If I were to guess I would say this will fail and that people will much prefer to buy a Kindle Fire, Nexus or Samsung tablet, even if costs a little more.
"We can sell a boat load of these at $99...Been there, done that." said Alberto Torres, senior vice president, Mobility Global Business Unit, HP.
HP almost had to release a tablet. There is plenty of evidence that tablets will play an increasing role in computing - particularly corporate computing.
Don't count HP out. They have a very strong position in the Enterprise - and have preferred supplier agreements with many customers. And the price is quite attractive. I could picture them having some success with this if the product is any good (it is hard to tell simply from looking at the specs). Time will tell.
All of that was true when they released the webOS-powered TouchPad. At least back then they owned their own OS, and could have done some really neat things with vertical integration. Now, they're playing the commodity Android tablet hardware game along with all the other not-Apples out there.
A mini-pad is just HP's first step on a very difficult path. Here's it is step by step:
1. Release Android-based mini-pad at a low price ($169). 2. Attempt to differentiate it from all other generic Android mini-pads. 3. Spend millions on advertising. 4. Cross fingers and hope it sells.
And then we come to a fork in the road.
5a. If sales are good, HP can consider creating a larger model to go head-to-head with the 9.7" iPad, or 5b. If sales are poor, they'll be forced to lower the Slate 7's price to $99 to clear out unsold inventory. As they did with Touch Pad.
HP will cross that bridge when they get to it. They're still barely at step 1 above. But in a perfect world in some science fiction-like alternate-timeline universe, this is what HP would have been able to do. Two years ago, starting the day they bought Palm, they could have:
1. Built a robust HP-branded WebOS app / content / services infrastructure. 2. Refined webOS for future HP phones and HP pad computers. 3. Repeated #1 and #2 until the infrastructure and webOS were at least beta quality. 4. Started work on an iPhone-like handset (but not a direct iPhone copy.) 5. Released the handset when it was ready and could leverage the infrastructure. 6. Continued work on webOS for pad computers. 7. Released the HP pad computer when it was ready and could leverage the infrastructure. 8. Spent millions on advertising. 9. Crossed fingers and hoped their hardware apps content services sold well.
And, of course, if HP had started all that in April 2010, when they acquired Palm, they'd realistically still be at step #4 right now. Steps #1 and #2 are the hardest, take the longest, and must be complete before you can release any hardware that will sell. Yes, I know Apple had no app ecosystem when the first iPhone was launched, but they have one now, and that's what HP is now facing. And yes, I know that the Android ecosystem is improving every day, but in 2010 it was quite a mess (and arguably still is, in many ways.)
The infrastructure is the most expensive, complex, and time-consuming thing a tech player like HP needs to create in the post-PC world. And HP is now relying 100% on another company's infrastructure (Google's.) Therefore HP doesn't control their own destiny in the post-PC era. They're just another me-too Android cloner. Trying to compete on price instead of quality. Mid-pack in the race to the bottom.
Come to think of it, HP never controlled their destiny in the legacy PC era either, beholden to Microsoft for all those years. So maybe HP thinks that just being a hardware OEM is enough. They might think that just a small trickle of cash from Slate 7 sales will be enough to carry them through the post-PC era, however long that will be. Knowing full well that Google has dropped $12.5 billion on Motorola and will be fighting tooth and nail to increase their slices of both the smartphone handset and pad computer pies. (Albeit extremely narrow slices: see "other.") Good luck with that, HP.
(Oh, and HP tried a similar HP-hardware + partner-ecosystem trick a few years ago. Remember when Carly Fiorina did a deal with Apple to sell HP-branded iPods? And how well did that go?)
Is it? I think it isn't. HP has 0 buying power, so they get 0 advantages over Apple and other OEMs, in fact they get penalized.
What do they offer, here? Vanilla android (good on the surface, but 0 $ invest on apps or ecosystem and HP needs a differentiator to be seen as a viable android alternative = fail), low medium meh build quality (less than nexus 7), 2 cortex a9 with 0 engineering by HP to make them better (against the quad on the nexus 7) and since they are on the same foot (bad phone applications, low quality fragmented ecosystem), Screen Vs screen matters, and HP takes a beating.
What am I missing? 30 dollars makes up for it?
I guess it doesn't.
How do they have 0 buying power? Last I checked they still sell a decent amount of PCs/laptops, somebody's buying and somebody's manufacturing them.
"We can sell a boat load of these at $99...Been there, done that." <span style="color:rgb(24,24,24);font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;line-height:18px;">said Alberto Torres, senior vice president, Mobility Global Business Unit, HP</span>
.
Ah, the ol HP TouchPad with WebOS. What a mess. I think the reason for that was because they committed to enough components that it was less costly to build and sell at $99 than to 1) back of the component deals, and/or 2) continue to store used components, possibly not in their facility.
It really did remind me of the iPad; chrome logo in center, text bottom center, camera same location, lock button same location, volume...
Reminds me of how similar all the smartphones where before the iPhone.
it's as if they want to be sued by apple so they get fandroid's simpathy while looking as the good guy against big bad apple (and enjoying the free ads).
How do they have 0 buying power? Last I checked they still sell a decent amount of PCs/laptops, somebody's buying and somebody's manufacturing them.
Compared to Apple and Samsung or even Asus/Lg/lenovo?
HP has nothing on phones, android, flash memory, small screens, etc. Their computers are low quality and poor build imitations of superior models, expecially their "envy" line (oh.. the irony) that sells 1 computer each decade.
"We can sell a boat load of these at $99...Been there, done that." said Alberto Torres, senior vice president, Mobility Global Business Unit, HP
I guess he forgot to mention there's a difference between selling in a fire sale and trying to make a sustainable business out of it.
Ha! Reminds me of growing up in Pasadena in the 1950-1960s... There was this Jewelry store, downtown, that had a "going out of business" sale that lasted years...
It became such a joke, that they even started advertising is as "our fourth annual going out of business sale".
What a colossal waste of time and resources! It will be another me too tablet in a sea of me to android tablets that no one will buy. Seriously if anyone wants an android tablet there going to buy a Galaxy or an Asus. LOL.
So Yahoo finance has a story up a out how this is a threat to the iPad. Hmm...why wouldn't this be a threat to Nexus 7 or Kindle Fire? Seems to me bottom feeders will compete most with other bottom feeders. Also I think this hurts Microsoft and Windows 8 as much as Apple. How does Microsoft get any tablet traction when their PC OEM partners are releasing cheap Android tablets? These cheap tablets are just confirming that tablets are more for consumption than creation. I don't see how that is good for Surface RT or Pro.
Compared to Apple and Samsung or even Asus/Lg/lenovo?
HP has nothing on phones, android, flash memory, small screens, etc. Their computers are low quality and poor build imitations of superior models, expecially their "envy" line (oh.. the irony) that sells 1 computer each decade.
And neither did Apple. So we all know that it can be done.
"Slate" is the word that Ballmer used to use. It's a cold, flat, slab of a word, grey and hard. Why don't they know this? I wish them well, but using this tainted word is a bad start.
Compare to "pad," which is warm, soft and (sorry) fuzzy.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If I were to guess I would say this will fail and that people will much prefer to buy a Kindle Fire, Nexus or Samsung tablet, even if costs a little more.
"We can sell a boat load of these at $99...Been there, done that." said Alberto Torres, senior vice president, Mobility Global Business Unit, HP.
All of that was true when they released the webOS-powered TouchPad. At least back then they owned their own OS, and could have done some really neat things with vertical integration. Now, they're playing the commodity Android tablet hardware game along with all the other not-Apples out there.
1. Release Android-based mini-pad at a low price ($169).
2. Attempt to differentiate it from all other generic Android mini-pads.
3. Spend millions on advertising.
4. Cross fingers and hope it sells.
And then we come to a fork in the road.
5a. If sales are good, HP can consider creating a larger model to go head-to-head with the 9.7" iPad, or
5b. If sales are poor, they'll be forced to lower the Slate 7's price to $99 to clear out unsold inventory. As they did with Touch Pad.
HP will cross that bridge when they get to it. They're still barely at step 1 above. But in a perfect world in some science fiction-like alternate-timeline universe, this is what HP would have been able to do. Two years ago, starting the day they bought Palm, they could have:
1. Built a robust HP-branded WebOS app / content / services infrastructure.
2. Refined webOS for future HP phones and HP pad computers.
3. Repeated #1 and #2 until the infrastructure and webOS were at least beta quality.
4. Started work on an iPhone-like handset (but not a direct iPhone copy.)
5. Released the handset when it was ready and could leverage the infrastructure.
6. Continued work on webOS for pad computers.
7. Released the HP pad computer when it was ready and could leverage the infrastructure.
8. Spent millions on advertising.
9. Crossed fingers and hoped their hardware apps content services sold well.
And, of course, if HP had started all that in April 2010, when they acquired Palm, they'd realistically still be at step #4 right now. Steps #1 and #2 are the hardest, take the longest, and must be complete before you can release any hardware that will sell. Yes, I know Apple had no app ecosystem when the first iPhone was launched, but they have one now, and that's what HP is now facing. And yes, I know that the Android ecosystem is improving every day, but in 2010 it was quite a mess (and arguably still is, in many ways.)
The infrastructure is the most expensive, complex, and time-consuming thing a tech player like HP needs to create in the post-PC world. And HP is now relying 100% on another company's infrastructure (Google's.) Therefore HP doesn't control their own destiny in the post-PC era. They're just another me-too Android cloner. Trying to compete on price instead of quality. Mid-pack in the race to the bottom.
Come to think of it, HP never controlled their destiny in the legacy PC era either, beholden to Microsoft for all those years. So maybe HP thinks that just being a hardware OEM is enough. They might think that just a small trickle of cash from Slate 7 sales will be enough to carry them through the post-PC era, however long that will be. Knowing full well that Google has dropped $12.5 billion on Motorola and will be fighting tooth and nail to increase their slices of both the smartphone handset and pad computer pies. (Albeit extremely narrow slices: see "other.") Good luck with that, HP.
(Oh, and HP tried a similar HP-hardware + partner-ecosystem trick a few years ago. Remember when Carly Fiorina did a deal with Apple to sell HP-branded iPods? And how well did that go?)
How do they have 0 buying power? Last I checked they still sell a decent amount of PCs/laptops, somebody's buying and somebody's manufacturing them.
I guess he forgot to mention there's a difference between selling in a fire sale and trying to make a sustainable business out of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
"We can sell a boat load of these at $99...Been there, done that." said Alberto Torres, senior vice president, Mobility Global Business Unit, HP
I guess he forgot to mention there's a difference between selling in a fire sale and trying to make a sustainable business out of it.
He didn't really say that. I just made that up but I forgot the "/s" at the end.
D'oh! on me.
Ah, the ol HP TouchPad with WebOS. What a mess. I think the reason for that was because they committed to enough components that it was less costly to build and sell at $99 than to 1) back of the component deals, and/or 2) continue to store used components, possibly not in their facility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bro2ma
It really did remind me of the iPad; chrome logo in center, text bottom center, camera same location, lock button same location, volume...
Reminds me of how similar all the smartphones where before the iPhone.
it's as if they want to be sued by apple so they get fandroid's simpathy while looking as the good guy against big bad apple (and enjoying the free ads).
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
How do they have 0 buying power? Last I checked they still sell a decent amount of PCs/laptops, somebody's buying and somebody's manufacturing them.
Compared to Apple and Samsung or even Asus/Lg/lenovo?
HP has nothing on phones, android, flash memory, small screens, etc. Their computers are low quality and poor build imitations of superior models, expecially their "envy" line (oh.. the irony) that sells 1 computer each decade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
How do they have 0 buying power? Last I checked they still sell a decent amount of PCs/laptops, somebody's buying and somebody's manufacturing them.
Indeed. HP is the world's third largest consumer of semiconductors, after Samsung and Apple.
For 2012:
$23.9 billion Samsung
$21.4 billion Apple
$14.0 billion HP
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
What makes you think such things originate with their marketing department?
Actually I was joking around. HP's ideas originate from the janitor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
Indeed. HP is the world's third largest consumer of semiconductors, after Samsung and Apple.
For 2012:
$23.9 billion Samsung
$21.4 billion Apple
$14.0 billion HP
I might as well talk to a door.
What if i told you Apple could easily buy 3x more semiconductors even when spending only 2x more than HP? Can you figure out why?
Not only that, that does not invalidate what i said on my previous post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
"We can sell a boat load of these at $99...Been there, done that." said Alberto Torres, senior vice president, Mobility Global Business Unit, HP
I guess he forgot to mention there's a difference between selling in a fire sale and trying to make a sustainable business out of it.
Ha! Reminds me of growing up in Pasadena in the 1950-1960s... There was this Jewelry store, downtown, that had a "going out of business" sale that lasted years...
It became such a joke, that they even started advertising is as "our fourth annual going out of business sale".
What a colossal waste of time and resources! It will be another me too tablet in a sea of me to android tablets that no one will buy. Seriously if anyone wants an android tablet there going to buy a Galaxy or an Asus. LOL.
So Yahoo finance has a story up a out how this is a threat to the iPad. Hmm...why wouldn't this be a threat to Nexus 7 or Kindle Fire? Seems to me bottom feeders will compete most with other bottom feeders. Also I think this hurts Microsoft and Windows 8 as much as Apple. How does Microsoft get any tablet traction when their PC OEM partners are releasing cheap Android tablets? These cheap tablets are just confirming that tablets are more for consumption than creation. I don't see how that is good for Surface RT or Pro.
And neither did Apple. So we all know that it can be done.
Compare to "pad," which is warm, soft and (sorry) fuzzy.