod sales have been declining for several years.
Yes but it’s still the best selling Music device on earth. No other music player ever caught it.
But now everyone uses their phones for this stuff.
Yet Apple replaced the iPod with an even better selling phone and better selling tablet.
No.
As of June, 2009, more than 340 million Sony Walkmans had been sold since 1978.
Apple had sold 297,000,000 Ipods as of December, 2010.
I doubt that Apple has sold more than 43 million Ipods since December, and that, simultaneously, Walkman sales have stagnated.
I mean really? Tape players and iPods are not the same last time I looked?
Let me change the statement. “The iPod is BY FAR the best selling DIGITAL music device on earth. Tape decks not included.” lol
A tape player is a type of device, while an Ipod is merely a brand — there are many other brands of digital music players.
And the last time I looked, Sony Walkmans were “music devices” and “music players.”
By the way, the Walkman has had many iterations since 1978. The latest ones are digital.
I wouldn’t be so sure about the “BY FAR” part as other digital music players are outselling Ipods in some countries.
Please endeavor to get the declarations correct when they are first made.
Nevertheless, the Sony Walkman is the best selling music device on Earth, not the Ipod. And that fact stands in spite of years of Apple’s intense Ipod marketing and blanket advertising.
Sorry fanboys.
Ok, ok. LOL! It’s silly but I am gonna bite cause what you said makes no sense.
1. The WALKMAN is a brand just like the IPOD is a brand. Ok?
2. According to you the walkman has sold: 340 million since 1979? And Apple has sold 297 million iPods as of Dec 2010. So Apple in 10 years (IPod came out in 2001) has sold all most as many iPods as Sony has sold walkmans in 30 plus years??? So in 1/3 the time. Hummmmm. Lets do a little math.
Apple has been selling at a clip of about 30 million a year (297 / 10)
Sony has been selling at a clip of about 11 million a year (340 / 30)
And you want to sit here and tell me which is more popular???
Ok I don’t know about you but the math tells me that the iPod is and has been way more popular in it’s life span. And since the “iPod” is a brand name I could stretch it and say that the brand name is also included in all iPhones and all iPads since all have the functionality of an iPod which Apple loves to point out. But I am not going to even kill you with that, I am going to go with one more nugget.
Look at sales of Walkmans since 2001 head to head with the iPod? No competition. The only thing the Walkman has on the iPod is longevity. That is the only reason there are more Walkmans sold then there are iPods. The only reason. Ummm and on that note that would make my original declaration correct.
Oh and while i am at it us “Fanboys” can rest confident in a few facts:
No music player will EVER sell like the iPod.
No Tablet will sell like iPad.
No Smartphone will sell like the iPhone.
No laptop will sell like the Mac Book Air.
Those are facts us “fanboys” will be able to sit and chew on for a LONG time to come! A very long time to come.
Last note: yes ANYTHING popular can’t be popular in all places at all times. So I am sure that the iPod is out sold some place on earth, Just like there is some place on earth where Macs outsell Windows machines. (At colleges for instance) Or a search engine is more popular then Google (Like in China) but over all the iPod has 60 plus percent of the market, its a good bit over HALF of the market so its BY FAR the most popular music device on earth. There is nothing factually wrong with that statement. At least till it’s market share falls under 50% . LOL!
(Added Last note. missed what you said about By Far)
Edited 2011-08-23 23:08 UTC
Okay. We shall see who is making no sense.
Right. So what? I didn’t equate a brand with a device category.
You wrote, “Tape players and iPods are not the same last time I looked?” What is the point of such a statement? A tape player is a type of device while an Ipod is a brand. The topic was: which device was “the best selling music device on Earth [your words]?”
Please try to pay attention and stay on topic.
Nevertheless, the Walkman has sold more units than the Ipod.
Also, you excluded a couple of significant factors from your math.
The world population in 1979 was around 4.37 billion, when the Walkman became popular. In contrast, the Ipod first became popular in 2004, when the world population was 6.4 billion. That’s a 46% increase. Assuming that most of the Walkman sales happened when the device first became incredibly popular (when the world population was dramatically less), it is very likely that sales-per-capita was greater with the Walkman than with the Ipod. Sales-per-capita is a more valid indicator of sales strength — you can’t sell to folks who don’t exist!
In addition, a lot of national markets were unavailable when the Walkman first appeared, further decreasing the pool of available prospective customers. So, “sales-per-available-customer” is an even more valid sales strength indicator. If we could get accurate sales figures and good statistics on available markets, I have no doubt that the Walkman sales-per-available-customer would greatly exceed those of the Ipod.
Furthermore, Sony did very little in the way of advertising compared to Apple, which plastered Ipod ads everywhere for an extended period. So, the Walkman sales were based significantly more on merit rather than on advertising/marketing, as compared to the Ipod.
No.
Again, the Walkman has sold more units total. But even if we don’t use total numbers, the Walkman has outdone the Ipod in “popularity” because its “sales-per-available-customer” is probably significantly greater.
Look at it this way, in the U.S.A., FDR got 60.8% of the vote when he won the presidency in 1936, while Obama got 52.9% of the vote when he won the presidency in 2008. However FDR only got 27,752,648 votes while Obama got 69,456,897 votes. So, who was the more popular president? — FDR, of course — FDR won a greater percentage of available votes.
You would probably lose with that stretch, because Sony has an exceedingly more eclectic and varied consumer product line, including many decades of consumer audio products and Sony Ericsson music phones.
I wouldn’t say that. The Walkman was outselling Ipods in Japan in 2009: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ansrP2IonbRA The Ipod outsold the Walkman in Japan for only 4 years of the Walkman’s 32-year existence. Pretty amazing for such a long enduring product.
Anyway, everything has it’s time. Remember your words? — “the best selling music device on Earth.” Historically, that would be the Walkman.
By the way, Ipod sales are currently waning.
Longevity is a solid indicator of a quality product. I seriously doubt that the Ipod will last more than two or three more years.
Huh? Which declaration?
No.
It is very likely that the Walkman outdid the Ipod in sales-per-available-customer, and it is a fact that the Walkman has sold more units total than the Ipod.
Are you from the future?
Perhaps you would be willing to make a little wager on those assertions (especially on the Iphone statement, since Android phones have long since eclipsed IOS phones).
You betcha! There is this little place called Asia…
Or at the Apple Store, for example.
The Walkman had almost 100% percent share of the portable music player market when it was first popular, so, no, the Ipod is not by a huge margin “the most popular music device on Earth.”
There is one point that the Apple fanboys used to constantly chant before the Ipod, and now seem to have forgotten. The point is that popularity/sales figures does not necessarily equal quality. I wholeheartedly agree with that argument (but I would not concur that Apple makes quality products). No doubt we will hear this point again, when Apple sales are in the dumps.
The pet rock is a great analogy of how Apple’s current popularity does not necessarily mean that Apple products have quality: http://www.petsdo.com/blog/pet-rock-made-man-multi-millionaire-6-mo… The pet rock was immensely popular, due purely from fad marketing — the content of the product was simply a rock. Apple uses fad marketing in precisely the same way, and the products really aren’t that great.
Did you hear that Apples year over year sales are up 124%. I think it’s like 15+ quarters in a row of double digit growth. Pfft. That means nothing, right? It’s because they make shinier pet rocks.
Oh and those quality and customer satisfaction ratings. Pfft. They only call the fanboys, right? Real people hate apple products (not made of plastic).
Honestly, dude, listen to yourself. Your like a bad caricature.
]{
LOL!
All that is mute because if your numbers hold the iPod based on it’s current sales rate will outsell the Walkman by next year. Then what? And you act as if the the iPods sales are waining because of competition or something?
And you said Sony didn’t advertise like Apple?? Huh. Sony is a company known as one of the best at advertising just like Apple. You look at the walkman’s wikipedia page and one of the first things you see about the walkman is how its advertising helped it sell: “Advertising, despite all the foreign languages, still attracted thousands of buyers in the US specifically”
Or: “Sony’s marketing team produced their first advertisement, a print ad, in 1979 named Bridging the difference. The marketing of the Walkman introduced the idea of ‘Japanese-ness’ into global culture, synonymous with miniaturization and high-technology.” Those statements are at the beginning of the page, not dug out out of the page.
Fact is Sony marketed just as hard as Apple does. Also if you look at it Apple actually makes way fewer Ads for their products then most companies. You can normally count them on your fingers and Apple puts them on their site so its easy to see when new ads come out and how many they have made.
Again when the iPod outsells the walkman then what? Even though the iPod is waning (Killed by Apple putting the same functions in the iPhone and iPad as the iPad can do, not by it not being popular still) its still selling at almost 10 million a quarter, then what??
Also Apple, unlike Sony has not actually moved the iPod name to other different devices like Sony has. Sony makes walkman phones and walkman digital players etc. The iPod is the same as the day it came out, a digital media player. a few different shapes and sizes but still the same. They have not kept the name alive by trying to sell other things and market them as iPods like Sony has done with the Walkman name. I bet if you look in detail at the original use of the Walkman then the sales numbers you like to tout will get a good bit smaller.
Also your math is still off because you left out competition The Walkman did not have the same level of competition as the iPod did. Sony made the market for walkman “type” devices. Apple did not, yet Apple took over that market. Also as you said the iPods sales are waining, so are EVERY other device like the iPod. Because times are different as you said. People now have the same functions in their phones.
Ahhhhh I never mentioned iOS. I said the iPhone. Android is an OS used by almost 50 companies, the iPhone is a single device. And NO Android device has sold as well as the iPhone (Not even close) or the iPad (Not even close) Sort of like your argument over iPod and tape player. And I don’t need to be from the future. If you look at the BEST Android devices, their sales are not even close to the iPhone or iPad or even the iPod touch or the Apple TV. So I don’t need to be from the future. Yes if you add up 500 different Android devices Android has the lead in numbers. Apple has the money though! Hummm.
Yes but that goes with your argument that the population of the earth was different then, there were almost no electronic companies making those type of devices at that time, so you would expect it to have almost 100% market share. And STILL Sony jacked another companies idea to make the walkman and didn’t pay license fees for decades over it. And you said the correct word: HAD. As it stands not its NOT.
You don’t have to concur, you are not a person who buys Apple products it seems. Those who do over and over again give Apple the highest marks in almost every product category Apple is in for quality. So your concurrence doesn’t matter, thats your opinion. Not fact.
Again I am confused at your argument. Please show me facts of who has better quality? To pull out the pet rock doesn’t mean anything to me. Show me what company in a product category that Apple is popular in:
Music players
Tablets
Smart phones
Video players (Like the Apple TV)
Computers
Show me who is rated with better quality?
Right and Apple is just really getting into Asia yet they are KILLING in China. With only a hand full of stores Apple is selling better in China then in any place on earth. The same with most of Asia but Japan. Even though Apple is very popular you can’t expect them to outsell well established local companies like Sony in Japan. Just like you can’t expect Sony to do the same here with Apple.
At this point Apple is number one. Thats just the way it is. They are going to be in that position for a while so get used to it. Sony is almost dead at this point and there is not much other competition out there at this time. Just like Apple has a lot of fanboys, they also have a lot of haters. LOL! Its ok, we are used to it.
In the end the iPod will outsell the “walkman” in all its different versions and that will be that.
That might happen, except for the fact that the Walkman sales are not standing still. So, we shall see if the Ipod ever out-sells the Walkman in total numbers.
Again, the Ipod doesn’t come close to Walkman’s popularity in regards to sales-per-available-customer. It’s the same as comparing FDR’s popularity to that of Obama — Obama got 3x the votes, but FDR was much more popular — there were more available voters during Obama’s election.
That’s a fact. Sony didn’t advertise like Apple, and Sony doesn’t Unlike Apple, Sony has a huge, diversified line of great products. They can’t afford to put the kind of advertising resources into a single product, like Apple does.
No. Sony doesn’t advertise nearly as much as Apple. Apple spends a lot more on advertising. Apple plasters ads anywhere they can — TV, bus stop panels, sides of buildings, etc. — just like fashion-based companies. That’s “fad” advertising, and it’s an engine that can make inferior products sell like hot cakes.
First of all, if you are going to direct readers to a page, please link it.
Secondly, just because Sony advertised the Walkman, it doesn’t mean that Sony bought the same quantity and type of ads. This point requires a little bit of fine reasoning (which might be difficult for fanboys), but even though Sony possibly bought ads in as many markets as were available, the scope of the Walkman campaign was a fraction of the scope of the Ipod campaign, which, in the 2000s, could run in more available markets.
I was there when the Walkman was released, and, thus, I also witnessed Apple’s fad media blitz with the Ipod later. Trust me, Sony’s campaign was feeble compared to Apple’s campaign. I learned of the Walkman from friends. The Walkman sold much more on word-of-mouth and merit than the Ipod.
Please keep in mind that all of your quotes and the entire “marketing” section of the Walkman Wikipiedia page are referenced to a single source: “Du Gay.” Sounds like Du Gay wrote an opinion piece.
Anyway, whatever Du Gay says, it doesn’t change the fact that Apple continually relies on huge, fad media blitzes, while Sony (and most other electronics outfits) advertise far far less.
Not really.
And the number of ads that Apple creates has nothing to do with the amount of media advertising that they buy. They happen to buy a lot more media than other electronics manufacturers.
Again, Walkman sales aren’t stagnant. No one knows if the Ipod will be able to out-sell the Walkman in total numbers.
Additionally, in light of the less ideal conditions that existed when the Walkman became popular, the Walkman sales figures are much more impressive than those of the Ipod, which benefited from greater numbers available customers and from Apple’s gigantic fad advertising blitz.
In your response, you glossed over the point that the Walkman had greater sales-per-available-customer than the Ipod.
Actually, the condition of not having competition is part of why the Walkman was so amazing — the Walkman was a completely new type of product, while the Ipod was really just another mp3 player with a design copied from Braun and Creative. Apple had to use a lot of fad ads to compete.
Again, the Walkman sold on merit, whereas the Ipod sold on advertising.
That’s probably true.
Don’t really understand your point — Iphones use IOS.
The individual Android phones have to compete against each other. However, there are probably more Android phones sold compared to Iphones sold.
When there are a bunch of different Iphones competing against each other, get back to us with some sales figures.
Yes. The Walkman was a groundbreaking, “revolutionary” device, while the Ipod was not. Whether or not Sony “stole” the idea from Andreas Pavel is not clear — Sony claims to have come up with it on their own. Clearly, Pavel had the idea first and he even patented it (which is why Sony approached him in the beginning), so he should certainly be credited as the inventor and he probably should’ve gotten a lot more compensation from Sony.
In contrast, Apple should not be credited as the inventor of the mp3 player nor as the entity who created the original design of the Ipod.
You are right. I do not have to concur. For one to see all of the problems inherent in Apple products, one need merely go to one of the many Apple help forums on the web and scroll through the endless complaints, or one can merely walk into any Apple store and witness the “genius” bars booked solid with people bringing in their problematic Apple products.
You are confused by a simple analogy? Let me see if I can dumb it down.
Pet Rock = fad marketing with very little substance and high profit
Apple = fad marketing with very little substance and high profit
Apple = Pet Rock
Got it?
On this forum, I have linked the countless problems inherent in Apple products more times than I can remember. I am not going to do it once more, unless you would like to make a little wager that Apple has fewer problems than non-Apple products. Most of the problems come from Apple’s propensity for putting form over function, from lack of field testing and from rushing products to market. Other electronics manufacturers do not suffer these three conditions.
I’ve seen a lot of complaints about how many find the Ipod controls frustrating when compared to non-Apple players. Apple surely is not any better quality in this category, but it certainly is a lot more expensive!
Any industrial/military ruggedized tablet will have much better build quality than an Ipad. A lot of these non-Apple tablets have more computing power than the Ipad. Most of them also have greater accessibility (ports, flash cards, etc.)
Slam one of these ruggedized, non-Apple tablets and an Ipad together five or six times, and see which tablet breaks first.
I can’t really add anything to the previous arguments on this forums, except that, certainly, there are ruggedized smart phones (such as the G’zOne Commando, Motorola i1, etc.) that have way better build quality than the Iphone — no back glass to crack!
Quality in video players? I don’t have time to research the internal components of the various players.
Ruggedized industrial/military non-Apple laptops obviously have better build quality than any Macbook. Again, try drop tests and banging them together and see which one breaks first.
In regards to desktop computers, geez, almost any PC company’s top-of-the-line model with a high-end case beats the top-of-the-line Apple for quality components. Of course, with PCs, one can build (or pay someone to build) a computer with any component desired.
Ah, but Sony did out-sell everybody in the USA with the Walkman.
Nonetheless, you are probably mostly correct about the “home court advantage,” and, in Asia, each country has it’s “home court” manufacturers.
Apple leads in sales in a few areas. Apple sales are based on fads — fads come and go.
Hardly.
I wouldn’t be too sure. Anyway, the Ipod can never come close to the Walkman’s sales-per-available-customer strength — and that is that!
Problem here is the Walkman as you pointed out is just a name, the products under that name are no where close to the same as the original product. Apple could of done the same and called the iPhone, the iPod phone. But that is silly marketing that Sony seems to do to keep the walkman name alive. Again if you compare the original products, under the original names, Apple will have the edge.
Right. LOL! Sony doesn’t advertise even though I can’t get away from their stupid playstation ads and phone ads etc. Sorry but Sony does just as much marketing. Just because you didn’t see it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/timeline-and-history-of-the-walkman….
Here goes the link for you that talks about all the different ways Sony got the word out there for the walkman! No different then any other company.
Again you act as if the “walkman” is the same as when it came out. Sorry but besides making models the “iPod” is still the same device as when it came out. So to say that the “walkman” can’t be caught in sales because its not stagnant would mean you are including things like walkman phones and other devices sony shamelessly slapped the walkman name on. And I left out the per available customer issue because it’s off set by lack of competition for the Walkman.
Please show me how you get repeat customers on advertising alone?
Ok? I am talking about the device. The iPhone not the software that runs it. Since you like to grab what I say and try to point out where it’s wrong. On top of that the first Android phone did not have competition and yet didn’t get close to the first iPhones sales numbers. So competition is not an excuse in this case.
? In one breath you say it’s groundbreaking and in the next basically admit that Sony stole the idea? LOL! You losing me man.
Actually I would love to take you up on that wager.
? You lost me again, how are you comparing something Apple doesn’t make “industrial/military ruggedized tablet” I mean that is reaching a bit. Now lets compare “Apples to Apple” consumer grade products Apple is always rated highest. Even Consumer reports rated the iPhone the highest and it had antenna problems at the time.
Come on.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briancaulfield/2011/03/18/apples-iphone…
5 years in a row customers (You know the people who actually use the products) have rated the iPhone #1. Every year since it came out.
Out of computer companies:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-dominates-pc-customer-satisfact…
Apple number one.
Where is Sony?? Hummmmm.
Sorry what you saying is not what is happening in the real world. You have a lot of opinions and yes like with any products some people have issues. But Apple is NUMBER ONE when it comes to product ratings and has been for YEARS. Sorry thats not a FAD as you like to say. LOL!
And Apple isn’t just number one, they trounce the competition. Yes people line up at the Genius bar. But based on what I linked above they leave happy! Oh and with the other companies you have to go to the geek squad. Yeah ok. LOL!
And you say Sony is hardly dead? Show me one product they lead the market in? The Playstation? The Walkman? TV’s? Computers?. Sony losing money like crazy! The PS network was down for months. Sony is a wreck.
http://www.deadline.com/2011/05/sony-earnings-slammed-by-tsunami-an…
(Don’t include loses for the Tsunami and just look at straight business loses Sony is but a shadow of it’s former self.)
Yes if you add other companies together. If you look at company to company, Apple is number one and growing. Same as with Android. And you make it seem like Apple only competes against Apple? But Android companies compete against everyone?? Apple competes for the same customers as HTC, Samsung, Sony, Motorola, etc, etc. To make it seem like Apple doesn’t have to compete against Android companies and Android companies don’t have to compete head to head against Apple and vice versa doesn’t make sense since they are all sold through the same resellers and phone companies.
Again it all goes back to what I said: Apple is number one in almost everything they do! You shouldn’t be so upset about it and just accept it till it’s no longer true.
In the mean while I will be sipping Tequila on the beach in Mexico soon, paid for by my ever rising Apple stock that has been going like gang busters for the last 11 plus years.
Oh yeah? What’s Sony’s stock doing?
Sony might want to worry about the butt whipping Microsoft is giving them with the Kinect and get Apple off their minds. They can’t keep up! LOL!
Unfortunately, you continually evade addressing points directly, so I am not going to expend any more energy stating the same facts over and over.
However, I am interested in pursuing one line:
Great!
Before we start, please answer this question: how may chronic design problems do you estimate Apple has suffered since Steve Jobs rejoined the company in the late 1990s?
LOL! What? You spent several posts telling me that Apple is a FAD company that does FAD advertising and can only sell products because of marketing. I BLEW that out the water by showing you that Sony spends 5 times the money on marketing and makes way less money!
You told me Apple doesn’t make quality products, yet when you look at product ratings for Apple’s products next to those in the same industry, Apple is always rated number one! So I blew that out the water also.
My question to you is what do you have against Apple? At this point your argument is not based on facts but personal bias against Apple. Your original argument of taking offense to me saying that the iPod was number one music device in the world wasn’t based on fact ether. If you personally dislike Apple that’s on you. Its doesn’t take away from what Apple, a bankrupt company that is now the largest consumer electronics company in the world has done. And they didn’t do it with FAD marketing as you claim.
Now you are saying: “How may chronic design problems do you estimate Apple has suffered since Steve Jobs rejoined the company in the late 1990s?”
To be honest I don’t know but I am willing to look it up. My question to you is, who are we comparing this to? Sony? Samsung? Dell? HP? Which company are you saying has better track record then Apple and then we can look it up and compare. No company makes perfect products but I am sure that most companies have as many problems if not more. The key here is in the end who are the most satisfied customers? Apple could have 50 times more issues then the next company, yet in the end if they fix those problems and the customers are happy, what does it really matter?
So please lay it out for me.
Who has the most chronic problems (All products? Particular products)
What companies are being compared.
You mentioned Dell. Let’s compare Apple to Dell. Of the companies that you mentioned, Dell is the closest to Apple in number of product categories.
Okay. Then let’s see if you will put your money where your big mouth is.
No. Kool-Aid surveys are not valid.
Our criteria will be factual documentation of problems: recalls; epidemic complaints in forums; product flaws reported by the press; etc.
Wait… the bet is which manufacturer has had more problems. Are you already backing-pedaling and acknowledging that Apple has had many more problems than its competitors?
I guess that you are not as confident in Apple’s quality as you seem.
? Backpedaling? Lol! I am waiting for you to bring one fact and drop the opinion piece.
Dell is fine.
Please show your facts.
Waiting..,
Well, we have not yet set the amount of the wager, and, because you continually evade direct argument, I must insist on an impartial arbiter (in case of dispute), and we must agree to a few more conditions.
To keep things interesting, I suggest that the wager be for USD$1,000. Agreed?
? Man you beat around the bush.
If you have facts bring them to the table.
If you don’t like in the case of Sony then let it be.
All this adding third parties in etc, etc is just excuses. Get to the point.
I have shown that Apple is rated number one in quality from multiple raitings companies and customers.
You have shown nothing.
While you are at it I will no problem see your $1000 USD and raise you $500 more. $1500 USD. Let’s make it happen. Hit me at [email protected] if you serious so we can arrange for the money to be held etc!
Okay.
No emailing — let’s keep this on a public forum. We just have to figure out where, because searching for these posts is getting a little unwieldy.
$1,000 is fine, unless you are willing to float the extra $500 for me.
The bet is which manufacturer has created more epidemical problems in its products through its own flawed design or engineering, from 1996 to the present.
So, here are my conditions so far:
– Third-party component problems can be excused as can problems with third-party software.
– Problems discussed in forums must be reported by at least 30 different users to qualify as valid evidence of an epidemical problem.
– Journalistic reports on epidemical problems qualify as valid evidence.
– Editorials or “opinion pieces” do not qualify as valid evidence.
– Recalls are valid evidence.
– Problematic company policy or dissatisfaction with customer service does not qualify as a product problem, and, thus, cannot be considered in this wager.
– A period of two weeks is allowed for discovery.
– This wager will held be on a public forum (the public will have the right to witness the proceedings and make comments).
– Any disputes will be judged by the arbiter.
That’s all of the conditions that I can think of right now.
If you have any objections, or if you have conditions, make them known.
We still have to choose an arbiter.
Oh and just a little note:
Sony’s Ad budget 2009 was 5 Billion dollars:
http://www.channelnews.com.au/Sales_And_Marketing/Marketing/J3F3T6P…
Apple’s Ad budget in 2010 was 691 million:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=114224
That should settle who actually spends more on marketing.
Um yeah Fad Ads?? LOL! Right. That would be Sony who spends more then 4 times that of Apple. Hahahah.
Wait check this little nugget: “According to company filings, Sony spent $5.5 Billion on advertising last year. They failed to deliver a single cent in profits.
On the other hand Apple spent $501 Million advertising only 4 product categories; they also delivered a massive profit in the last quarter of US$1.67 billion this was up from $1.14 billion, for the same quarter a year ago. Revenue rose to $9.87 billion, from $7.9 billion last year.”
LOL! Yeah I think this argument is over. Sony is dead (As I said) And Sony markets WAY more then Apple (Which I said) 5 Billion more spent on Marketing then Apple in 2009 alone!! WOW!
Like I said its a long known fact that Apple is cheap when it comes to advertising compared to the industry.
(Added in a nugget)
Edited 2011-08-24 23:50 UTC
As I have said, Sony is about a zillion times more diversified than Apple. Sony not only makes computers, phones and mp3 players and software (which is pretty much the limit of Apple’s scope), but it also: produces blockbuster movies; runs the biggest record company in the world; manufactures broadcasting and film cameras and production equipment; makes gaming devices; runs four design centers around the globe (winning a lot more design awards than Apple ever will); makes professional and consumer still cameras; makes consumer video cameras; makes professional and consumer audio equipment; makes home theater systems; makes car audio equipment; etc. That’s only the Sony items that I can think of off the top of my head.
If Sony is spending 5 billion dollars a year on advertising, it is spread out over all of these other departments (I would guess that most of that money is going to advertise its movies and music). It is very unlikely that Sony is spending anywhere near as much as Apple on advertising computers, music players and phones. According to your figures, if Sony spent the same amount as Apple advertising such items, that would eat up 14% of their ad budget, and computers, mp3 players and phones ain’t nearly 14% of Sony.
So, sorry, Apple spends way more per product on it’s fad advertising blitzes.
501 Million in advertising for only 4 product categories?
I rest my case!
L O L ! ! !
All that and Sony makes NO money. Wow.
LOL!
And if they (Sony) spent most of their 5 billion dollar budget on their movie and music divisions then their movies and music would have to make double that kind of money in return or they wouldn’t be making movies and music anymore. So that’s not true.
And this is what Sony it’s self said about that:
“As Sony ramps up to relaunch their struggling brand around the 2010 Soccer World Cup senior executives in the Company are moving to totally restructure Sony marketing after admitting that brands like Samsung, Nintendo, Apple and Panasonic have done a “far better†job than Sony during the past 18 months.”
None of those companies make movies or music, yet Sony is comparing their issues to companies like Apple.
Fact is Sony spends way more on marketing, most of it’s not on movies and music or they would not have needed to restructure their marketing budget in the face of companies like Apple, since Apple doesn’t make movies. LOL!
And Apple has only 4 product categories, that is true, and you want to know why? Because before Jobs came back Apple tried to do everything just like Sony, that almost put them into bankruptcy, the direction Sony is going right now. When Jobs got back first thing he did was shed products and product lines that didn’t make money to focus on their core strengths! Thats smart business. Unlike Sony who has 50 product lines and the ones that make a profit are being killed by the ones that dont! To the point that they have to depend on cheap companies like Vizo to make products for the once proud Sony. Apples 4 divisions make more profits in one year then Sony has made in it’s last 5 years.
Good try at a come back though. LOL!
Edited 2011-08-25 12:59 UTC
x
Edited 2011-08-25 05:05 UTC
Which doesn’t really impact Apple as iPods now account for only 5% of Apple’s revenue. The iPod will finally be superseded by another Apple device.
And of course the iPhone and iPad both have iPods built in, I stopped using my iPod when I got an iPhone which is now my iPod.
Meanwhile Apple mostly sells iPod Touch’s which are a convenient and popular introduction to the world of iOS devices – it’s particularly popular gift for kids and means that when they get their iPhone or iPad they already know how operate iOS devices.
On a global scale, that’s really not that many units sold for a consumer device. Especially not considering that it is supposed to usher in the death of the desktop.
For $500 you can get a decent laptop that does more than an iPad, not to mention desktop systems.
Might explain why Apple haven’t sold more units.
Uh, yeah, ok. Maybe you need to step out of the RDF for a while.
Yea, that didnt work out AT ALL for the IBM PC. Apple was such a dominant player in the desktop space. Not learning from the past, are we.
It’s actually the fastest selling consumer product in the history of man kind.
You can but the iPad is not really there to compete with a $500 (Windows) laptop. You can do stuff on such a laptop but (for most people) the experience will not be nearly as pleasant as the using an iPad 2.
I’ll just say again here that the iPad is the fastest selling consumer product in human history.
Actually, at this time, there is a very small non-iPad tablet market, and a very large iPad market. That’s the reality today.
It might change and the iPad could become like the iPhone with 20% market share or it could be like the iPod with 65% marker share.
I don’t know about the past but Apple today is worth more then Dell, HP, and Lenovo combined so I don’t think they need to learn much from the past.
I doubt that. Remember – the iPad is actually TWO products. The Nokia 1100 alone sold 200 million units in five years – that’s 40 million *per year*, compared to your combined iPad1/2 sales of, like, 25-30 million in 18 months.
unfortunately… it is a Nokia 1100.
Nothing wrong with the 1100, you just have to scale back your expectations to about five years before its release date.
We’re not talking about Nokia 1100 here.
My, you are confused.
So, what is it for iPad in a year+, a mere 30 million? Try 250 million over the course of 3-4 years.
iPhone in a subcategory, iPod in few visible markets… plus, the world simply quickly zoomed past the time of dedicated music players. It’s clear ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ipod_sales_per_quarter.svg ) the iPod really took off (and still only in few atypical places) at roughly the same time it happened also to mobile phones with music player capability (mobile phones which weren’t castrated by carriers in most places)
Yes, their music capability isn’t used so universally as in the case of iPods. For my region, it’s something like 20-30% of all European mobile phone users also regularly listening music on them. But that already adds up just in that one region to an absolute value in the range of total number of iPods ever produced.
Anyhow, in a reasonably prosperous ex-Comecon late EU memberstate, I can probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I’ve seen an iPod (well, excluding mine…). S1 mp3 players, and similar (Creative, et al), seemed to be typical for quite some time; largely replaced by mobile phones few years ago already (typically by so called “feature phones” …though, later, often in a form of touchsreens, like LG Cookie).
And most places are less prosperous than mine, with even greater mark-up on Apple products.
This one always fascinates me. People are often very quick, particularly at tech forums, to voice their disdain towards bankers, brokers, etc. …except when worshipping valuations of some darling of theirs made by… the very same despised people.
Edited 2011-08-22 23:17 UTC
iPad1 is not iPad2. Otherwise we should count in the replacement of Nokia 1100 on the market and that will blow iPad range away any day now.
Personally I don’t despise bankers, I just think they need better regulation.
If there was no food hygiene regulations then lots of people would die from food poising after eating in restaurants – it wouldn’t make restaurants a bad thing just unregulated restaurants.
On your substantive point. Economic performance does matter, not only is is it an indicator of the relative success of the competing technologies and products in the market place but also because all the technologies would be meaningless if they are not made into products by enterprises and the long term economic health of those enterprises drastically effects which products have a secure future and which don’t.
Total valuation is not on it’s own a telling indicator but it is indicator along with profitability, revenues, balance sheet etc.
Yes.. because the ipad is far more “pleasent” for using keyboard/mouse centric programs or replacing everything one could do with a 500$ laptop right? Be careful how you throw around the claim that no computer use can be a pleasent as on your brand loyalty.
You missed my point. I was simply saying that on a $500 laptop most software generally runs poorly.
I have a USD 450 Lenovo I got purely for development testing and the thing is pretty poor. The battery life sucks, browsing performance is bad (that could be mostly flash though), Microsoft office apps struggle, and don’t even think about playing any PC games from this era.
On the other hand I don’t have any such issues with an iPad 2 and so the experience is much better at a comparable cost.
]{
I don’t know about $500 laptops, but my $450 laptop runs most software quite well.
I appreciate the point you’re making there, the iPad is certainly a more pleasant experience for casual browsing and what not, but while a $450 laptop is bound to struggle with large applications, how does your iPad 2 handle Microsoft Office? Or any PC game from a few years ago? A $450 laptop will be clunky for many tasks, but at least it can *do* them, and that makes it a more useful device in many situations.
I find it interesting how the tablet is continually compared to a laptop. Why would you run MS Office on an iPad? Why would you run apps or games that require touch and accelerometer on a laptop? You might as well compare the laptop to a similarly priced game console. Do people complain that MS Office doesn’t run on an XBox and that you can’t typeset large documents with a gamepad?
With regards to games, the iPad is exactly in the same situation as any game console in that the hardware doesn’t change very often. This brings a certain guarantee to the experience for anyone using the device and I don’t have to be bothered with “my laptop is too slow for my expensively purchased app/game” complaints.
You know that you will get a much more consistent experience with an iPad than a similarly priced laptop in the same way that games for an XBox are very likely to run on your XBox. Whether you find that experience too restrictive or can be happy with it is another matter.
I’d agree that the different form factors are better suited to different use cases. Personally, I’d still like to explore the true potential in the hardware rather than have it limited by some manufacturer’s vision of what I want to run and what interface I want to control it.
In this specific thread, the comparisons are in reponse to the original claim that anything done on a tablet chassis (specifically; ipad) will be a more pleasent experience than a clamshell chassis. The original claimant sais; “they do the same and this one is better always.” The respondents; “a tablet is good for this type of use, a clamshell is good for this type of use.”
Because of the constant hyperbole that the tablets, and iPad in particular, will usher in the death of the PC and/or laptop?
That assumes that you would be buying a tablet, because it’s cheaper than a laptop or because it has a faster CPU or more memory.
But I hope people aren’t buying a tablet instead of a laptop because of price or hardware, but a form factor, which suits casual users better than a laptop.
By continuing to ignore the form factor, it will also prevent someone from seeing why the iPad is able to sell.
There are very few ways tablets can be compared to laptops, when looking at a practical standpoint, unless you directly have the exact same apps for both devices, which you usually don’t.
This statement is yet another classic example of the unrelenting Apple hyperbole and of the irrationality of most Apple worshipers.
One would have to include a few severely limiting conditions in such a statement, before it could even become close to being true. Then, the brag wouldn’t be very impressive.
Do Apple fanboys really believe that more Ipads have been sold in a day/week/month/year than cans of Coca-Cola? … bottles of Budweiser? … packs of Malboro cigarettes? … gallons of Exxon gasoline? The list goes on and on. These are definitely consumer products (and the user actually “consumes” most of them).
It would not be surprising that Apple sales are strong, in light of the fact that there are many who actually believe statements such as the one quoted above. Certainly, Apple sales figures have less to do with the merits of Apple products and more to do with Apple marketing.
No, your right, that was my fault and as other pointed out, Nokia holds that crown.
I confess to being biased given that I hold a non trivial number of Apple shares but I do own all of these devices including a dozen apple products, several Android devices (several phones and a tablet), and several PC’s (actually I was a Win developer in my past life).
I do believe Apple products are currently the best based on my usage of them all – the computers and the tablets more so then the phones.
Fanboys, please endeavor to get the facts straight before making bold declarations about Apple products.
And, no, the Nokia 1100 is not “the fastest selling consumer product in the history of man kind.” Numbers for food products are much much greater than any hardware product can ever hope to achieve.
In regards to your belief that Apple products are the best, well, everybody has a right to an opinion.
Edited 2011-08-23 18:46 UTC
I think Apple learned all the right lessons from the past and not the idiotic ones (licence the OS etc).
Here are a few of the many lessons learned:
a) Build a better value stack for your customers (world’s best and biggest app store, world’s best retail experience, world’s best brand, world’s best digital content store, etc).
b) Build a set of products that cater for every market segment, except the piss poor crap end, and which are highly integrated, snap together in ingenious ways, allow easy user skill and content migration.
c) Build the world’s best supply chain and use your cash mountain to not only secure the best components but prevent your competitors from getting their hands on any. Note the way that would be Macbook Air competitors cannot get any unibody manufacturing deals because Apple sewed them up. Similarly when the retina display iPad arrives probably next year no one else will be able to buy such displays.
d) Based on the above build products that no one can else can match in price and quality and make any money on. Kill the OEMs one by one.
Apple built a business with the iPad from scratch, with an entirely new product range in a product category that was minute, that if it was a stand alone business would have been in the fortune 500 in just 18 months. Trying to dismiss the scale of Apple’s achievement or the size of the impact it is having on the PC and tech world is just silly. The iPad is kicking away the last legs that the sclerotic PC makers were leaning on. HP’ departure won’t be the last.
Please, define “world’s best”. According to whom or what?
Okay, where is my headless desktop then? And no, the Mac Pro doesn’t really qualify.
And this is good for me as a consumer because…? Maybe you sit in the board of directors and I don’t, but I thought competition was (supposedly) a good thing, but it seems that no company really wants any — Apple in particular.
Yeah, keep on dreaming. Or check the prices. Whichever is going to cause you less stress. As far as I am concerned, my only reason to be interested in Apple is OS X. Or rather, was. Lion is firmly in the “what where they thinking” category and, if this is any indication of the things to come, I’m ready to move on.
And what about believing AND repeating baseless claims then?
Steve, is that you?
RT.
PS: Could we have “fanboy (-1000)” option and just save time in the future? 😉
Ever hear of a mac mini?
How bout a “I don’t know how to google (-1000)” option?
I said desktop, by which I mean some parts should be user replaceable/expandable — at very least disks (as in more than one), RAM and graphics card. At the moment only RAM fits the description. In other words: no matter how you spin it, there’s no such thing and Apple is conspicuously absent in this market segment.
Is this relevant or adding anything to the discussion? My point was that I was just feeding the troll. What’s yours?
RT.
Well the Apple app store has the most apps and sells the most apps and makes developers a lot more money than any other app store. Thus best. Apple retail stores are hugely popular, have astonishing best of class visitors and sales per square foot and are growing much fast than an other retail chain. Thus best. Apple’s brand always tops or comes near the top of customer appreciation and satisfaction surveys, brand appreciation surveys, reliability surgery etc. Thus best. Apple has the digital contents store with the biggest range of content and larger turnover and sales. Thus best. It’s not rocket science.
Mac Mini – duh!
That depends whether you like Apple products or not. My comment was about understanding why Apple succeeds, which includes factors such as this.
Competitors have struggled to match the iPad in build quality and price and when they come close they make far less money than Apple. Its a similar story with the Macbook Air, competitors cannot match the unibody build quality and price and have been begging Intel unsuccessfully for special discounts
You may not like the way the tech world is evolving but trying to pretend it isn’t changing or that Apple isn’t doing remarkably well especially in the new growth sectors is just silly. You don’t have to be a fan boy to see what is happening or to be interested in the reasons why.
Only if you are ready to accept that, say, Lady Gaga is the best musician ever because she sells more records than [obscure or semi obscure musician of choice]. 😉 And I find rather odd that, all of a sudden, bigger means better while not until too long ago it was all about “quality”. Looks like fat numbers are important only when they’re good for you.
As I said:
– Can you replace the RAM? Check.
– Can you replace the hard disk? No.
– Can you have more than one? No. (Unless you go for the server version).
– Can you replace the graphics card? No.
Also, no matter how sleek the design is, it still represents very poor value for money.
I asked before and I’ll ask again: please explain how this is good for me as a consumer.
RT.
That’s not the definition of best. Most != best.
What’s a “best of class visitor”? The king?
You’re not measuring quality, you’re measuring quantity. By the same measurement Britney Spears made “the best” music and the VW Beetle is “the best” car.
Differentiating between quantity and quality seem to be rocket science though.
Edited 2011-08-23 19:02 UTC
Sorry, but Lenovo begs to differ.
This wasn’t hard to find but, for instance, from: http://www.techcentral.ie/article.aspx?id=17271
“Lenovo profits nearly double
Becomes third largest PC maker”
The Chinese company reported that both desktop PC and laptop shipments for the quarter increased by 23% from the same period last year.
Dying, indeed.
Or should we count the iPads as PCs just to make Steve & Co. happy?
RT.
Lenovo makes a quality product. My old ThinkPad (IBM version) was extremely well built. They also get very high marks from Consumer Reports. They’re my first choice when looking at non-Apple hardware, so I’m glad they’re doing well. Never had good experience with HP/Compaq ( Always seemed to be fixing somone’s… )
Dude, what are you smoking? Don’t you know that Apple is the ONLY company in the known universe who makes quality computers? Clearly you must be mistaken regarding this…what was it?…Lenovo company, whoever they are.
Apple just beat Lenovo in China
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-08-19/hardware/299…
Its the shape of things to come.
Apple’s sales in China went up six fold in the last year.
Apple doesn’t chase PC sales by just market share or units, and thus is not interested in the pretty dreadful world of razor thin margins and shabby beige boxes.
Of course iPads are are computers just a new sort of computer. I know their are a lot of folks who love yesterday’s technologies and their certainties but times change.
What part of “The data were not directly comparable since Lenovo did not include Taiwan and Hong Kong in its calculations” you didn’t get? 😉
And sorry, but this is just too good to let go:
Are these really your words? No one can write stuff like that and keep a straight face — congratulations if you can!
RT.
You forgot one:
Fill all of your marketing materials with words like “best”, “biggest”, “most”, etc. This sort of juvenile triumphalism will appeal to people who have a compulsive need to brag about something & who will endlessly repeat those talking points to anyone who will listen (as you’ve done here). That sort of thing appeals to people with no actual accomplishments of their own, so they latch onto Apple. It’s just the adult version of “my dad can beat up your dad,” but with Apple as daddy.
These are the folks who choose computing devices solely based on which one will give them the best bragging-rights-by-proxy. Which is why Apple fanboys stick out like sore thumbs on tech forums: when you have a community of actual technology enthusiasts, it just makes the wannabes and hangers-on more obvious.
Hahaha, jump the gun much? Outside of the “tablets are killing the desktop” hype-bubble, the total sales of BOTH models of the iPad have barely managed to overtake the first XBox (only 125 million to go before they catch up with the PS2). Decent numbers for a game console or consumer electronics toy, but utterly pathetic for something that’s supposedly going to “kill the desktop” and be the “computing platform of the future.”
What?
Why do Apple fanboys often feel the need to dream-up non-existent scenarios for their arguments. I guess that deep down they must realize that their beloved corporation is not anywhere near as great as they pretend.
First of all, there actually are quite a few “unibody” laptops out there, they are just made of polycarbonate plastic.
Secondly, anyone can contract any “run-of-the-mill” CNC shop to machine unibody enclosures. Apple doesn’t have all of the zillions of CNC machines in the world “sewn-up” — that’s quite a crazy notion.
Nonetheless, several reasons make metal “unibody” laptops an unattractive proposition. First of all, if the pieces are machined as in Apple’s method, the process is expensive, time consuming, wasteful and environmentally unsound. Secondly, if one drops one of these metal items and a panel is bent, one faces a very expensive repair.
There have been lots of reports of bent/dented unibody Macs. Presumably, this drawback is the reason why Apple subsequently offered a more resilient polycarbonate “unibody” laptop.
In addition, “unibody” construction doesn’t really have any practical advantages — it isn’t any stronger (it’s weaker and less resilient in Apple products), and it doesn’t add any protection to the internal components. If you want strength and protection in your laptop, get one of the several “ruggedized” brands, such as Panasonic ToughBooks.
So, the basic reason that most manufacturers don’t machine “unibody” laptop enclosures is because it is basically a stupid, expensive and problematic idea, that puts form over function.
By the way, Apple was definitely not the first to offer a production model of a laptop with metal, “unibody” construction. Here is a Sony laptop from 1997 with a shell made up of four magnesium panels (doesn’t dent as easily as the aluminum Macs): http://www.sony.net/Fun/design/history/product/1990/pcg-505.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/237812/apple_forces_competition_to_a…
Sure unibody laptop enclosures are stupid. Sure. PC makers could make them if they wanted. Sure. Keep saying that. Still doesn’t change anything.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/237992/windows_laptop_makers_cant_ca…
PC OEMs are finding it hard to impossible to match the Macbook Air which is flying off the shelves. Apple is the only PC maker that is still showing substantial growth and makes most of the profits in the industry. There are reasons for that.
Dude. The author of that article has no clue about manufacturing processes nor about the widespread availability of CNC mills. He is obviously just another one of the many Apple-worshiping journalist, as indicated by the article’s last sentence: “In the end, only Apple will be able to reliably deliver the cool, calming, solid, familiar tactile experience that end-users and IT admins alike desire.” Detect any bias in that sentence?
Again, there are CNC shops all over the place. The manufacturers do not have to buy such machines as that crappy article suggests. If Apple had a lock on all of the CNC machines in the world, pretty much every industry on the globe would be in a crisis. It’s a ridiculously naive, fanboy-wishful-thinking notion.
Furthermore, it is not necessary to machine metal “unibody” enclosures as there are metal forging processes that are just as strong and cheaper (namely stamping).
No. The reason why most manufacturers are keeping away from CNC housings is because they can make a less expensive, less wasteful and more resilient housing using plastics.
Another article by an Apple-worshiping “journalist” posted by the same site. I am not going to even bother pointing-out the biased language.
Again, the author has no clue about manufacturing.
Not surprisingly, this second article actually references the first article you linked as it’s information source that “Apple has booked solid all the lathes.”
Really?! Oh, Apple! You are so smart and forward thinking! Now you have all of those cheap inferior competitors by the short hairs!!!
It is amazing that people actually stomach such tripe without thinking. There is no way that Apple can “book” all of the CNC mills in the world. Additionally, all industry would shut down if it were so.
However, I would like to point out that, even though this article is biased in favor of Apple, the author acknowledges that Sony and Dell offered super thin laptops years before the Macbook Air.
PC makers don’t want to match the Macbook Air — the housing is too expensive, wasteful and environmentally unsound (20,000 CNC mills — hello!) to manufacture. In addition, there are the aforementioned bending problems, that require more expensive (and harder to machine) alloys.
Everyone has a right to one’s opinion about what constitutes “substantial growth,” but one thing that cannot be denied is that there are way more non-Apple laptops being sold, compared to Macbook sales.
Yes. And the reason is that there are millions of people who are gullible enough to believe that Apple has a lock on all of the CNC houses in the world.
Edited 2011-08-24 00:37 UTC
So let me see if I understand your post.
– Those respected journalists who are pro-apple are actually pro-apple fanboys who know nothing about anything while you are a manufacturing idiot savant
– Apple is actually an environmentally wasteful manufacturer of crap; never mind what those pinko-commie Greenpeace people say and the unparalleled customer satisfaction rating
– Plastic is fantastic! Plastic is better, stronger and better looking and better for the environment too! Don’t settle for imitations, get genuine plastic!!! Never mind that it takes 25k years to decay in a landfill and looks like shit.
– Apple is not really selling that many laptops; never mind that fact that Apple holds the #1, #3, and #5 slots in the top 5 best selling laptops on Amazon
– PC makers have no interest in those awesome margins Apple makes; they want to stick to the cheaper, better plastic stuff and make 2% margins because really, that’s where the money is; that HP CEO must be a dumb ass for wanting to divest the biggest PC business in the world
Is that about right?
]{
Edited 2011-08-24 07:34 UTC
Those reporters don’t have a clue about manufacturing nor what a CNC mill actually is nor about the availability of such machines.
I just did a quick web search and found several CNC brands selling, with no back-order notices. These “journalists” can’t even be bothered to do a little light research.
If you doubt me, perhaps you would care to make a little wager on the availability of new CNC mills and/or the availability of CNC houses. We can start at USD $1,000.
Do you have any idea how wasteful and toxic it is to machine large runs from metal rather than using a more efficient method, such as injection molding?
Built into Apple’s “unibody” manufacturing process is a lot of milling energy expended on each unit and a lot of metal that has to be recycled, requiring more energy.
Not only does milling big pieces of metal in large scale production-runs consume a lot of electricity, it also uses a lot of toxic machining lubricant, that has to be disposed.
Multiply by 20,000 the energy expended by one of these CNC machines plus its waste toxic lubricant, and you have the environmental damage just in the machining step of the process.
Furthermore, to recycle all of the metal shavings generated, energy has to be expended to gather them and package/handle them. Then, the shavings have to be shipped to a foundry, using even more energy.
At the foundry, a lot of additional energy is required to remelt the shavings and to make new ingots.
In addition, please note that this whole process is pre-consumer — it is additional to and separate from the process of the consumer recycling their end product.
Injection molding plastic requires much less energy than mass machining, and it produces almost no material waste, with no pre-consumer recycling necessary. Most of Apple’s competitors use injection molding and fasteners — much more environmentally friendly.
In regards to plastic looking “like shit,” the only time it looks like shit is when it is used on Apple products!
I have no idea what is selling at Amazon, but more non-Apple laptops are sold, compared to the number of Apple laptops sold.
I do not pretend to know the interests nor motivations of PC makers, nor would I praise Apple for price gouging.
I had no idea it could get THAT drafty in them Apple Stores!
RT.
PS: Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Interesting. All these years later that Apple is the fastest growing computer company in the world and making the most money. This is not a battle, it’s a war. MS won the PC battle for 20 years. Blew up just like Android. Now Windows is losing steam, and Apple still has plenty of room to grow.
But while all that was happening Apple came out with the iPod which just like the iPad was over priced device that no one needed but just like a Benz or BMW it’s a status symbol that people will pay a premium for just because it’s Apple. No one else is gonna match that.
There will be iPads and then everything else like in the music player market.
You really do have to credit Apple’s marketing machine for this. They have done an amazing job convincing the world that their products are the best because they’re the most aesthetic and that people should pay the higher prices for them. All criticism of their litigation obsession aside, they are true masters at selling a product.
Ah, that leaves a mere 6 billion 927 million people…
Let me guess, and there was also only iPod market?…
Can’t wait.
That’s correct. If I remember rightly once the iPod took off we were promised an iPod killer pretty much every other month. None succeeded. The iPod’s market domination only ended when it was superseded by a new Apple device the iPhone. iPod Touch sales are still very healthy (and are a very useful entry level device to those new to the iOS world). There was never a music player market, just an iPod market and lots of unimportant, low volume, low profit fast forgotten junk music players.
Don’t be so narrow-minded (also: http://www.osnews.com/permalink?486327 )
Edited 2011-08-22 23:20 UTC
While I agree that the iPod was the king of mp3 players, there were a lot of other players that were superior to it, except that the other players weren’t tethered to iTunes, so the tech tards didn’t know how to use them. Apparently, drag and drop (or better yet, Media Monkey) is too complicated for people to figure out.
So, while the iPod won the mp3 race, it wasn’t because of it’s superiority, but because of its ability to cater to the lowest common denominator, just like the iPad does. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, but don’t pretend these devices are more than what they actually are.
Actually both you guys are wrong. The real winner here are companies like Tracfone and Net10 which are selling low cost no contract phones have integrated mp3 players Like the LG 500g which can play back mp3 and other files without forcing you to subscribe to something like Itunes or other such services. All you have to do is plug it into a usb port and copy files over to it like you would to a flash drive.
You must not have grandparents. ( I apologize if you actually don’t )
Seriously though, my parents, grandparents and many others barely understand what the “Desktop” is, let alone how to drag and drop files into a flash drive.
Quick story:
I once had to walk this guy through the steps of emailing us photos, over the phone. I figured as long as he knew where the images where ( he didn’t ) that he could simply move them to the desktop temporarily so he wouldn’t have to wade through folders trying to find them again. After he finally found the images I told him to drag them to the desktop and his response was, “Whoa, hold on now… what’s this ‘Desktop’ thing?”. The whole process took over an hour…
Tony, that’s a little bit exaggerated, no? You might live in US, or maybe other country, where Apple products are very popular. But – the situation might not be the same in EU countries. Here in CZ other brands sold volumes – Cowon (iAudio), Creative, iRiver, to name a few. Owning an iAudio, I would definitely not call it a “fast forgotten junk”.
You Apple proponents still have to claim, that anyone is promissing you <your device here> killer in a month, while what others do is – they play a catch-up game. So, enjoy the Apple being the top device innovator, but don’t be too nervous, if Apple does not become the world dominator anytime soon 🙂
I’m guessing that’s a typo, because otherwise you’re suggesting that cassette and CD walkmans didn’t happen. Even assuming you’re talking mp3 exclusively, try Japan: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10344536-1.html
Don’t be pedantic and obtuse – we are of course asking about digital music – duh!
In the digital music player and retailing business Apple crushed the opposition and nobody and no device dented Apple’s dominance
There isn’t even really an iPad market, there’s an Apple market. What people wanted was a tablet Mac, what they got was a giant iPod, and Apple fans still flock to the Apple stores in droves to pick up their giant iPods. Then there’s the curious-with-a-credit-card-sans-brain like me who bought an iPad 1 around release; I honestly expected more of it.
get your ipad here only 200kr/month for 24 months
All that it means is that nearly 30 million people have money to blow and all the rest do not. So much for the “rest of us”.
Wow 30 million! That means >99.5% of people in the world don’t own an iPad!
Yet! Apple is only just starting
Funny, because I could have sworn that there was another
overly-sanitized, gated community-esque platform which had almost that exact number of users at its peak… before the more open, less-restrictive alternatives caught up and completely annihilated them. Damn it, what were they called again? The name is right on the tip ofmy tongue…
Oh yeah, that was “America Online”. By Apple fanboy logic, AOL “beat” the internet because they had a greater number of users than any other single ISP. Remind me, how did that work out for them in the long run?
Yeah, keep telling yourself that. Look at the history of general-purpose computing and you’ll see that walled-garden single-vendor systems ALWAYS lose to open, multi-vendor systems. It’s only a matter of time before Android does to iOS what the “real” internet did to AOL 10-15 years ago.
Posted from my Xoom.
Hahaha,
BallmerKnowsBest
… and now HP’s Touchpad with WebOS has a massive userbase. Great strategy HP – well done! I knew all along they weren’t that stupid – they loss led on the end user device, to then make money on the apps and ecosystem.
Pure genius!
I was thinking the same thing. Wouldn’t it be great if this was just a publicity stunt to get people to buy the TouchPad in droves, to create an instant userbase for it? Then I remembered they cancelled the Pre3 without releasing it.
If they had done this after releasing the Pre3, with the same dramatic price cuts on it, then it would be more plausible.
Alas, I fear this is just product dumping to clear the warehouses before they are shuttered for good.
Perhaps a home-brew ecosystem will grow up around it, now that so many people have them?
There are a ton of online retailers who still have them “in stock”, but at full price.
I’m willing to bet if you keep an eye on these, they’ll drop the price eventually (they’ll have to!)
I bet if you call a few of these and ask, they’d be willing to sell them at discounted prices.
FWIW, I just bought two more of the 32gb units at $124/ea from an online retailer a couple hours ago – they ran out minutes after I ordered them.
Furthermore, HP is still receiving shipments back from retailers, and selling them as stock arrives.
The TouchPad’s $99 price is a sign of things to come for the tablet market.
Yeah sure. The future of the tablet market is companies rushing to sell top notch hardware at a huge loss. By that brilliant reasoning the future of the car market is also Porsches for $5000. Just think of how many they could sell!
By the way, I bought a touchpad last night on impulse. Even if Android is never ported, for $100 it’ll be a nice web browsing machine for a year and then a nice platform for some sort of tech project. Can’t go wrong.
No, the future of the tablet market is cheaper tablets.
Nope. You can already get tablets for close to $100, and the realities of hardware costs means they are total crap. Resistive touch screens, completely out of date processors, insufficient ram, and a hastily slapped on Android that’s likely out of date and buggy.
You’re dreaming if you think we’re ever going to get a tablet that can compete with iPad/Xoom/Galaxy class products for $100.
Who said anything about 100?
I said cheaper. I’m thinking 200-300.
So your argument doesn’t hold up. You said:
But it hasn’t. The HP Touchpad has demonstrated that there’s a huge market for a $500 tablet sold for $100. Just like there’s a huge market for anything sold way below market value. There is absolutely zero indication that there is a huge market for cheap tablets that are built to that cheap price. Big difference.
Edited 2011-08-22 23:15 UTC
Actually there is a lot of space where the price of the device can be reduced. $100 manufacturing cost is not that far off, considering that cheaper components can be used. Cheaper != lower quality, but rather not the latest generation.
That makes sense… if you’ve never heard of concepts like “economies of scale” and assume that component prices will never drop.
Apple’s iPad2 costs look to be the same as iPad’s in 2010. And Apple is the biggest consumer, so they benefit the most. iPad1’s component costs are about $200 at the moment, but those are Apple’s costs…
PS: Did you try to insult me? Or maybe you know the actual costs of components to manufacturers? How many contacts at Foxconn do you have?
I see advertising for a $200 tabled on OSNews. Buy one and try it.
I have a g-Slate here for development. I don’t actually know what it costs (because I got it for free at Google event) but it’s really not in the same class as an iPad 2.
The hardware is reasonable if a bit cheap feeling (also I don’t like the form factor but that could be me) and the stereoscopic cameras are cool (and take much better stills then my iPad 2) but the software is really immature.
I mean even YouTube, which is a Google app, is very unstable, and there are no apps to speak of that look even half decent on the thing.
Possibly, when the OS and the apps mature and there are more apps in the Market then Android on a tablet will be competitive but we’re not there yet and pricing is not the issue.
Why not?
Think on a company promoting its new ecosystem; the company gives away high-end devices for free (or almost free) and profits by the whole ecosystem (apps, ad-based free apps, accesories, etc.).
In fact, because of what happened this weekend with webOS, the platform will be alive for a long long time and a lot of developers (someones enthusiastic, other ones wishing earn money) will continue writing apps for it.
Edited 2011-08-22 23:21 UTC
Possible, but highly unlikely. To create this kind of stir (a $400-$500 device for $100) a company would be losing quite a lot of money on every device. So first they need deep pockets. Then they need to make that money back, in an environment of $1 apps.. After having my iPhone for a year I’ve spent maybe $100-$150 on apps for it and I have quite a lot compared to most people. Then consider that this kind of hardware you will likely want to get a newer model in 2-3 years… I don’t think it would be profitable.
I doubt there will be many new apps. The platform is still dead. Hard to justify starting development now for a dead platform. That’s a very short time window to make back your development costs, when you know all the users of the platform you will ever have are already out there. Not sure how many touchpads there are in total now but it’s not huge.
Well, Touchpads and phones (Pre, Pre2, Pixi, etc.)
I’d seen reports that over 350k touchpads were sold overnight on Friday – we know Best Buy had 270k of them that they wanted to dump – so who knows how many HP created initially, a million? 5 million?
Also, HP has stated that they won’t simply drop support for WebOS. I suspect at the least, they’ll sell it to someone who wants to enter this market (or is in the market, and wants a unique edge… HTC or maybe Samsung?)
That’d be interesting. You’d think they’d want to do more than shelve it after all their investment.
Well, I say yes. Early PCs costed thousands of $, modern ones cost a few hundreds. Price has dropped by an order of magnitude before stabilizing. Same drop for cellphones and DAPs. And there’s nothing special about tablet hardware (save for being magical, of course). So in 10 or 20 years, $100 or less capacitive tablets that do *much* more than the current ones should be commonplace.
If tablets follow the competitive evolution of other digital hardware, that is. They could also fall under the control of a monopoly and keep their high price as any price drop is turned into profit. Just like everyone enjoys Windows’ pricing today.
Edited 2011-08-23 03:59 UTC
10-20 years? More like 2-3 years.
Riskier bet
Capacitive phones have been around since more than 3 years and they’ve not yet dropped in price by an order of magnitude.
Yes they have,
The Huawei Ideos has a capacitative screen. It sells for $80 unlocked in Africa.
I stand corrected then
If the hardware is ready and it’s only about fixing the software, 2-3 years could indeed be a good estimate.
You can get a $100 tablet today. In 10 or 20 years time you’ll still be able to buy a $100 tablet, and a $500 tablet which will be better (and more magical).
Anyway this means nothing.
The iPhone is the most popular smart phone in the US ( actually it holds both the #1 and #2 spots, it’s that magical 😉 but it only has 20% of the US market after 4 years on the market.
The iPod has been around for 10 years, it still commands 65% of the music player market.
Both are subject to the same economic impact on technology.
]{
There’s a huge difference. Today’s $100 tablets are piece of junk. Tomorrow’s $100 tablets will be good enough. At which point the $500 tablet market will become a niche, just like $4000 laptops are a niche nowadays.
4 year is not maturity, even for computers. Microcomputers have appeared in the late 70s, and that market has only reached the stable equilibrium that we know well in the early 90s. I think we are still up for some surprises in the smartphone world.
Because Apple have been clever and have made cheap iPods too
Well, my own interpretation’s above. In the end, your guess is as good as mine, I guess, but I’m ready to bet
Edited 2011-08-23 06:06 UTC
Apple makes the best selling laptops and their cheapest laptop is twice this price so this theory is clearly not valid.
http://amzn.to/mPtlJ4
There are mp3 players at a fraction of the cost of the cheapest iPod and they do exactly the same thing as the iPod but the iPod still dominates.
http://amzn.to/qgqX7X
Notice that the best selling mp3 player is actually USD 229 a whopping 11 times a competing player also on the top 10.
So this is a nice theory but the market reality just does not back it up.
Apple’s 13-inch macbook pro sells best because it’s the cheapest OSX-running laptop that isn’t a piece of junk. As it happens people need OS X specifically for some tasks like media editing (legacy reasons play a big part there) or iOS development (iOS currently playing a big part in the mobile ecosystem).
So basically, the main reasons to buy a mac instead of an equivalent PC are the abusive OS X and iOS SDK licensing terms. Does not exactly say much about their chances to compete in a free market.
As said elsewhere, I think it was in this thread, iPod sales are in steady decline in favor of the cheap mp3 players bundled in cellphones.
Well, it goes to show that stuff like monopolies and well-worded licensing terms can help the most expensive stuff to stay alive.
Like Windows.
Edited 2011-08-23 15:08 UTC
Are you seriously suggesting that Apple makes 3 of the top 5 best selling laptops on the strength of purchases from media creators and software developers?!?
Yes.
Geeks also play a role in the Mac audience, though, either when they use the machines (because OS X can be a better fit than Windows for the minority of geeks who need no Windows software* or don’t feel ridiculous when spending most of their time in a Windows VM) or when they suggest other people to use it.
But I don’t think this is a significant part of the Mac audience as compared to the rest.
* (And again you need to buy a mac if you want to use OS X)
Edited 2011-08-23 15:26 UTC
The only reason that people are buying the Touchpad is that they are getting a tablet that cost $324.00 to manufacture at $99.00.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal-tech/tablets/231001092
Would these same people buy a tablet whose parts and quality were around $99.00? And…I doubt manufacturers are willing to take a $225.00 + loss per unit on their tablets.
If I was Samsung, RIM or any other tablet manufacturer (Apple excluded, of course), this would depress the hell out of me. It’s the “champagne tastes, beer wallet” syndrome at play. In addition, HP just impacted their sales for this Q, at the very least.
There is no tablet market…just an iPad market.
Edited 2011-08-23 14:37 UTC
Speaking of cheaper tablets, Amazon (at least in the US) just knocked the price of the Asus Transformer down to $350
That is awesome news but that could probably because the second version of the Transformer with the quad core Tegra 3 could possibly be on its way?
I would love to have me a piece of that!
That’s cheap, really, for what the iPad is.
come on! the ipad is a nice but too expensive “toy”… i’m a programmer and the ipad is too restrictive to let me perform my activities smoothly (launch an IDE, compile, test, running one or more virtual machines, etc.).
I know, I know, it is nice to use one of them, but, apart of the hedonist pleasure using it (though I find its keyboard quite disgusting); I think it is a weaker machine than almost all current laptops.
Edited 2011-08-23 03:50 UTC
I am also a ‘programmer’ and my development environment of choice is 8 core XEON with 10 gb of ram, a pair of ssd’s, and 2 27″ monitors but, you know, so what.
The average person is not a programmer. In truth the ‘average person’ really only uses a computer to do email, browse, and watch the occasional movie or tv show and the iPad is an awesome replacement for that (and you don’t need to worry about viruses or defraging and other similar stuff).
Sorry, you are right! My comment above seemed too arrogant.
Sadly I didn’t hear of the fire-sale prices until Monday. Apparently these things sold out on Saturday. I may have to contact my old room mate who works for HP to see if he has any to offer. $99 would have been incredibly hard to pass up.
There is a retired thread on slickdeals from the weekend that made it to 2500+ pages. That has to be some kind of record.
I spent about 4 hours following this thread. By the time you finished reading one page there were 4 more pages in the thread. I’ve never seen anything like it, it was insanity.
I managed to get a 16gb for $99 from TigerDirect thanks to that thread. Every time the thread got updated with an in stock source, the 20000 people reading the thread at that moment crashed the source’s servers, desperately trying to snag one. It really was legendary. When I got shipped a tracking number I was ecstatic, because it just didn’t seem like there was going to be any way to get one.
I have used a Pre since Jan. 2010. webOS, like many defunct systems before it, truly was a superior interface. For $99 I don’t even care that it’s a dead end. It’ll be a great web/email/fb/twitter machine for a couple years, more than worth the $99. Maybe TouchDroid will materialize, maybe not. This might make me hang on to my Pre for a while longer instead of upgrading to the next iPhone though.
Long live webOS. Rest in peace.
I spent a lot of time and some few long distance calls to find out HP servers and infrastructure stinks. Every touchpad in 500 miles from me was sold out by noon. HP web site took my credit card and up to the point of shipping and puked.
They claim they will get back in 48 hours so I might end up with 50 or none.
Why does everyone want an unloved tablet?
A customer enters a Best Buy shop.
Mr. Praline: ‘Ello, I wish to register a complaint.
(The owner does not respond.)
Mr. Praline: ‘Ello, Miss?
Owner: What do you mean “miss”?
Mr. Praline: I’m sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint!
Owner: We’re closin’ for lunch.
Mr. Praline: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this HP Touchpad what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very boutique.
Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the webOS HP Touchpad…What’s,uh…What’s wrong with it?
Mr. Praline: I’ll tell you what’s wrong with it, my lad. ‘it’s dead, that’s what’s wrong with it!
Owner: No, no, ‘e’s uh,…it’s resting.
Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead tablet when I see one, and I’m looking at one right now.
Owner: No no it’s not dead, it’s, it’s restin’! Remarkable tablet, the HP Touchpad, idn’it, ay? Beautiful interface!
Mr. Praline: The interface don’t enter into it. It’s stone dead.
Owner: Nononono, no, no! ‘it’s resting!
Mr. Praline: All right then, if it’s restin’, I’ll wake him up! (shouting at the screen) ‘Ello, Mister webOS! I’ve got a lovely app for you if you ?show…
owner hits the tablet)
Owner: There, it moved!
Mr. Praline: No, he didn’t, that was you hitting it!
Owner: I never!!
Mr. Praline: Yes, you did!
Owner: I never, never did anything…
Mr. Praline: (yelling and hitting the tablet repeatedly) ‘ELLO Touchpad!!!!! Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! This is your nine o’clock alarm call! (Takes tablet out of the case and thumps it on the counter. Throws it up in the air and watches it plummet to the floor.)
Mr. Praline: Now that’s what I call a dead tablet.
Owner: No, no…..No, it’s stunned!
Mr. Praline: STUNNED?!?
Owner: Yeah! You stunned it, just as he was wakin’ up! Touchpads stun easily, major.
Mr. Praline: Um…now look…now look, mate, I’ve definitely ‘ad enough of this. That tablet is definitely deceased, and when I purchased it not ‘alf an hour ?ago, you assured me that its total lack of movement was due to it bein’ tired and shagged out following a prolonged reboot.
Owner: Well, he’s…he’s, ah…probably pining for Palm.
Mr. Praline: PININ’ for the PALM?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that?, look, why did he fall flat on his back the moment I got ‘im home?
Owner: The Touchpad prefers keepin’ on it’s back! Remarkable tablet, id’nit, squire? Lovely interface!
Not to be picky, but “owner” is probably not the right noun to use here. In fact I seriously doubt the “owner” of Best Buy would be sitting behind the counter! *grin*
Also: should we insert the customary “you’re holding it wrong” joke to balance things out?
That said, it’s good to see you prefer to come up with drivel like this rather than explain why Apple’s market “dominance” is good for the consumers but, hey, if that makes you happy…
RT.
Your humour bypass worked out OK I see and the pedantic implant seems to be functioning well
Apple’s ‘market dominance’ is the result of the consumer deciding that Apple products are better than competing products. Thus for consumers it’s a good thing. They get to buy product they prefer.
Well, to invoke a discussion I had with MOS6510 recently…
If that’s so clear-cut, why do Apple sue competitors instead of leaving them doing business ?
Liebherr and Miele respectively make the best fridges and washing machines in the high-end market, and are well-known for that. Yet they have never sued Samsung.
Apple may be suing it’s competitors but to the best of my knowledge those legal actions have not yet actually constrained the supply of any competing product, so as of today consumers have in reality a free choice as to which products to buy.
It seems therefore to me that there are two possible hypothesis here:
Either
a) Apple products are so very popular with consumers because they do meet/satisfy the needs and requirements of those consumers better than competing products
or
b) Apple products are so very popular with consumers even though they do not meet/satisfy the needs and requirements of those consumers because of other factors unrelated to the nature of the products themselves such as advertising, fashion, fad, etc
I find (b) not only inherently implausible but frankly ludicrous.
You’ve just handwaved my question away. I’m not satisfied.
If Apple products are so successful, why do they sue ? Why do they feel threatened ?
Do they see a trend towards competing devices winning, even though they had the best stuff hands down in the beginning ? Do they feel like they’re reaching the limits of their innovation capacity ?
Or maybe something else totally different ?
Edited 2011-08-24 11:03 UTC
If yours was an attempt at humour then it was very lame and I recommend you stick to your “straight off the press release” posts you’re so much better at.
Not only is debatable whether there’s any actual dominance at all, you’re still not explaining why this is a good thing for me as a consumer: over the years I’ve bought 3 Mac minis, 1 Mac Pro, several iPods and 1 iPhone but I still can’t find a reason to get all excited about Apple’s “dominance” — not to mention that Apple’s behaviour has been pissing me off for quite some time now.
RT.
I like your name
edit: son of a bitch, that deleted spammer had an awesome name. now its lost like tears in rain.
Edited 2011-08-24 05:19 UTC
Gosh, do I love these “Friends and family” postings. Here are a couple I saw and really liked.
1. “All my friends and family have Android phones. I don’t understand why bother publishing anything about iPhone”.
2. “None of my friends have the MacBook Air. No one wants to pay the premium for laptop being `thin and light’. I don’t understand what’s this all about those MacBook Air.”
Seems like in all the cases we have with unfortunate choice of friends and disfunctional family.