We aren't speaking relative to what the iPad is worth, but rather the value of money. $500 isn't chump change.
Nah, unless you are a teenager $500 is totally "dirt cheap." Especially in terms of computers.
These are all very rough approximations, but the cost of living has gone up by about 90-100% since 1989 in North America. A brand new computer in 1989 would have cost you between 2 and 3 thousand bucks. So a brand new computer today should cost something like 4 to 6 thousand but it actually only costs around a thousand on average.
Prices have dropped considerably and this has happened only very recently for the most part. 500 bucks is a steal for any kind of computer.
I know they are trying to keep it cheap (and I might buy one for $250) but I'm sick of the all fanboy hype around the Tegra 3 chip being quad-core. The new DUAL-CORE 28nm chips that use newer ARM architectures from Samsung, Qualcomm, TI, etc wipe the floor with Tegra 3, and its GPU is not great either.
You don't understand how this works: more cores = more self-esteem.
... Except, Amazon is not a vendor, are they? Amazon took the guts of the OS and did their own thing. ...
I've heard rumours from some fairly well connected people that Android is being forked like crazy in the secret labs of almost every company that currently distributes it on their hardware.
Amazon's Kindle Fire opened the flood gates on this idea, and the fact that Google is probably abandoning the Android brand and obviously about to fork it themselves anyway just means it's going to happen sooner rather than later.
Later this year, or early next, you will be reading lots of articles about the bastard offspring of this "forking" with titles like "Is this even Android anymore?," "Whither Android?" or "Samsung's new Mobile OS."
My prediction is that it will turn into a four or five way race depending on which companies can get a media ecosystem in place soon enough. We will see these five entities battling each other with vertical integrated strategies (a la Apple), and the fact that "Android" (or what used to be Android), is part of the underpinnings of two or three of the entries won't even be relevant.
Google themselves haven't proven they can market hardware of their own design with success. I think Apple might come out with a 8 inch iPad for about the same amount of money or slightly more for a better system. Android can't even get their Ice Cream Samwich OS working properly. Google should stay away from marketing hardware, they just aren't qualified to do it.
Don't despair. The marketing will be handled by the masterminds at Motorola.
That would be a pretty stupid goal. The Fire is designed (and marketed) to be an effective conduit to Amazon's store and nothing else. Google can't compete there.
Google can lose money on the tablet just as easily as Amazon can. The difference is that Amazon is planning on making money hand over fist with the captive customer the "Fire" brings to them. Where is Google planning on generating the profit?
"We will lose $20 on each unit, but we can make it up with volume."
"Umm, Yeah, right..."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therbo
Amazon don't even sell the Kindle outside of the US, so theres no decent tablets apart from the iPad, so a Google Tablet would be a instant hit.
Anything sold below cost should be a hit of some kind. RIM perfected that technique with their Playbook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Agreed. I don't see this as targeting the Fire for the same reasons you mention. Instead I think it's hoped to jump-start Android-based tablet sales in general. Going by previous joint projects between Google and Samsung and Moto, this new one is probably just Google working with ASUS showing how they suggest it be approached while showcasing "pure" Android features. Really just another of the Nexus-type projects IMHO.
Um, Yeah, the Nexus product... how did that work out for Google? No matter large a number you multiply times zero, you get the same answer.
What Google management fails to not realize is that every moment they are busy with money-losing distractions, they are ignoring money-making opportunities. Already their cash cow is pooping out smaller numbers... Reminds me of Nero, a fiddle, and a place called Rome.
Um, Yeah, the Nexus product... how did that work out for Google? No matter large a number you multiply times zero, you get the same answer.
What Google management fails to not realize is that every moment they are busy with money-losing distractions, they are ignoring money-making opportunities. Already their cash cow is pooping out smaller numbers... Reminds me of Nero, a fiddle, and a place called Rome.
It seems to worked pretty well to get the media talking about Android and getting the potential purchasers of Android-powered smartphones taking a look when the earlier Nexus phones were announced. Going from 6% share to over 50% in less than three years isn't a terrible showing.
I think Google has the same intent with their Nexus tablet. Just get the media talking and people looking, then if it comes together the tablet sales for their licensees will get a life.
IMO Google's not introducing a Nexus-branded tablet to compete with the licensees.
What evidence do you have that's what they do? My understanding is that Google does the ad placements, with the data itself allowing for targeted ads never leaving their control. That's why they're valuable to advertiser's. If they simply sold "the list" then the value to the chain would drop fast just like it did with the old mailing lists that ended up used several times and shared with other departments.
Do you have some link showing Google's really selling the data itself instead of placing/delivering the ads? I'm happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood.
Um, Yeah, the Nexus product... how did that work out for Google? No matter large a number you multiply times zero, you get the same answer.
What Google management fails to not realize is that every moment they are busy with money-losing distractions, they are ignoring money-making opportunities. Already their cash cow is pooping out smaller numbers... Reminds me of Nero, a fiddle, and a place called Rome.
By his measure, the Nexus One was pretty successful; It really standardized the 800x480 display, started the trend for OLED displays, set the placement for the nav buttons, and pretty much formed the basis for the design of candybar android phones going forward. Not to mention it formed the basis for the Droid Incredible and HTC Desire, and to a lesser degree, the HTC Evo; 3 of the most popular and well known android phones out there.
The Nexus S was kind of a flop. NFC didn't really take off, and no one really followed with the whole concave design (a shame, because I thought it was pretty neat).
I think its a bit too early to tell how successful the Galaxy Nexus is.
if google are quick/smart enough (and care enough) to brand their own sub 9.8 tablet with good screen tech and an sd card slot (to attack apple at their weaker point - their control of storage for profit) before apple release their own ipad mini (and to me it's a certainty they will) they can very easily carve a nice % for themselves in the sub $499 category along side the fire and build from there on. If I were an exec at google I would sell it at a loss to get google play (what a bad choice of name btw) going and hit both amazon and apple in terms of establishing a presence for content sales. God knows they have the capital to do it, if they don't through money down the drain with bs such as google+.
Apple are acutely aware of this threat from the smaller form factor and I am sure will be rushing a mini ipad to market as soon as they can, and it also seems the new 9.8" ipad with at least a storage bump is coming quicker than their usual march schedule.
if google are quick/smart enough (and care enough) to brand their own sub 9.8 tablet with good screen tech and an sd card slot (to attack apple at their weaker point - their control of storage for profit)…
Interesting, a partially cloud-based (for-pay) tablet?
Quote:
(and to me it's a certainty they will)
Just like it was a certainty to many that the iPhone nano would come out. Because if there's one thing we all know, it's that the iPhone screen isn't small enough.
Quote:
Apple are acutely aware of this threat from the smaller form factor…
And as the threat is insignificant, they've chosen to ignore it.
Comments
Are you kidding? $500 is cheap?
We aren't speaking relative to what the iPad is worth, but rather the value of money. $500 isn't chump change.
Nah, unless you are a teenager $500 is totally "dirt cheap." Especially in terms of computers.
These are all very rough approximations, but the cost of living has gone up by about 90-100% since 1989 in North America. A brand new computer in 1989 would have cost you between 2 and 3 thousand bucks. So a brand new computer today should cost something like 4 to 6 thousand but it actually only costs around a thousand on average.
Prices have dropped considerably and this has happened only very recently for the most part. 500 bucks is a steal for any kind of computer.
Amazon don't even sell the Kindle outside of the US, so theres no decent tablets apart from the iPad, so a Google Tablet would be a instant hit.
An instant hit - don't make me laugh.
I know they are trying to keep it cheap (and I might buy one for $250) but I'm sick of the all fanboy hype around the Tegra 3 chip being quad-core. The new DUAL-CORE 28nm chips that use newer ARM architectures from Samsung, Qualcomm, TI, etc wipe the floor with Tegra 3, and its GPU is not great either.
You don't understand how this works: more cores = more self-esteem.
How else do spec whores measure their self-worth?
... Except, Amazon is not a vendor, are they? Amazon took the guts of the OS and did their own thing. ...
I've heard rumours from some fairly well connected people that Android is being forked like crazy in the secret labs of almost every company that currently distributes it on their hardware.
Amazon's Kindle Fire opened the flood gates on this idea, and the fact that Google is probably abandoning the Android brand and obviously about to fork it themselves anyway just means it's going to happen sooner rather than later.
Later this year, or early next, you will be reading lots of articles about the bastard offspring of this "forking" with titles like "Is this even Android anymore?," "Whither Android?" or "Samsung's new Mobile OS."
My prediction is that it will turn into a four or five way race depending on which companies can get a media ecosystem in place soon enough. We will see these five entities battling each other with vertical integrated strategies (a la Apple), and the fact that "Android" (or what used to be Android), is part of the underpinnings of two or three of the entries won't even be relevant.
It's not necessarily the size of the tablet... it's the price.
The new iPad is now available anytime you walk into an Apple store. The lack of a waiting list indicates sales are slowing.
The lack of a waiting list indicates sales are slowing.
Of course it does.
Amazon don't even sell the Kindle outside of the US, so theres no decent tablets apart from the iPad, so a Google Tablet would be a instant hit.
Because it will be specifically designed to google?
The ultimate googlePad?
Or the hyper googler?
Wow can't wait to get one.
Chinese teen sold kidney for iPad
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46977413.../#.T39olZl5GuI
In related news, a Chinese teen traded his toenail clippings for a Samsung Tab.
And the Tab owner gave him $0.50 change.
Google themselves haven't proven they can market hardware of their own design with success. I think Apple might come out with a 8 inch iPad for about the same amount of money or slightly more for a better system. Android can't even get their Ice Cream Samwich OS working properly. Google should stay away from marketing hardware, they just aren't qualified to do it.
Don't despair. The marketing will be handled by the masterminds at Motorola.
That would be a pretty stupid goal. The Fire is designed (and marketed) to be an effective conduit to Amazon's store and nothing else. Google can't compete there.
Google can lose money on the tablet just as easily as Amazon can. The difference is that Amazon is planning on making money hand over fist with the captive customer the "Fire" brings to them. Where is Google planning on generating the profit?
"We will lose $20 on each unit, but we can make it up with volume."
"Umm, Yeah, right..."
Amazon don't even sell the Kindle outside of the US, so theres no decent tablets apart from the iPad, so a Google Tablet would be a instant hit.
Anything sold below cost should be a hit of some kind. RIM perfected that technique with their Playbook.
Agreed. I don't see this as targeting the Fire for the same reasons you mention. Instead I think it's hoped to jump-start Android-based tablet sales in general. Going by previous joint projects between Google and Samsung and Moto, this new one is probably just Google working with ASUS showing how they suggest it be approached while showcasing "pure" Android features. Really just another of the Nexus-type projects IMHO.
Um, Yeah, the Nexus product... how did that work out for Google? No matter large a number you multiply times zero, you get the same answer.
What Google management fails to not realize is that every moment they are busy with money-losing distractions, they are ignoring money-making opportunities. Already their cash cow is pooping out smaller numbers... Reminds me of Nero, a fiddle, and a place called Rome.
Um, Yeah, the Nexus product... how did that work out for Google? No matter large a number you multiply times zero, you get the same answer.
What Google management fails to not realize is that every moment they are busy with money-losing distractions, they are ignoring money-making opportunities. Already their cash cow is pooping out smaller numbers... Reminds me of Nero, a fiddle, and a place called Rome.
It seems to worked pretty well to get the media talking about Android and getting the potential purchasers of Android-powered smartphones taking a look when the earlier Nexus phones were announced. Going from 6% share to over 50% in less than three years isn't a terrible showing.
I think Google has the same intent with their Nexus tablet. Just get the media talking and people looking, then if it comes together the tablet sales for their licensees will get a life.
IMO Google's not introducing a Nexus-branded tablet to compete with the licensees.
What evidence do you have that's what they do? My understanding is that Google does the ad placements, with the data itself allowing for targeted ads never leaving their control. That's why they're valuable to advertiser's. If they simply sold "the list" then the value to the chain would drop fast just like it did with the old mailing lists that ended up used several times and shared with other departments.
Do you have some link showing Google's really selling the data itself instead of placing/delivering the ads? I'm happy to be corrected if I've misunderstood.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/...l-information/
And, in case you have a knee jerk reaction, the article is written be Associated Press.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/...l-information/
And, in case you have a knee jerk reaction, the article is written be Associated Press.
Okaaay...
And that's evidence that Google sells your data to 3rd parties? You'll need to point the part out to me that claims that. I seem to have missed it.
Um, Yeah, the Nexus product... how did that work out for Google? No matter large a number you multiply times zero, you get the same answer.
What Google management fails to not realize is that every moment they are busy with money-losing distractions, they are ignoring money-making opportunities. Already their cash cow is pooping out smaller numbers... Reminds me of Nero, a fiddle, and a place called Rome.
By his measure, the Nexus One was pretty successful; It really standardized the 800x480 display, started the trend for OLED displays, set the placement for the nav buttons, and pretty much formed the basis for the design of candybar android phones going forward. Not to mention it formed the basis for the Droid Incredible and HTC Desire, and to a lesser degree, the HTC Evo; 3 of the most popular and well known android phones out there.
The Nexus S was kind of a flop. NFC didn't really take off, and no one really followed with the whole concave design (a shame, because I thought it was pretty neat).
I think its a bit too early to tell how successful the Galaxy Nexus is.
The new iPad is now available anytime you walk into an Apple store. The lack of a waiting list indicates sales are slowing.
What has that got to do with my comment?
Apple needs to come out with something with 7-inch screen soon, otherwise google will rapidly increase its tablet market share.
Google could not do anything except increase their tablet market share.
Apple are acutely aware of this threat from the smaller form factor and I am sure will be rushing a mini ipad to market as soon as they can, and it also seems the new 9.8" ipad with at least a storage bump is coming quicker than their usual march schedule.
if google are quick/smart enough (and care enough) to brand their own sub 9.8 tablet with good screen tech and an sd card slot (to attack apple at their weaker point - their control of storage for profit)…
Interesting, a partially cloud-based (for-pay) tablet?
(and to me it's a certainty they will)
Just like it was a certainty to many that the iPhone nano would come out. Because if there's one thing we all know, it's that the iPhone screen isn't small enough.
Apple are acutely aware of this threat from the smaller form factor…
And as the threat is insignificant, they've chosen to ignore it.
The new iPad is now available anytime you walk into an Apple store. The lack of a waiting list indicates sales are slowing.
What has that got to do with my comment?