or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › iPad mini is Windows 8 hardware makers' worst nightmare, analyst says
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPad mini is Windows 8 hardware makers' worst nightmare, analyst says - Page 2

post #41 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post

I don't know why people still don't get it, Apple makes a premium product in every way from hard to software, it's already cheap at $329, Apple doesn't need or want the type of consumer where $30, is going to make a difference, let alone $130 when the alternative is a piece of plastic shite with ads

And the funny thing is that Google and Amazon, which are dumping their tablets out at cost or even below cost are somehow hoping that their cheap customers will be buying up tons of content. That doesn't sound very likely, to put it mildly.

post #42 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by agramonte View Post

Yeah need to specify Windows RT there... the idea that an iPad (any of them) will eat into Windows 8/pro tablets is like saying Crayons will eat into Artist level pastels - One is for talented people, the other is for kids to play games on. 

Crayons?

 

Funny they sell much much better, easy to use and much less messy.

post #43 of 62

Have you gone to an MS store and tried the surface and the $100 flat keyboard - kind of nice, but the keyboard is nearly useless and the device doesn't wow and seems small.

post #44 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tychicum View Post

Holy Cow sunspot42 ... you actually know what you are talking about.  Of course you are spot on.  And you must be as old as I am and involved in the business to remember all of the names.  But I digress ...

 

Yes I agree it is a race to the bottom for most of the cheap plastic vendors.  I actually have some respect for what Microsoft is attempting.  It is different and it is priced reasonably relative to their costs of manufacture.  It won't work for them but ...

 

Andorid makes zero profit for Google.  Amazon sells its Fire for less than the cost to build it.  Who in their right mind would invest in these loser companies? Not me.

 

Amazon makes money selling books and anything they and partners can sell online. Fire helps direct customers their way. Google is mainly in the advertising business, and Android also helps with that. Both also sell cloud services (storage, ability to run distributed apps).

 

Apple does most of that as well as making steep margins on hardware. A sweet place to be but not the only one.

 

I don't know what business Microsoft thinks they are in, and I'm not sure they know either. Desktop PC software and anything else they can tweak that to fit, as far as I can tell. Not in competition with any of the above, so pointless to compare. Surface will sell as well as any Windows tablet with a stylus. You don't have to go back as far as Commodore, Atari et al. to work that one out.

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #45 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon or Google eventually offers some tablet for $10.00. I'm sure that they'll eventually make it all up in volume or something.

 

Lose money on every one made and make it up in volume. I like.

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #46 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

 

There was another factor at work in the early home computer wars, and that was the education market. Apple was successful there and it gave Apple a profitable and wide base. This time around Apple is also successful in the educational market in even a bigger way. 

 

Currently, yes. I just hope they don't forget that good UNIX compatibility is important for higher ed. I use Macs and Linux pretty much interchangeably, and Windows is a terrible choice if you want to do this, unless you're prepared tp run all your Linux stuff on a virtualizer.

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #47 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by danyak View Post

Have you gone to an MS store and tried the surface and the $100 flat keyboard - kind of nice, but the keyboard is nearly useless and the device doesn't wow and seems small.

One of few things in life I fear is going into a Microsoft store. I would like to see this Surface thing, but what about nightmares afterward? Did you read Marco Arment's story about going in to try one out?

At least there was no line dancing, but he says they were all over him. I actually would like to see Microsoft succeed, so that makes it doubly depressing.

They should have some of the excess staff, which is far too many judging from the pictures, dressed in civilian clothes and just hanging out having fun, or trying to, using some of the machines. Make the place look alive.
post #48 of 62

On this first day of launch, the *nightmare* sold out at the Regent Street Apple Store within 15 minutes of opening. But there was no real lineup.

post #49 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thIndian View Post

 

Let's not forget how much of that 32GB is eaten up by the OS.  Only 20GB available.  it's still more space, but not double.

 

Source? 

 

EDIT: According to Anandtech, Windows RT + Office takes up 7.3GB, which means 24.7GB is free.  Still a good chunk of your storage taken up, but not as bad as you said.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6385/microsoft-surface-review/6


Edited by SSquirrel - 11/2/12 at 4:59am
post #50 of 62
" it won't be enough to fund the development of powerful next-generation systems"

Yeah but the opposition (Google and Microsoft) have got pretty big war chests that don't come from making money from tablets.
post #51 of 62

Reading the comments section on a CNN article about the iPad mini was humorous. It started with "only stupid people pay so much for so little", then posters tried to one up each other in an escalating battle of scorn. "This is years old technology for twice the price." "Why pay three times the price for decade old technology?"

 

I did not stick around for the inevitable "Why pay a billion dollars for an abacus? Apple is doomed!"

post #52 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

No, their "worst nightmare" would have been if Apple had been able to price the low-end model at $199. Then competitors would be run right out of business. $329 leaves room for them in the market.

$199 can't be done. No money to recoup manufacturing startup and tooling, prep for multiple component vendors, ensure quality control, design, R&D. 

post #53 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe View Post

No, their "worst nightmare" would have been if Apple had been able to price the low-end model at $199. Then competitors would be run right out of business. $329 leaves room for them in the market.

 

Actually, that would have been Apple's worst nightmare.  Apple have spent years building up the belief that their hardware, their OS, their entire ecosystem all have their own inherent values and that when you put them all together, it's even better.  If APple had priced the iPad Mini at $199, yes they might have driven away any serious competition in the small tablet market, but they would have also been shouting from the rooftops that their product has no inherent value, its only value is what you can put on it.  God forbid they ever come out with an upgraded model, the price might be higher and they would have already set the ceiling of expectation.

post #54 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

People complain about the Mini and who would use it but it really doesn't matter, what Apple did a little over a week ago is very agressive Business. Simply put they have outclassed the competition at every size level. The price isn't outrageous on the Mini at all, those complaining really don't have a clue. Now all Apple needs is supply that meets demand.

It's not so much outclassed, but out marketed. People WANT, people REALLY WANT, iPads. There are the anti-apple folks out there that won't ever get one, but not enough of them are willing to PAY Apple prices to somebody else.

The real thing Aplle did was remove the doubt in many buyers' minds. The biggest discussion has always been $529 iPad vs $199 Kindle or Nexus. Apple took control of that discussion... But what you saw was the day later buyers flocking to Kindle and Nexus. Only die hard Microsoft fans are holding out for Surface now. When x86 Surface devices .. Surface... We will have the discussion again.

Although by the time that happens, Apple may be pushing quad-core A7 parts in MacBook... The writing is starting to appear for that rumor. Apple is at a point they lead the industry where they want it to go.., right now even more than WinTel.
post #55 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by mabhatter View Post


Although by the time that happens, Apple may be pushing quad-core A7 parts in MacBook... The writing is starting to appear for that rumor. Apple is at a point they lead the industry where they want it to go.., right now even more than WinTel.

 

I'm sorry, ARM processors are not putting out the same level of productivity as Ivy Bridge processors.  As quickly as they have been coming along, Intel has been producing some pretty big changes in their own work.  Look at what is coming with Haswell.  We will see Haswell Macs, not ARM Macs.

post #56 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by clexman View Post

Nice to compare the price of the 7.9" 16GB mini to the 32GB Surface that includes the keyboard cover.

 

I think it's worse for Microsoft to release the Surface RT, (which arguably needs the keyboard cover to even function properly), without it.  It allows Microsoft to advertise the Surface's price as being $100 lower than it actually is.  

post #57 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Regarding the iPad mini's price point, which some predicted would be in the $249 to $299 range, Wu believes the concerns are "overdone," and likens the product's positioning to the iPod mini and iPod nano.

 

Apple doesn't need to undercut the Google or Amazon pads.  The only reason to do that would be to force Google and Amazon to lower their prices, hurting them by reducing their profits.  Not necessary since Google and Amazon are selling their 7" pads at cost.  They're already hurting.  Neither company is making any profit on the hardware.

 

So where, exactly, are Google and Amazon making their profits on the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire, respectively?  Well, Google makes money on ads.  96% of Google's profits come from ads.  Everything Google ships is a platform for delivering those ads, including the Nexus 7.  And Amazon makes money retailing goods and media.  The Kindle Fire is little more than an Amazon at-home point-of-sale terminal with a built-in e-reader function.  Oh, and the Kindle Fire is festooned with ads unless you pay the opt-out fee.

 

Thus, Google makes money on Nexus 7 ads and Amazon makes money on Kindle Fire media sales.  Well guess what.  Apple can and most likely will make money on all their iOS devices through iAd at some point in the future.  And Apple is already making money on media sales through iTunes.  All that on top of the healthy hardware margins that no other company could approach.  Not even if they tried.  (Looking at you, Microsoft.)

 

(Note: I don't think iPad mini is a response to any competitor's pad.  It's Apple filling in a produce niche, like they did with Mac mini, iPod mini, iPod nano, and iPod shuffle.  And I don't think Nexus 7 is a response to iPad at all.  Nexus 7 is a response against Amazon's fork of Android.  You know, the fork based on Android 2.3 "Gingerbread" from 2010, the most successful fragment of Android ever released in the pad computing space.  Kindle Fire, with its proprietary, closed, obsolete, and relatively successful fork of Android, forced Google to release a tablet running a "pure" version of the latest Android release, just to prove to the world that it could be done.  Just to keep up appearances.)

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #58 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shameer Mulji View Post

But didn't you listen to Ballmer, the Surface is a PC!!!!!!! lol

 

Except it isn't at all because it's the Surface RT.  

 

On that note, I wish people would stop calling this thing the "Surface" when in fact it's the "Surface RT."  When the *real* Surface (the Surface "Pro"), comes out soon it will just be even more confusing for everyone.  

 

An easy guide:  

 

Windows 8 == Windows 7 with "Metro" bolted on top as a Start menu replacement. 

Windows RT == "Metro" (with fake version of Windows 7 desktop running beta versions of Office for ARM in background). 

 

Windows Surface RT == tablet that runs "Metro" (with beta of ARM Office)

Windows Surface Pro == a convertible/hybrid laptop running Windows 8 and Office.  

 

So Surface Pro (if it ever arrives) is a PC because it's actually a laptop, but Surface RT (the current "Surface"), is actually a post-PC device (a tablet).  It's just an incredibly bad, compromised tablet.   

post #59 of 62

Yup.  Apple could have killed the competition, Android and everyone else and they would have safely locked millions into the ecosystem.  Although I think the price is fair for what you get, it could have been a smart move to price them at $249 and up.  But then, maybe they know more than we do... who knows.
 

post #60 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnswilson1 View Post

If you a consumer can compare a mini to a full-size iPad -- which they will -- then why can't a consumer compare a mini to a Surface? Wake up folks. People don't want to spend $500 and up on tablets. They were spending about that on an iPad, and they don't even have to do that now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shameer Mulji View Post

But didn't you listen to Ballmer, the Surface is a PC!!!!!!! lol

Yes, you're right.  Surface is in for a different market than ipad:  the PC market vs the tablet market.  Why compare a PC with a tablet?  If you want to be productive, get surface.  If you want to consume media, get ipad.  some people will have both. 

post #61 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


Commodores, Ataris... died not because they were working on razor-thin margins, but because they could not compete with emerging PC standard. They remained expensive and were overtaken by PCs on performance level for less money.
I was Amiga user, and recall well - Amiga 600, sold in mid '90, was prety much repacked Amiga 500 I had from '87. That was over 5 years of selling same product, with really minor updates.

 

Commodore & Atari couldn't afford to update their products because their margins were tiny - they barely turned a profit even when they were moving more systems than Apple, and once their antiquated systems saw their sales plummet, both companies imploded.  Apple was doing extremely well during the same era with the Macintosh, and had plenty of money to spend developing ever more sophisticated systems.  

 

Don't get me wrong - Apple made plenty of mistakes while Jobs was away, mistakes which by the late 1990s left the company reeling.  (Mistakes including allowing el cheapo Apple clones to enter the market, going after the low-end of the market with their junky Performa systems, and developing an idiotic profusion of near-identical models that only served to confuse customers and up Apple's operational overhead.)  Maintaining decent margins however wasn't one of those mistakes.  For most of the time Jobs was away Apple avoided specs battles and especially slogging it out in the gutter with the likes of Commodore, and that turned out to be a very wise strategy.

 

Google, Samesung, Acer, Asus, Dell, HP and the rest of the idiots in the tablet market are already hurtling down the trail blazed by Commodore, Atari, Coleco, TI and a dozen other long-dead former titans in the personal computer space.  The only one I think stands a snowball's chance is Amazon, and there are two reasons for that:

 

1) They might actually be able to monetize the el cheapo customers they've got locked inside of their cut-rate prison sufficiently to turn a consistent profit on the tablet business thru media content subscription / purchase revenues (think of it as a combination of iTunes, Netflix, Pandora and magazine subscriptions), keeping their customers from defecting every Christmas to the next cheap tablet that plops out of some Chinese factory

and

2) They're going to fork Android, cut a deal with Microsoft, make Bing the default - if not the only - search engine and hoover up the lion's share of the ancillary search revenue spawned by tablets (the whole reason why Google got into this business in the first place).  They're going to do to Google what Microsoft and Compaq did to IBM - hijack the platform and run off with all the revenue.

 

Google will ultimately regret ever producing Android, the same way IBM was nearly wiped out by the PC.

post #62 of 62
Which is why Ballmer should be shown the door ... MS has been for a very long time following, reacting, and running in circles it seems. We will see how the new tablet will do, and Windows 8 for that matter.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › iPad mini is Windows 8 hardware makers' worst nightmare, analyst says