or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Samsung to rival Apple's iPod touch with Android Galaxy Player
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung to rival Apple's iPod touch with Android Galaxy Player - Page 3

post #81 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Beef up? Honestly I'm at a loss here. The iPod touch is currently a fantastic device. It can and will get cheaper with time, but again besides GPS, what more couple people want from it at this point? Sometimes people just want without good reason. Part of what makes Apple so great is that they won't put it in there without a good reason. The current iPod touch though is just amazing. Two cameras, great battery life, the retina display with A4 chip at 1 ghz. It is an engineering marvel.

There are two noticeable holes in the iPod lineup:

(1) the space formerly occupied by the iPod nano (before it was replaced with the current shuffle with a screen)

(2) a 16 GB iPod Touch.

They could have solved #1 easily enough by selling the last generation Touch for $150-$175

They can solve #2 even more easily by just adding a 16 GB Touch to the lineup.

So this is really easy to fix -- they just need to do it.
post #82 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

There is also a really good chance that you would be a Windows loving, Apple hating, Android fan boy.

because they don't use itunes?

wut
post #83 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

There are two noticeable holes in the iPod lineup:

(1) the space formerly occupied by the iPod nano (before it was replaced with the current shuffle with a screen)

That isn't a hole. The current nano replaced the old nano. You may not like it as much. You may not agree with what they put in or took out (I know I didn't agree) but it isn't a hole.

Quote:
(2) a 16 GB iPod Touch.

They could have solved #1 easily enough by selling the last generation Touch for $150-$175

They can solve #2 even more easily by just adding a 16 GB Touch to the lineup.

So this is really easy to fix -- they just need to do it.

I suppose they could have but why? The jump between the last generation and this one is just too huge. It's sort of like the $99 iPhone 3GS. I know it's there but part of me wonders who in their mind would ever buy such a thing? I understand that the current 8 Gig iTouch isn't much of a bargain which is why I went for the 32 gig for my boys. I suspect this was done intentionally by Apple and while I don't appreciate it, I can understand it. When Samsung declared they were coming out with a 7 inch tablet, everyone thought they would be able to radically undercut Apple's price. Turns out they had to match it and ended up giving you less for the same price.

I'm pretty sure that even with a few cost saving measures that Apple's margins on the iPod Touch have to be very aggressive on the low end. That is just an insane amount of goodness for so little.

A few months ago, this article looked into the price of the components and the phones. Apple's iPhone was the most expensive in terms of parts because they use the best available.

For whatever reason, I cannot find an iSuppli analysis for the iPod Touch. Even with some cost saving measures though the margins can't be large on it.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #84 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

You mean this POS that looks like it was designed in 1986?


Also, if these things use Android, it isn't actually mentioned on the (seven!) pages on the Archos website dealing with their latest products. So maybe they are running Android, but even if they are, the author of this article could be excused for not knowing it (since Archos themselves hardly touts it as a feature), and Archos themselves are complete idiots for not promoting that fact.

So yes, if you want an ugly POS *possibly* running Android that's big as a VCR and looks like something someone wearing parachute pants would own, then Archos is the way to go.

Jesus, everything you said is bullshit.

Hell, the first thing I saw at their site:


Not to mention they have an entire menu devoted to their Android products.

It's ok, keep spouting your nonsense. People won't check and they'll repeat it and continue to make irrational fanboys look like the idiots they are.

BTW, if I remember correctly, Archos had products that looked like the image you posted, back in 2007, in case anyone thinks this is what they're coming out with currently.
post #85 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

It will have to be much cheaper relative to the Galaxy S phone, than the iPod touch is relative to the iPhone for it to sell well. No one is going to pay hundreds of dollars for a crappy Android phone with the phone part removed.

It will be cheap. Samsung will include it free with every device they sell: TV, DVD player, washer, dryer, fridge. Fridge will be connected to wi-fi/online music store, Pandora radio...

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #86 of 100
Thats an original design...NOT
post #87 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post

It will be cheap. Samsung will include it free with every device they sell: TV, DVD player, washer, dryer, fridge. Fridge will be connected to wi-fi/online music store, Pandora radio...

Are you being sarcastic, because that sounds sorta awesome lol.

Honestly, sticking some speakers on a fridge and giving it access to internet radio may seem like an overkill, but think about it from a mom's perspective who has to prepare dinner every night in a cramped kitchen...
post #88 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

That isn't a hole. The current nano replaced the old nano. You may not like it as much. You may not agree with what they put in or took out (I know I didn't agree) but it isn't a hole.

Repeating over and over again that it isn't a hole isn't much of an argument.

It is a hole because in the old lineup you could buy an iPod for $150 that had a camera and the ability to play video and that was very small. That product fit nicely in between the low-end shuffle and the high end Touch. Now there is nothing between the shuffle and the Touch. There is no iPod with a camera and ability to play video for $150. That's a hole.

And there is no argument for not having a 16 GB Touch except as a way of getting people to pay the extra $$ for the 32 GB Touch. That's an argument for Apple's bottom line in a world without iPod competitors. But now there is a (possibly credible) iPod competitor which exposes this hole in Aople's lineup.

The botto line here is that Apple created these holes in their lineup to pressure people who would have happily bought a 16 GB nano into buying the 32 GB iPod Touch. If Apple were the only game in town that would at least be a profit-maximizing thing to do (even though it would also be kind of a d!ck move). But since Apple isn't the only game in town this is something that might boost the bottom line in the short run but which will push some people to competitors in the long run (admittedly I don't know how many -- i hope it isn't very many, since I own a lot of Apple stock)
post #89 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

There is no iPod with a camera and ability to play video for $150. That's a hole.

Then there is a hole between every product lineup. If the old Nano wasn’t selling the way it used to with the iPod Touch offering a lot more of everything for only a little more money then why should Apple keep selling it? You say there is no valid argument expect a pejorative comment about Apple’s bottom line, but that is the only valid argument any for-profit company should ever have.

Maybe a Samsung Android-based PMP will make some waves with the Nano design, but I don’t really see it. The iPod Touch is more likely to drop in price than Apple recommissioning the old Nano, especially since the Nano never ran iOS it’s not likely that some Nano-like PMP without a touchscreen will run Android to fill that gap.

Frankly, I don’t see Samsung making any dent here when Apple succeeded as a late starter amongst plethora of competition. On top of that, the PMP market is declining with more and more people pushing to smartphones with built-in PMP apps. There might be a $150 Android PMP hole but is hole really big enough to warrant action from Apple when they already have economy of scale to make it hard for competitors to compete on price as it is?

Personally, the new Nano is the Shuffle I’ve always “wanted", but since I always have my iPhone on my person I have yet to buy it.


edit: Here is an article suggesting less than $100 Android-based phones. A PMP could be even cheaper.

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/12/...roid-explodes/
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #90 of 100
Never trust an outfit that tries to save money by inverting the "V" to create an off-looking "A" in their name.
post #91 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

In Germany, the government won't allow businesses just to lay people off for the government (taxpayers) to support. The gov. insists they reduce them to 3/4 time, 1/2 time, etc., and again when the economy turns around they just go back to full-time.

Germany is back to the employment right now that they had before the recession. Not America though, we fire people, then have to go through the prolonged process of hiring and training new workers. Stupid!

Two words: Ronald McDonald Reagan (Okay, three words!)
post #92 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by easy288 View Post

Ah, people around here are showing their bias, AGAIN.

Uh, yeah, that's about par for the course in a forum named AppleInsider. Not AndroidInsider. Not RIMjob Insider, Not Win Does Dallas incider.
post #93 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecphorizer View Post

Uh, yeah, that's about par for the course in a forum named AppleInsider. Not AndroidInsider. Not RIMjob Insider, Not Win Does Dallas incider.

LOL... You have a way with words, Tod!
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #94 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Repeating over and over again that it isn't a hole isn't much of an argument.

The reality is you made it sound like there was nothing there. There is a product there and I acknowledged that you may not agree with what they put in or took out. You now go on about what they took out. The product is still there. That's not a hole.

Quote:
It is a hole because in the old lineup you could buy an iPod for $150 that had a camera and the ability to play video and that was very small. That product fit nicely in between the low-end shuffle and the high end Touch. Now there is nothing between the shuffle and the Touch. There is no iPod with a camera and ability to play video for $150. That's a hole.

It isn't a all a hole. In my view Apple is clearly aiming this Nano at a different market. All the teens used to get by with an iPod Nano. A few years ago that was all I saw were kids with Nanos. Now everyone in that age group wants an iPod Touch. This very Christmas I saw my own sons and all the nieces and nephews sitting in a row with their iPod Touches. I have no doubt that scene played out thousands of times this last season. The reality is kids will get their parents to bump up to an iPod Touch.

That means Apple needed another reason to keep the Nano. iPod sales as a whole are declining. It's pretty clear they've gone after high end athletes/runners who think nothing of dropping $100 on a good pair of shoes and fashion conscious folks who think nothing of dropping $100 on a pair of jeans. Go to any sort of running event and see how many clip on iPods are there. Sure some people still have Nanos with arm bands but again, when they upgrade, they are already in the ecosystem, it's no different in terms of price than what they pay for shorts, shirts and shoes and it saves weight and is more convenient than what they had before. Those are compelling reasons to purchase.

Quote:
And there is no argument for not having a 16 GB Touch except as a way of getting people to pay the extra $$ for the 32 GB Touch. That's an argument for Apple's bottom line in a world without iPod competitors. But now there is a (possibly credible) iPod competitor which exposes this hole in Aople's lineup.

You were given a very valid rationale and that is profit margin. The iPod Touch at $229 might even be only a break even product to loss leader. The tear downs on the iPad put the cost of components at a little over $250. The iPhone 4 was $168-ish. The iPod Touch, I couldn't find but it'd probably be safe to say $130-ish just for parts. Apple has an obligation to protect their margins. Apple is ahead of the game here. The bar was raised through the roof with the latest iPod.

Quote:
The botto line here is that Apple created these holes in their lineup to pressure people who would have happily bought a 16 GB nano into buying the 32 GB iPod Touch. If Apple were the only game in town that would at least be a profit-maximizing thing to do (even though it would also be kind of a d!ck move). But since Apple isn't the only game in town this is something that might boost the bottom line in the short run but which will push some people to competitors in the long run (admittedly I don't know how many -- i hope it isn't very many, since I own a lot of Apple stock)

Then they are doing them a favor. If you were the one teen who was sitting amidst all the other cousins this Christmas season and they are playing with their Touches, messaging each other with Kik, shooting video of each other and uploading it to YouTube right there or editing it on the Touch, challenging each other to games, etc. you'd stick your lower lip out and beg your parents to return it for an iPod Touch. You'd be as left out as a kid can be and the purchase would be a bad experience. Apple is very smart about moving their products and the customer expectation on when it is an appropriate time. The old iPod nano was a nice solution and the last one was the pinnacle of it's respective time. However the whole social networking and infrastructure around the iPod Touch just makes it a better product, for only a few dollars more by a magnitude of order. You're basically going from an MP3 player to a minicomputer for just a few dollars more. iPod Touch has Netflix, games, HD video, video editing, cameras, video conferencing, you name it for just a few bucks more. The Nano of old can't stand up to it even at a lower price and Apple knows that too. It is why they went for the high end fashion/running market instead. For us low end athletes, the shuffle is still there.

I can pretty much guarantee based off the Samsung pricing in other areas that this thing won't beat Apple pricing. They haven't in a single area yet.

EDIT:
One more point. It is increasingly clear that Apple is killing Nintendo and Sony in portable gaming. If you as a parent have to get the teen a $159 Nano and a $169 DS or $169-199 PSP, then you are actually ahead of the game with the low end iPod Touch and still spending less even with the 32 gig iPod Touch. Before you had two devices, one with very expensive games to worry about or keep track of and now you only have one that does more than either of the two prior devices did. Its a win all around, especially for Apple.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #95 of 100
My wife loves her Nano 5. She doesn't want the new Nano - Can't play Monopoly, can't play videos. She doesn't want the Touch - too big.

If she didn't have a working Nano 5, she would see a huge gaping hole there in the lineup, and she would end up wanting nothing, and using her mobile phone for media instead.
post #96 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

My wife loves her Nano 5. She doesn't want the new Nano - Can't play Monopoly, can't play videos. She doesn't want the Touch - too big.

If she didn't have a working Nano 5, she would see a huge gaping hole there in the lineup, and she would end up wanting nothing, and using her mobile phone for media instead.

You're wife's phone is smaller than an iPod touch and does media better?

I loved how small my LG Dare was and enjoyed it as well and I also carried an iPod Nano. The iPhone beats them both which is why I carry it now.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #97 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You're wife's phone is smaller than an iPod touch and does media better?

Yes, it's half the size of an iPod Touch, and no, it doesn't do media better, but it does do media, and that's enough for her. It's certainly better in her eyes than the iPod Touch, which she insists is too big.

She doesn't need a camera. If the new Nano could do video and games at all, she would love it even more than the old one.
post #98 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yes, it's half the size of an iPod Touch, and no, it doesn't do media better, but it does do media, and that's enough for her. It's certainly better in her eyes than the iPod Touch, which she insists is too big.

She doesn't need a camera. If the new Nano could do video and games at all, she would love it even more than the old one.

The iPod Touch is only one cm. longer and two cm. wider than a Nano. It's one mm narrower. You could be right that there is a large market out there for people who want to carry two inferior devices, but that's their choice I suppose.

I was absolutely one of those "too big" folks. The functionality and convenience overcame the marginal increase in size. If she tried it for a week or two, she might feel the same way.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #99 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The iPod Touch is only one cm. longer and two cm. wider than a Nano. It's one mm narrower. You could be right that there is a large market out there for people who want to carry two inferior devices, but that's their choice I suppose.

I was absolutely one of those "too big" folks. The functionality and convenience overcame the marginal increase in size. If she tried it for a week or two, she might feel the same way.

Apple is in a unique position to try out drastic changes. They did it with the Shuffle and then changed it back. How many people are buying a new iPod every year? How many people wont just be willing to buy the previous years model at a reduced price if the new one is too much of a change in the wrong direction for them? If the new Nano isnt selling well, or they see the new Nano is replacing the new Shuffle in sales (which I doubt due to price differences) then they can correct that with next years iTunes special event. Seems like more is to be gained in this shrinking stand-alone PMP market by taking such risks.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #100 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by ljocampo View Post

if Samsung did succeed in competing and caused Apple to lower prices, I'd have one.

I think you have things backwards. The only one forcing prices down is Apple themselves. Heck, no one is able to even compete with the iPad as it is, that's why they are pushing 7" tablets as the second coming. It has nothing to do with any advantages other than allowing manufacturers to get close to Apple's price point with the iPad that is 40% bigger.

If Apple follows previous history, they will probably drop the price of the 16GB by at least $100 when they release the new version - that puts the entry level iPad at $400 - that's pretty darn amazing for what you get.

If you still can't afford that then oh well - we all can't have everything. I'm positively lusting after an 11" MacBook Air, but it ain't happening any time soon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Samsung to rival Apple's iPod touch with Android Galaxy Player