The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
Everybody needs "a computer" and most people choose Windows. Only a select few choose Macs.
Everybody needs "a cell phone" and most people choose Android. Only a select few choose the iPhone.
But as of right now.... no one needs a tablet. It's still a luxury item with a lot of overlap of their other devices.
Even so... those who buy a tablet are choosing the iPad because of the App Store, accessories, etc. It doesn't really matter what the other companies are doing in the tablet space.
I predict that the tablet market will evolve like the MP3 player market... and not the cell phone market.
There were plenty of MP3 players that were cheaper and "better" than the iPod... but no one could top the iPod.
I don't think citing "look what happened to Android phones" is any guarantee that the same will happen in the tablet market.
The major advantage Apple have over all their competitors is economy of scale...
When introducing the iPad they had the confidence and cash to order big on components which means they got massive discounts on production costs which equates to being able to offer a lower retail price without hurting profit margin. When rumours of the iPad first circulated the price was consistently touted as $999. The announcement of $499 blew competitors who had been planning to undercut by selling at $800 or $900 out of the water.
The GalaxyTab and Xoom etc all seem to have been production runs in the (hundreds of?) thousands rather than the millions of iPads that Apple went for, so consequently they can't get the scale deals from component suppliers and so their tablets cost more to build even while using lower quality components.
If you then add in trying to match or beat Apple for price I'm struggling to see where any of these competitors ever hoped to make money on these things...
And as Acer came to realise recently - market share means nothing if you are losing money on everything you sell.
People said that about Android when they saw the original G1 phone.
Oh yes, Android caught up and surpassed Apple's share.
Given the state of Android and what Google has to stoop to in order to compete with Apple's 14-month old phone (and in many cases their 2 year old phone), Google can certainly keep the crown.
Google gets the "banana boat" share. Apple gets the glory, by all the measures that actually matter in the market.
It's amazing that there's obviously such an enormous demand for 'tablets' yet only one company seems to be able to make money off them. It's even more amazing when you consider how much money Apple is making and that they cannot make the product fast enough. You'd think that at least one really serious second banana would emerge from all this, but no.
Of course, that was very much the experience with the iPod, too.
It's been said before many times. Like the iPod, it's an iPad market, not a tablet market.
A price war for the bottom of the tablet barrel may end up being very, very ugly.
Look at what happened with the Personal Music Player (PMP) business. Some tried to compete with features (Zune HD) and others on price and in the end, it really didn't matter. Zune is dead. While you can buy a 4GB iRiver MP3 player for $25 (versus the 2GB iPod shuffle at $49), guess what? Apple still has something like 90% of the PMP market, including 99% of the market that the iPod touch covers.
Heck, cost competition isn't even driving sales of competitors' content. The iTunes Store is the dominant digital music store; Amazon has never gotten much traction and Wal-mart is shutting down their digital music storefront (Yahoo and Microsoft are a distant memory now).
The market would benefit from some credible competition to Apple's iPad and yet, it appears no one can get it done and worse, they are falling farther and farther behind.
The key point is that Apple's customers don't care about such matters. It's not like they're reading SEC filings from Apple and their competitors and deciding which device to buy. They just buy what seems to be the best for their needs and if they don't like it, they have 30 days to return it.
People don't buy what you sell, they buy what you believe. And Apple believes in building the best that can be built for the best value.
And since Android is still a money losing proposition and he iPhone is number one, I am not seeing your point.
His point is that "even as" people predicted that Android phones would not "gain traction" (see Josh - I can write like DED too!) due to the G1 being seen as inferior to the iPhone, Android phone sales have pulled way ahead of iOS phone sales. Therefore, he claims, it is entirely possible that Android tablet sales volume will too pull ahead of iOS tablets.
He said nothing about profitability of the OS. His point concerned the sales volume of hardware.
The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
Not only does it appear there will not be carrier subsidized BOGOs to artificially infant tablet marketshares, some carriers are turning there back completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycomiko
Ah, more people hivhlighing apple makes more money on be product you brought than other companies made on competing products, as if a high margin is the reason to purchase stuff.
When you are investing in a product with. Certain amount of lock-in, the sustainability of the product line should be a key consideration. I suppose you coul argue th lack of Aps to buy for Android reduce lock in and therefore it doesn't matter.
I also matters because developers are not going to invest resources in dieing platforms. Profibility actually make a hug difference to consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleLover2
His point is that "even as" people predicted that Android phones would not "gain traction" (see Josh - I can write like DED too!) due to the G1 being seen as inferior to the iPhone, Android phone sales have pulled way ahead of iOS phone sales. Therefore, he claims, it is entirely possible that Android tablet sales volume will too pull ahead of iOS tablets.
He said nothing about profitability of the OS. His point concerned the sales volume of hardware.
I am not convinced Android has traction. The market share has not done much to attract developers and anything but very basic Apps are only supported on a handful of handsets. Profibilty is also important to traction. How sustainable is 2 of the top 5 Android handset makers losing money?
How can you talk about traction and ignore profitability. Do you believe people are so attached to th Android platform they will accept increasing prices?
People don't buy what you sell, they buy what you believe. And Apple believes in building the best that can be built for the best value.
Everyone says that: Acer, Motorola, HP, Logitech, RIM, etc.
They will address different markets at different price points with differing levels of customer satisfaction, design, etc. but in the end, they all say that they are building the best things with the best value.
In the end, the public will vote with their dollars. Some companies deliver, others won't, but they all have the same belief that what they are producing is a good value proposition to the consumer whether it's McDonald's or some fine-dining white tablecloth restaurant. If you don't understand that, you don't understand fundamental business in a free market economy.
The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
But even for the phones the current outlook is a losing proposition. How long can you sell a free OS while fighting lawsuits for all the code you stole and buying companies for their IP? Android is dead, it may just take 2-4 years for it to stop kicking...
They could save a lot of money with a) plastic housings and b) ceasing the development and delivery of software updates (obsolete before the warranty runs out).
I don?t know if they can save enough, but some
But since the major selling feature of Android tablets appears to be "It looks enough like an iPad to confuse people", that might be counterproductive.
This is not just 1 random case. There are many many cases like this since Nov. 2010.
I'm closing my iTune acct now... until Apple admits about the security problem and puts in some fix.
Actually, it does appear to be an isolated case. And it appears that the person's password was stolen. But even if there are a large number of cases, which would you rather have:
a. We've detected what appears to be fraudulent activity in your account and have therefore temporarily disabled the account so that you aren't robbed
or
b. We open our store to anyone who wants to deliver product and are happy to include 50,000 viruses in the list of apps that are available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shen
But even for the phones the current outlook is a losing proposition. How long can you sell a free OS while fighting lawsuits for all the code you stole and buying companies for their IP? Android is dead, it may just take 2-4 years for it to stop kicking...
You left out: "spend $12.5 B for intellectual property that you're incapable of developing yourself".
I wonder if Google realizes that they Apple developed the iPhone for something like 1/100 of what Google just spent for IP.
Watch them all brag about how many tablets they sold in the 2011 after slashing the price within pennies of the actual cost.
That's exactly why they are doing this, but more specifically, they are slashing prices now to clear the inventory in Q3, so they can dance the whole dance again. They will sell thousands of tablets to the retail channel again in Q4 to refill. After Christmas, they will be able to report the high sales they had for the Christmas season, neglecting to elaborate that the sales were to the stores, not to consumers.
If they don't get rid of inventory now, they'll have minimal sales next quarter.
The problem with the Tablet market is that there really isn't one. Apple just announced and released the iPad all of a sudden in the span of months and after the mentality of people thinking that it's just a big iPod touch, people started going crazy for them. It's not because they need a tablet, but it's instant on, full screen internet device that's a better alternative for a laptop for some people and has the ability to run useful apps and work related websites for companies. The Tablet market happened because companies figured that Apple couldn't just own the market to themselves and RIM's investors were clamoring for them to come out with a Blackberry alternative which hasn't worked out so well. At the end of the day a tablet can do everything the iPad can and probably more but it's gonna always come down to the App ecosystem which Apple completely dominates.
The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
Actually the early Android phones weren't bad and a damn sight better than most feature phones. The primary problem is not with Android as with the retail model. Android phones were fed primarily and marketed by the cell carriers - a logical and proven choice. Those same carriers are not stepping up to deploy tablet devices as willingly because they don't get as much return from them vis a vis data plans and certainly not voice plans.
So that leaves the big box and business retailers. At this point you now have the Android tabbies all sitting side by side competing with each other, and the Apple iPad off on its own in its own display (depending on the retailer of course). But Apple has a dedicated retail stream of its own devising, globally. So you don't have anywhere near the leverage to sell thru that you had with the Android phones. People don't view tabbies in the same light as smartphones - so to expect that the same process that advanced the Android smartphone unit share to dominance is not the same process that drives the tabbies.
The rest of the problem is that "Android" is not marketed to the masses. "Android" is not a consumer-friendly moniker and if you ask the average consumer what Android is, the best you can expect outside of our little coterie here of tech geeks, is "it's an operating system for phones isn't it?"
The average consumer doesn't immediately associate Android with ease of use - they think of the goofy robotic commercials targeted for that small subset of tech geeks who love turning into a robot. Or they associate it with a funny looking trash-can zippy cartoon of a robot. Google and the hardware companies have been hugely challenged in marketing the Android tablet and they simply don't have the same level of perceived value with the average consumer as the iPad does. Unless they redress their marketing issues with the tablets they are not going to be able to catch-up and the individual platforms will be shipping in the hundreds of thousands, with perhaps millions being sold eventually. Contrasted to the tens of millions of iPads being sold by Apple to the majority of consumers. The only limit or challenge Apple has right now with the iPad is simply making enough.
Now this is not to say that the Android tabbies suck - they don't. I've played with several and they are nice, if just a tad glitchy. But as you say *eventually* Android will clean-up and look and perform nicely and consistently on all hardware. The key here is to get Google and the hardware guys to stop focussing on features and start focussing on ease of use and the consumer experience - beyond saying it's just like an iPad.
Comments
The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
Everybody needs "a computer" and most people choose Windows. Only a select few choose Macs.
Everybody needs "a cell phone" and most people choose Android. Only a select few choose the iPhone.
But as of right now.... no one needs a tablet. It's still a luxury item with a lot of overlap of their other devices.
Even so... those who buy a tablet are choosing the iPad because of the App Store, accessories, etc. It doesn't really matter what the other companies are doing in the tablet space.
I predict that the tablet market will evolve like the MP3 player market... and not the cell phone market.
There were plenty of MP3 players that were cheaper and "better" than the iPod... but no one could top the iPod.
I don't think citing "look what happened to Android phones" is any guarantee that the same will happen in the tablet market.
When introducing the iPad they had the confidence and cash to order big on components which means they got massive discounts on production costs which equates to being able to offer a lower retail price without hurting profit margin. When rumours of the iPad first circulated the price was consistently touted as $999. The announcement of $499 blew competitors who had been planning to undercut by selling at $800 or $900 out of the water.
The GalaxyTab and Xoom etc all seem to have been production runs in the (hundreds of?) thousands rather than the millions of iPads that Apple went for, so consequently they can't get the scale deals from component suppliers and so their tablets cost more to build even while using lower quality components.
If you then add in trying to match or beat Apple for price I'm struggling to see where any of these competitors ever hoped to make money on these things...
And as Acer came to realise recently - market share means nothing if you are losing money on everything you sell.
Best Buy - ad (6 months from now)
Tablet Mania!!! 72 Hours Only!!! 3 Amazing Tablet Deals This Weekend Only!!!
......
Offer ends soon. Contact your local store for details.
That was so good I nearly reported it as spam!
People said that about Android when they saw the original G1 phone.
Oh yes, Android caught up and surpassed Apple's share.
Given the state of Android and what Google has to stoop to in order to compete with Apple's 14-month old phone (and in many cases their 2 year old phone), Google can certainly keep the crown.
Google gets the "banana boat" share. Apple gets the glory, by all the measures that actually matter in the market.
People said that about Android when they saw the original G1 phone.
And they were correct in terms of profitability.
It's amazing that there's obviously such an enormous demand for 'tablets' yet only one company seems to be able to make money off them. It's even more amazing when you consider how much money Apple is making and that they cannot make the product fast enough. You'd think that at least one really serious second banana would emerge from all this, but no.
Of course, that was very much the experience with the iPod, too.
It's been said before many times. Like the iPod, it's an iPad market, not a tablet market.
A price war for the bottom of the tablet barrel may end up being very, very ugly.
Look at what happened with the Personal Music Player (PMP) business. Some tried to compete with features (Zune HD) and others on price and in the end, it really didn't matter. Zune is dead. While you can buy a 4GB iRiver MP3 player for $25 (versus the 2GB iPod shuffle at $49), guess what? Apple still has something like 90% of the PMP market, including 99% of the market that the iPod touch covers.
Heck, cost competition isn't even driving sales of competitors' content. The iTunes Store is the dominant digital music store; Amazon has never gotten much traction and Wal-mart is shutting down their digital music storefront (Yahoo and Microsoft are a distant memory now).
The market would benefit from some credible competition to Apple's iPad and yet, it appears no one can get it done and worse, they are falling farther and farther behind.
The key point is that Apple's customers don't care about such matters. It's not like they're reading SEC filings from Apple and their competitors and deciding which device to buy. They just buy what seems to be the best for their needs and if they don't like it, they have 30 days to return it.
People don't buy what you sell, they buy what you believe. And Apple believes in building the best that can be built for the best value.
And since Android is still a money losing proposition and he iPhone is number one, I am not seeing your point.
His point is that "even as" people predicted that Android phones would not "gain traction" (see Josh - I can write like DED too!) due to the G1 being seen as inferior to the iPhone, Android phone sales have pulled way ahead of iOS phone sales. Therefore, he claims, it is entirely possible that Android tablet sales volume will too pull ahead of iOS tablets.
He said nothing about profitability of the OS. His point concerned the sales volume of hardware.
I don't think citing "look what happened to Android phones" is any guarantee that the same will happen in the tablet market.
There are no guarantees in life. But strong indications exist everywhere.
The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
Not only does it appear there will not be carrier subsidized BOGOs to artificially infant tablet marketshares, some carriers are turning there back completely.
Ah, more people hivhlighing apple makes more money on be product you brought than other companies made on competing products, as if a high margin is the reason to purchase stuff.
When you are investing in a product with. Certain amount of lock-in, the sustainability of the product line should be a key consideration. I suppose you coul argue th lack of Aps to buy for Android reduce lock in and therefore it doesn't matter.
I also matters because developers are not going to invest resources in dieing platforms. Profibility actually make a hug difference to consumers.
His point is that "even as" people predicted that Android phones would not "gain traction" (see Josh - I can write like DED too!) due to the G1 being seen as inferior to the iPhone, Android phone sales have pulled way ahead of iOS phone sales. Therefore, he claims, it is entirely possible that Android tablet sales volume will too pull ahead of iOS tablets.
He said nothing about profitability of the OS. His point concerned the sales volume of hardware.
I am not convinced Android has traction. The market share has not done much to attract developers and anything but very basic Apps are only supported on a handful of handsets. Profibilty is also important to traction. How sustainable is 2 of the top 5 Android handset makers losing money?
How can you talk about traction and ignore profitability. Do you believe people are so attached to th Android platform they will accept increasing prices?
Watch them all brag about how many tablets they sold in the 2011 after slashing the price within pennies of the actual cost.
"Hey guysh, we shold fifteen of them thish time!"
People don't buy what you sell, they buy what you believe. And Apple believes in building the best that can be built for the best value.
Everyone says that: Acer, Motorola, HP, Logitech, RIM, etc.
They will address different markets at different price points with differing levels of customer satisfaction, design, etc. but in the end, they all say that they are building the best things with the best value.
In the end, the public will vote with their dollars. Some companies deliver, others won't, but they all have the same belief that what they are producing is a good value proposition to the consumer whether it's McDonald's or some fine-dining white tablecloth restaurant. If you don't understand that, you don't understand fundamental business in a free market economy.
People said that about Android when they saw the original G1 phone.
Then you will understand why things are different.
The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
But even for the phones the current outlook is a losing proposition. How long can you sell a free OS while fighting lawsuits for all the code you stole and buying companies for their IP? Android is dead, it may just take 2-4 years for it to stop kicking...
They could save a lot of money with a) plastic housings and b) ceasing the development and delivery of software updates (obsolete before the warranty runs out).
I don?t know if they can save enough, but some
But since the major selling feature of Android tablets appears to be "It looks enough like an iPad to confuse people", that might be counterproductive.
Better support from Apple? Read this one:
http://www.dzone.com/links/r/welcome...een_disab.html
This is not just 1 random case. There are many many cases like this since Nov. 2010.
I'm closing my iTune acct now... until Apple admits about the security problem and puts in some fix.
Actually, it does appear to be an isolated case. And it appears that the person's password was stolen. But even if there are a large number of cases, which would you rather have:
a. We've detected what appears to be fraudulent activity in your account and have therefore temporarily disabled the account so that you aren't robbed
or
b. We open our store to anyone who wants to deliver product and are happy to include 50,000 viruses in the list of apps that are available.
But even for the phones the current outlook is a losing proposition. How long can you sell a free OS while fighting lawsuits for all the code you stole and buying companies for their IP? Android is dead, it may just take 2-4 years for it to stop kicking...
You left out: "spend $12.5 B for intellectual property that you're incapable of developing yourself".
I wonder if Google realizes that they Apple developed the iPhone for something like 1/100 of what Google just spent for IP.
Watch them all brag about how many tablets they sold in the 2011 after slashing the price within pennies of the actual cost.
That's exactly why they are doing this, but more specifically, they are slashing prices now to clear the inventory in Q3, so they can dance the whole dance again. They will sell thousands of tablets to the retail channel again in Q4 to refill. After Christmas, they will be able to report the high sales they had for the Christmas season, neglecting to elaborate that the sales were to the stores, not to consumers.
If they don't get rid of inventory now, they'll have minimal sales next quarter.
The early Android tablets weren't any good and neither were the early Android phones, but it didn't take long for Android phones to improve and to start properly competing with the iPhone and it probably won't take long for the major flaws with Android tablets to be fixed either. Don't just look at the current state of non-iPad tablets.
Actually the early Android phones weren't bad and a damn sight better than most feature phones. The primary problem is not with Android as with the retail model. Android phones were fed primarily and marketed by the cell carriers - a logical and proven choice. Those same carriers are not stepping up to deploy tablet devices as willingly because they don't get as much return from them vis a vis data plans and certainly not voice plans.
So that leaves the big box and business retailers. At this point you now have the Android tabbies all sitting side by side competing with each other, and the Apple iPad off on its own in its own display (depending on the retailer of course). But Apple has a dedicated retail stream of its own devising, globally. So you don't have anywhere near the leverage to sell thru that you had with the Android phones. People don't view tabbies in the same light as smartphones - so to expect that the same process that advanced the Android smartphone unit share to dominance is not the same process that drives the tabbies.
The rest of the problem is that "Android" is not marketed to the masses. "Android" is not a consumer-friendly moniker and if you ask the average consumer what Android is, the best you can expect outside of our little coterie here of tech geeks, is "it's an operating system for phones isn't it?"
The average consumer doesn't immediately associate Android with ease of use - they think of the goofy robotic commercials targeted for that small subset of tech geeks who love turning into a robot. Or they associate it with a funny looking trash-can zippy cartoon of a robot. Google and the hardware companies have been hugely challenged in marketing the Android tablet and they simply don't have the same level of perceived value with the average consumer as the iPad does. Unless they redress their marketing issues with the tablets they are not going to be able to catch-up and the individual platforms will be shipping in the hundreds of thousands, with perhaps millions being sold eventually. Contrasted to the tens of millions of iPads being sold by Apple to the majority of consumers. The only limit or challenge Apple has right now with the iPad is simply making enough.
Now this is not to say that the Android tabbies suck - they don't. I've played with several and they are nice, if just a tad glitchy. But as you say *eventually* Android will clean-up and look and perform nicely and consistently on all hardware. The key here is to get Google and the hardware guys to stop focussing on features and start focussing on ease of use and the consumer experience - beyond saying it's just like an iPad.