I don't understand. How much iPad use involves having a group of people simultaneously touching the screen?
iPad? There might be a game or two.
I was stating that in reference to using them on 50" LCDs as a work table. They work but have limitations you have to aware of as a designer or user. Just like capacitance and gloves. Like I said, for an ebook reader it should be just fine for page flips and such.
"Amazon appears to be focusing on a product with superior content delivery"
I agree, I prefer Amazon's selection, but I wouldn't want to view any of it on that tiny screen. Guess I can't have the best of both worlds
Sounds like your a videophile but any videophile would also have a blu-ray player which nowadays comes with Amazon streaming ( and Netflix too). Therefor your Amazin Prime membership would allow streaming on your 52" LEDTV in addition to your Kindle Fire. Problem solved.
Except that J and R is a brick and mortar store Sherlock.
They have 2. Both in NYC. J&R probably does 90% of their business over the internet.
Barnes & Noble have 717 stores and 637 college bookstores across all 50 states and DC.
Quote:
Barnes & Noble internet still sells at a higher price too.
Lets take a look shall we? New releases as of 9/30 from the J&R site and the B&N site:
The Whole Love: J&R - $13.99, B&N - $15.83
Cole World: J&R - $10.99, B&N - $9.35
25 Years Sting: J&R - $118.99, B&N - $134.99/$109.15 (Marketplace)
The Journey: J&R - $13.49, B&N N/A
The Less You Know, the Better: J&R $13.99, B&N - $12.62
Music Is Better Than Words: J&R 13.99, B&N $12.03
And the appropriate one on which to stop:
Everything is Boring & Everyone is a F--king Liar: J&R - $11.99, B&N - $12.34/$8.82 (Marketplace)
Looks like B&N is cheaper as often than not Sherlock. Where they aren't you can likely find it from one of their affiliates for cheaper than J&R. Taking into account the affiliate prices J&R is cheaper ONCE off that list and has one more title than B&N. The rest of the time it's cheaper to use B&N's storefront.
They have 2. Both in NYC. J&R probably does 90% of their business over the internet.
Barnes & Noble have 717 stores and 637 college bookstores across all 50 states a
Everything is Boring & Everyone is a F--king Liar: J&R - $11.99, B&N - $12.34/$8.82 (Marketplace)
Looks like B&N is cheaper as often than not Sherlock. Where they aren't you can likely find it from one of their affiliates for cheaper than J&R. Taking into account the affiliate prices J&R is cheaper ONCE off that list and has one more title than B&N. The rest of the time it's cheaper to use B&N's storefront.
Score: J&R 2, B&N 5
OK you did not just give me 7 hand selected titles and expect that to be statistically accurate?
Therefore here is one for u released just yesterday:
Well it may be wrong to your ears but it's is both true and accurate. Simply Google "Barnes and Noble overpriced" and tell me what you come up with.
Sorry - you may know Apple info as a moderator at AI but your retail knowledge is inaccurate.
Also I only made one statement. Perhaps I should have said "one of the most" overpriced retailers. But whatever- Amazon undercuts them as does Jand R for physical music and video items.
I've been buying at B&N for more decades than you've likely been alive. I also buy from many other places. I have a member card, and that adds another 15% discount. Even Amazon isn't cheaper on many purchases. Most B&N stores don't even carry music and video. I don't buy from their website except for Nook books for my iPad.
...only after they either plug it into a "truck" or drive 20 miles to an Apple store.
Upgrading implies that the device is already running, so upgraders still had to tether it to a "truck" at some point, and will have to tether it to a "truck" again to get the upgrade.
A server's a server, and the update you're downloading is the same update whether the device is able to handle it directly or is required to go through intermediary software on a "truck" like iTunes.
Are you suggesting that iOS 5 is unsafe?
I wouldn't think so.
It's a good thing that Apple is finally catching up to Android on this critically useful feature. But make no mistake about it: it's merely catching up. Apple does innovate in a great many areas, but they are not first in every one of them.
I don't understand any of your post. It's all kind of inane. You can't run any computer in a useful way these days without tethering in some way to a server on the internet. So your mentioning that is less than useful.
And you know that iOS is safer than Android by a mile. You also are being very simple in your reading of my post. I assume that's deliberate.
I think nht is correct about the Kindle Fire - it does have a capacitive screen. The infrared tech you mentioned is used in the lower-priced Kindle Touch (an interesting way to solve that problem; thanks for bringing it to my attention).
Like I said, I hadn't read everything. In a couple of articles, the writers seemed confused as to whether the Fire had a cap screen or whether they used the Kindle Touch method. That's why I questioned it.
Sounds like your a videophile but any videophile would also have a blu-ray player which nowadays comes with Amazon streaming ( and Netflix too). Therefor your Amazin Prime membership would allow streaming on your 52" LEDTV in addition to your Kindle Fire. Problem solved.
Sadly AppleTV won't allow Amazon streaming.
So I assume you carry your 50" screen and generator every time you might want to watch a video sitting somewhere out of your home?
Or even on a room of your place where the 50" isn't available? Or do you refuse to watch video unless it's on your 50" screen?
The whole point to the Fire is content consumption, and that includes music videos, Tv shows and movies. No one is just going to buy this for music and books. They can do that on a regular B/W Kindle.
If the article here at AI from a few days ago is generally accurate, and the new Kindle Fire is basicly RIM's Playbook with a slower processor, less memory and no camera, the estimated parts bill (who's estimate again?) of $180 may not be accurate.
Back in April, iFixit and TechInsights had teardowns, parts ID's and estimated costs for a few devices, including the Playbook. At that time the total parts cost for the 16GB version was $190. Unless parts prices have gone up quite a bit since April, if Amazon's 8GB, no camera, no multi-touch display and older processor Playbook-ish version should be quite a bit less than that, correct? No camera saves $15, about $8 savings on 8GB rather than 16, plus savings on both the touchscreen and processor (Playbook's item cost was $45 and $17). Would $12 total probably be a fair savings on those two components? If so that's at least $33 less, dropping the parts costs to somewhere around $155 rather than $180, and that's ignoring the minor savings from eliminating bluetooth/radio/gps components.
So assuming AI and it's sources were right, a big assumption perhaps, the cost numbers that some of these analysts are using may be much higher than the reality.
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
The idea that requiring a user to first buy a computer and then install iTunes on it before being able to turn the iPad from a brick into a tablet is insane.
You know something that's even more insane?
The idea that a user has to first buy a computer in order to turn an iPod shuffle into an mp3 player.
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
The idea that requiring a user to first buy a computer and then install iTunes on it before being able to turn the iPad from a brick into a tablet is insane.
If the distinction between a server that my service provider buys and maintains and a local computer that I need to buy and maintain isn't clear, you may want to review Steve Jobs' WWDC presentation where he explained how useful it will be to finally be able to activate an iPad without having to buy a computer first.
Well, if you ignore what I've said, which is that you didn't always need to do that, then fine, try to make the distinction.
But it's all rather moot, as you know, because it's no longer the case as of the 14th. That will be the last time anyone needs to use a computer, even if you have an older model. So there's really no point in talking about this anymore.
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
Even if that unlikely number were correct, it isn't the full cost, as we constantly have to bring up. That is just the direct parts cost, not including the manufacturing cost which adds at least $10 to that. Then, again as you love to fail to notice, there are all the other costs involved in the R&D, and running the company, which these silly numbers given out don't include. No matter how you look at it, there would be, if you want to use this number, which is far off from other estimates, a total cost to the company of at least $200. To that must be added another number to come up with a profit. So at the very best, they are breaking even, and at the very worst, losing $60 per.
Comments
I don't understand. How much iPad use involves having a group of people simultaneously touching the screen?
iPad? There might be a game or two.
I was stating that in reference to using them on 50" LCDs as a work table. They work but have limitations you have to aware of as a designer or user. Just like capacitance and gloves. Like I said, for an ebook reader it should be just fine for page flips and such.
I agree, I prefer Amazon's selection, but I wouldn't want to view any of it on that tiny screen. Guess I can't have the best of both worlds
dental mexico best dentist in mexico dental school in mexico
"Amazon appears to be focusing on a product with superior content delivery"
I agree, I prefer Amazon's selection, but I wouldn't want to view any of it on that tiny screen. Guess I can't have the best of both worlds
Sounds like your a videophile but any videophile would also have a blu-ray player which nowadays comes with Amazon streaming ( and Netflix too). Therefor your Amazin Prime membership would allow streaming on your 52" LEDTV in addition to your Kindle Fire. Problem solved.
Sadly AppleTV won't allow Amazon streaming.
Well no shit internet vendors beat brick and mortar on price.
Except that J and R is a brick and mortar store Sherlock.
and Barnes & Noble internet still sells at a higher price too.
Except that J and R is a brick and mortar store Sherlock.
They have 2. Both in NYC. J&R probably does 90% of their business over the internet.
Barnes & Noble have 717 stores and 637 college bookstores across all 50 states and DC.
Barnes & Noble internet still sells at a higher price too.
Lets take a look shall we? New releases as of 9/30 from the J&R site and the B&N site:
The Whole Love: J&R - $13.99, B&N - $15.83
Cole World: J&R - $10.99, B&N - $9.35
25 Years Sting: J&R - $118.99, B&N - $134.99/$109.15 (Marketplace)
The Journey: J&R - $13.49, B&N N/A
The Less You Know, the Better: J&R $13.99, B&N - $12.62
Music Is Better Than Words: J&R 13.99, B&N $12.03
And the appropriate one on which to stop:
Everything is Boring & Everyone is a F--king Liar: J&R - $11.99, B&N - $12.34/$8.82 (Marketplace)
Looks like B&N is cheaper as often than not Sherlock. Where they aren't you can likely find it from one of their affiliates for cheaper than J&R. Taking into account the affiliate prices J&R is cheaper ONCE off that list and has one more title than B&N. The rest of the time it's cheaper to use B&N's storefront.
Score: J&R 2, B&N 5
They have 2. Both in NYC. J&R probably does 90% of their business over the internet.
Barnes & Noble have 717 stores and 637 college bookstores across all 50 states a
Everything is Boring & Everyone is a F--king Liar: J&R - $11.99, B&N - $12.34/$8.82 (Marketplace)
Looks like B&N is cheaper as often than not Sherlock. Where they aren't you can likely find it from one of their affiliates for cheaper than J&R. Taking into account the affiliate prices J&R is cheaper ONCE off that list and has one more title than B&N. The rest of the time it's cheaper to use B&N's storefront.
Score: J&R 2, B&N 5
OK you did not just give me 7 hand selected titles and expect that to be statistically accurate?
Therefore here is one for u released just yesterday:
Transformers: Dark of the Moon Blu- Ray:
Best Buy $17.99
JandR. $16.99
B&N. $30.92
You do the math; I'll keep the savings Sherlock.
Well it may be wrong to your ears but it's is both true and accurate. Simply Google "Barnes and Noble overpriced" and tell me what you come up with.
Sorry - you may know Apple info as a moderator at AI but your retail knowledge is inaccurate.
Also I only made one statement. Perhaps I should have said "one of the most" overpriced retailers. But whatever- Amazon undercuts them as does Jand R for physical music and video items.
I've been buying at B&N for more decades than you've likely been alive. I also buy from many other places. I have a member card, and that adds another 15% discount. Even Amazon isn't cheaper on many purchases. Most B&N stores don't even carry music and video. I don't buy from their website except for Nook books for my iPad.
...only after they either plug it into a "truck" or drive 20 miles to an Apple store.
Upgrading implies that the device is already running, so upgraders still had to tether it to a "truck" at some point, and will have to tether it to a "truck" again to get the upgrade.
A server's a server, and the update you're downloading is the same update whether the device is able to handle it directly or is required to go through intermediary software on a "truck" like iTunes.
Are you suggesting that iOS 5 is unsafe?
I wouldn't think so.
It's a good thing that Apple is finally catching up to Android on this critically useful feature. But make no mistake about it: it's merely catching up. Apple does innovate in a great many areas, but they are not first in every one of them.
I don't understand any of your post. It's all kind of inane. You can't run any computer in a useful way these days without tethering in some way to a server on the internet. So your mentioning that is less than useful.
And you know that iOS is safer than Android by a mile. You also are being very simple in your reading of my post. I assume that's deliberate.
I think nht is correct about the Kindle Fire - it does have a capacitive screen. The infrared tech you mentioned is used in the lower-priced Kindle Touch (an interesting way to solve that problem; thanks for bringing it to my attention).
Like I said, I hadn't read everything. In a couple of articles, the writers seemed confused as to whether the Fire had a cap screen or whether they used the Kindle Touch method. That's why I questioned it.
Sounds like your a videophile but any videophile would also have a blu-ray player which nowadays comes with Amazon streaming ( and Netflix too). Therefor your Amazin Prime membership would allow streaming on your 52" LEDTV in addition to your Kindle Fire. Problem solved.
Sadly AppleTV won't allow Amazon streaming.
So I assume you carry your 50" screen and generator every time you might want to watch a video sitting somewhere out of your home?
Or even on a room of your place where the 50" isn't available? Or do you refuse to watch video unless it's on your 50" screen?
The whole point to the Fire is content consumption, and that includes music videos, Tv shows and movies. No one is just going to buy this for music and books. They can do that on a regular B/W Kindle.
OK you did not just give me 7 hand selected titles and expect that to be statistically accurate?
Therefore here is one for u released just yesterday:
Transformers: Dark of the Moon Blu- Ray:
Best Buy $17.99
JandR. $16.99
B&N. $30.92
You do the math; I'll keep the savings Sherlock.
So, he gives seven, and you give one. So far, he wins.
Oh, and I just checked. $16.99 is the DVD. $19.99 is for the BluRay.
If the article here at AI from a few days ago is generally accurate, and the new Kindle Fire is basicly RIM's Playbook with a slower processor, less memory and no camera, the estimated parts bill (who's estimate again?) of $180 may not be accurate.
Back in April, iFixit and TechInsights had teardowns, parts ID's and estimated costs for a few devices, including the Playbook. At that time the total parts cost for the 16GB version was $190. Unless parts prices have gone up quite a bit since April, if Amazon's 8GB, no camera, no multi-touch display and older processor Playbook-ish version should be quite a bit less than that, correct? No camera saves $15, about $8 savings on 8GB rather than 16, plus savings on both the touchscreen and processor (Playbook's item cost was $45 and $17). Would $12 total probably be a fair savings on those two components? If so that's at least $33 less, dropping the parts costs to somewhere around $155 rather than $180, and that's ignoring the minor savings from eliminating bluetooth/radio/gps components.
So assuming AI and it's sources were right, a big assumption perhaps, the cost numbers that some of these analysts are using may be much higher than the reality.
http://www.ubmtechinsights.com/uploa...ison_chart.JPG
http://www.redblackberry.com/blackbe...and-chipworks/
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...mated--150-BoM
The idea that requiring a user to first buy a computer and then install iTunes on it before being able to turn the iPad from a brick into a tablet is insane.
You know something that's even more insane?
The idea that a user has to first buy a computer in order to turn an iPod shuffle into an mp3 player.
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...mated--150-BoM
... and iSuppli puts the figure at $209.63.
Who are you going to believe.
As I said before..."What's the use?!".
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...mated--150-BoM
How do you justify that a $150 BOM means a $199 product is turning a profit?
You know something that's even more insane?
The idea that a user has to first buy a computer in order to turn an iPod shuffle into an mp3 player.
OK.. i'll bite. How do you put music into an mp3 flash based device with no network connection without having to use a computer?
Give it a fresh read.
The idea that requiring a user to first buy a computer and then install iTunes on it before being able to turn the iPad from a brick into a tablet is insane.
If the distinction between a server that my service provider buys and maintains and a local computer that I need to buy and maintain isn't clear, you may want to review Steve Jobs' WWDC presentation where he explained how useful it will be to finally be able to activate an iPad without having to buy a computer first.
Well, if you ignore what I've said, which is that you didn't always need to do that, then fine, try to make the distinction.
But it's all rather moot, as you know, because it's no longer the case as of the 14th. That will be the last time anyone needs to use a computer, even if you have an older model. So there's really no point in talking about this anymore.
Interestingly, UBMTechInsights is making the same observations that I did to claim that the Fire is costing Amazon around $150, yielding a profit with each sale rather than a loss.
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...mated--150-BoM
Even if that unlikely number were correct, it isn't the full cost, as we constantly have to bring up. That is just the direct parts cost, not including the manufacturing cost which adds at least $10 to that. Then, again as you love to fail to notice, there are all the other costs involved in the R&D, and running the company, which these silly numbers given out don't include. No matter how you look at it, there would be, if you want to use this number, which is far off from other estimates, a total cost to the company of at least $200. To that must be added another number to come up with a profit. So at the very best, they are breaking even, and at the very worst, losing $60 per.