Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Consumer Electronics > Mobile Devices & Gadgets

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-06-2012, 01:25 PM   #51
OBLAMA2009
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravynmagi View Post
The iPad's market share has plummeted in the last year I believe. Think it was around 75-80% just a year ago. It dropped to 65% earlier this year and now I'm hearing just about 50%.

Yet Apple is still selling more iPads than ever. These cheap tablets don't seem to be affecting iPad's sale negatively at all, but instead just creating a new market for people that would never spend $500 on a tablet in the first place.
i wouldnt be surprised if apple mini severely eats into ipad sales though
OBLAMA2009 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 01:55 PM   #52
DLeRium
Lifer
 
DLeRium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: San Francisco Bay Area, CA
Posts: 19,829
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by poofyhairguy View Post
I see that as a good thing- whoever makes the Nexus line profits and whoever makes skinned crap fails. Time to line up and place your bid to make Nexus devices.

So if in the future the only Android tablets that are really successful are the Nexus line, then there goes away the problem with Android updates and version fragmentation.

The HTCs and Motos of the world screwed themselves when they invested all this money to create value with their skins no one wants. At least Samsung can fight back on the Nexuses some because some people like TouchWiz more than stock Android, and people like me will pay crazy premiums for features like expandable storage.
I honestly think that HTC and Moto deserve a place in this world. They provide hardware and software choices. I like HTC particularly. Moto just fails all around. But wasn't that the point of Android? It's a base OS for the OEMs to do whatever they want to it.

I'm fine with Nexus phones too, but why do they have to come in and severely undercut the ENTIRE MARKET. It's not just Apple. It's the OEMs also. I think many of us would be fine with a Nexus phone priced at $599 just like a $599 SGS3. The Nexus eats into OEM sales. It's not just Apple. So while ASUS gets paid off for the Nexus 7, SOMEONE absorbs the loss. Furthermore, it probably eats into ASUS' own sales.

Look at the Nexus 10. That will undoubtedly eat into the Galaxy Tab 10.1 So The Nexus 10 makes a profit and Google probably pays Samsung for it too, it cuts into the GTab 10.1. The question is whether Samsung nets anything out of this or would be better off selling Gtabs and Gnote 10.1s. I'm not sure.

Does LG have an incentive to sell the Nexus 4? If it's Google subsidizing, then I think that's wrong. Traditionally, hardware is meant to profit, and now we're throwing a curve ball at them. I mean what's acceptable? Do you want Apple's iPad division to run in the red and have the iOS App Store pay for it? Or maybe cut the iPad prices even more and pay it back with iPhone sales? What's acceptable?
DLeRium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 02:27 PM   #53
Chiropteran
Diamond Member
 
Chiropteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington VA
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLeRium View Post
I'm fine with Nexus phones too, but why do they have to come in and severely undercut the ENTIRE MARKET. It's not just Apple. It's the OEMs also. I think many of us would be fine with a Nexus phone priced at $599 just like a $599 SGS3. The Nexus eats into OEM sales. It's not just Apple. So while ASUS gets paid off for the Nexus 7, SOMEONE absorbs the loss. Furthermore, it probably eats into ASUS' own sales.
You are presenting a false premise. The Nexus phones do not undercut the entire market. There are whole lines of entry level android phones available, sans contract, for $150 or less.

If anything, I think the Nexus phones are successful because they fill an important niche, the middle ground. It's easy to find a cheapo entry level phone for $149. It's also easy to find a flagship full featured phone for $600+. The price range of $250-$400 doesn't really have much competition though, and that is exactly where the Nexus phones fit.

You give up a few high end features- no LTE, no sd card slot, but the phone is a lot cheaper than a flagship model, while offering superior hardware compared to a cheap entry level $149 phone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLeRium View Post
Traditionally, hardware is meant to profit,
Again, a false premise. Once the technology becomes commoditized, profit becomes very slim.
__________________
http://writeangry.blogspot.com/

Last edited by Chiropteran; 11-06-2012 at 02:29 PM.
Chiropteran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:11 PM   #54
Munky
Diamond Member
 
Munky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,377
Default

LOL at the premise of the article. No, the only people, other than the price-gouging manufacturers, hurt by the lower prices are those who overpay for the overpriced gadget and then feel stupid when someone else pays half as much for the same capabilities. Competition and lower prices are a good thing.
__________________
Core i7 @ 3.2-3.8 / AMD 6950 / 12GB DDR3 1600 / Asus Xonar D2 / Samsung 275t / Logitech z5500
Munky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:19 PM   #55
cliftonite
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 6,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLeRium View Post
I honestly think that HTC and Moto deserve a place in this world. They provide hardware and software choices. I like HTC particularly. Moto just fails all around. But wasn't that the point of Android? It's a base OS for the OEMs to do whatever they want to it.

I'm fine with Nexus phones too, but why do they have to come in and severely undercut the ENTIRE MARKET. It's not just Apple. It's the OEMs also. I think many of us would be fine with a Nexus phone priced at $599 just like a $599 SGS3. The Nexus eats into OEM sales. It's not just Apple. So while ASUS gets paid off for the Nexus 7, SOMEONE absorbs the loss. Furthermore, it probably eats into ASUS' own sales.

Look at the Nexus 10. That will undoubtedly eat into the Galaxy Tab 10.1 So The Nexus 10 makes a profit and Google probably pays Samsung for it too, it cuts into the GTab 10.1. The question is whether Samsung nets anything out of this or would be better off selling Gtabs and Gnote 10.1s. I'm not sure.

Does LG have an incentive to sell the Nexus 4? If it's Google subsidizing, then I think that's wrong. Traditionally, hardware is meant to profit, and now we're throwing a curve ball at them. I mean what's acceptable? Do you want Apple's iPad division to run in the red and have the iOS App Store pay for it? Or maybe cut the iPad prices even more and pay it back with iPhone sales? What's acceptable?
"Deserve" a place?? It is a business, either they survive or they don't.
cliftonite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:31 PM   #56
golem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
LOL at the premise of the article. No, the only people, other than the price-gouging manufacturers, hurt by the lower prices are those who overpay for the overpriced gadget and then feel stupid when someone else pays half as much for the same capabilities. Competition and lower prices are a good thing.
But if this continues, how much competition will there be? Acers a brand that pretty much competes mostly on price and they couldn't come up with anything that is as good as Nexus 7 for the price.

Going forward I see this.

Low end no name tablets.
Ainol and the like

Mid priced
Nook
Fire
Nexus

Higher priced
Surface (not a given it will survive)
Ipad
Nexus

Unless your the one chosen to make the next Nexus tablet (android side), why even bother?

Last edited by golem; 11-06-2012 at 03:34 PM.
golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:32 PM   #57
Axon
Platinum Member
 
Axon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,495
Default

Ironic that we "care" about this in the mobile device area, but ruthlessly poop on GPU manufacturers for a $10 difference.

I have no problem with Google or Amazon's pricing scheme. They wanted to undercut apple and get a piece of a valuable market share. They did that. As was said above, the Nexus devices get the "bang for your buck" crown. The price to performance ratio is unparallelled in the market. Good on them, and good for consumers.

I have an ipad 3 that I purchased for the screen alone. Apple subsequently puts out the ipad 4. I got burned in a way, but mostly a hypothetical way. No one weeps for me. Why should I cry for Apple?

Plus, in the end, none of this stuff is true. Apple sold a ton of ipad minis. You make a good product and it sells. The ipad sells. The Nexus 7 sells. Both are good products. The Nexus has already cycled its hardware with no eventful occurences. Nothing to see here.
__________________
Heat

i7 2600k @ 4.6/Gigabyte P67A-UD4/8 Gig G.Skill Ripjaws 1600/ASUS GTX 670 DCII TOP/OCZ Vertex 3 250 GB/WD Black 640 Gig HDD

No one wants to trade new stuff for old crap

Last edited by Axon; 11-06-2012 at 03:35 PM.
Axon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:38 PM   #58
Chiropteran
Diamond Member
 
Chiropteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington VA
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by golem View Post
But if this continues, how much competition will there be?
Like every commoditized market, in the end there will only be 2-3 serious competitors, possible 4 if we are lucky.

AMD (barely) vs Intel. Sony PS3 vs Microsoft XBox. AMD vs Nvidia. Coke vs Pepsi. Chipotle vs Qdoba. Verizon FIOS vs Comcast Cable. Anandtech vs Tom's Hardware.
__________________
http://writeangry.blogspot.com/
Chiropteran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:43 PM   #59
golem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Axon View Post
Ironic that we "care" about this in the mobile device area, but ruthlessly poop on GPU manufacturers for a $10 difference.

I have no problem with Google or Amazon's pricing scheme. They wanted to undercut apple and get a piece of a valuable market share. They did that. As was said above, the Nexus devices get the "bang for your buck" crown. The price to performance ratio is unparallelled in the market. Good on them, and good for consumers.

I have an ipad 3 that I purchased for the screen alone. Apple subsequently puts out the ipad 4. I got burned in a way, but mostly a hypothetical way. No one weeps for me. Why should I cry for Apple?

Plus, in the end, none of this stuff is true. Apple sold a ton of ipad minis. You make a good product and it sells. The ipad sells. The Nexus 7 sells. Both are good products. The Nexus has already cycled its hardware with no eventful occurences. Nothing to see here.
That's the thing. Everyone seems to think this article relates mostly to Apple. The Fire and Nexus do affect Apple, but I don't think they affect Apple as much as other Android manufacturers. Apple sells pretty much all the Ipads they can make, their losing market share, but that was a given.

How about every other manufacturer of Android 7 inch tablets besides Asus, or every other manufacturer of Android 10 inch tablets besides Samsung? Asus is doing well with the Nexus 7 now, how about when Google rotates to someone else? Do they just sit out that generation?
golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:44 PM   #60
golem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 816
Default

Double post
golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 03:45 PM   #61
golem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiropteran View Post
Like every commoditized market, in the end there will only be 2-3 serious competitors, possible 4 if we are lucky.

AMD (barely) vs Intel. Sony PS3 vs Microsoft XBox. AMD vs Nvidia. Coke vs Pepsi. Chipotle vs Qdoba. Verizon FIOS vs Comcast Cable. Anandtech vs Tom's Hardware.
True, when you think about it. Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft (maybe) are all strong competitors, maybe that will be enough.
golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 04:23 PM   #62
poofyhairguy
Diamond Member
 
poofyhairguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLeRium View Post
I honestly think that HTC and Moto deserve a place in this world.
They do if they earn it. Samsung has earned their place- the Nexuses don't threaten their lineup. If Moto and HTC have built brand loyalty then they will survive.

If not then oh well. Its not worth keeping them around just to have more choices if the choices are bad.

Quote:
But wasn't that the point of Android?
The point of Android is to lock Google into the next Windows.

Quote:
I'm fine with Nexus phones too, but why do they have to come in and severely undercut the ENTIRE MARKET.
I don't think you can say Google undercut the entire market. It is more like Google put a new tier in the smartphone market- middle-upper range. Not quite as good as the best, but better what was a mid-class phone a year ago. Especially in America where the outright cost simply doesn't matter and is a niche option.

In the tablet market Google is fixing a broken Android tablet market before Amazon steals it all. From the Xoom the Android tablet market has been broken when it comes to pricing and positioning. Google just fixed that.


Quote:
I think many of us would be fine with a Nexus phone priced at $599 just like a $599 SGS3.
I think the pricing should be set by market demands. I personally would pay hundreds more for a SGS3 over a new Nexus because I hate LG build quality and I like expandable storage. My mom might pay extra for the SGS3 because the commercials made her like the brand.

The Nexus as a brand really doesn't have an identity with consumers, and therefore is priced as a commodity as it should be.

Quote:
So while ASUS gets paid off for the Nexus 7, SOMEONE absorbs the loss. Furthermore, it probably eats into ASUS' own sales.
The Nexus 7 sales are Asus sales. You just assume its sold at a loss. Maybe so many people buy 16gb models that the overall line turns a profit. If it is thin margins then fine, we are basically back where computers are.

Quote:
I'm not sure.
Samsung is or they wouldn't bid for the Nexus. If anything I bet Samsung isn't looking at lost sales to the Nexus compared to sales the Nexus will bring from customers of other value tablets. No Samsung tablet so far has been priced aggressively.

Quote:
Does LG have an incentive to sell the Nexus 4?
Sure they do:

1. They get better experience with Google's code and early shots at updates, which as we have seen with Samsung can help with your non-Nexus lines.

2. It gives LG some legitimacy in the community. Until the Nexus we NEVER talked about LG phones. It doesn't exist to me because of (expected from LG) build quality issues, but the fact they are finally being talked about in the Android space is huge.

3. The Nexus lines run for about a year. That price-point will eventually be profitable within the life of the phone if it isn't now.

Quote:
Traditionally, hardware is meant to profit, and now we're throwing a curve ball at them.
Not really. Look at the computer OEM market.

Quote:
What's acceptable?
When I pay as little as possible for quality products. In some ways the new Nexuses are the first acceptable Android devices to a whole new audience.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaap View Post
I want [my phone's] limits to only be what's not technically possible, not what some company/guru has decided I shouldn't be able to do.
poofyhairguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 04:39 PM   #63
Munky
Diamond Member
 
Munky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,377
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by golem View Post
But if this continues, how much competition will there be? Acers a brand that pretty much competes mostly on price and they couldn't come up with anything that is as good as Nexus 7 for the price.

Going forward I see this.

Low end no name tablets.
Ainol and the like

Mid priced
Nook
Fire
Nexus

Higher priced
Surface (not a given it will survive)
Ipad
Nexus

Unless your the one chosen to make the next Nexus tablet (android side), why even bother?
Competition is an incentive for the manufacturers to innovate and give the consumer what they want. Some manufacturers are less competitive than others, some go out of business, but that happens in many industries. I would still rather have more competition than less.

Acer can create compelling products if they make the effort. I remember a year ago they had an AMD Brazos Windows 7 tablet that could spank anything from Apple or Android in terms of capabilities, and if I was in the market for a Windows tablet at the time I would have probably bought one. Now that Windows 8 is making a strong entry into the tablet market, that's just one more market where a manufacturer can compete and innovate if they weren't as successful with Android.
__________________
Core i7 @ 3.2-3.8 / AMD 6950 / 12GB DDR3 1600 / Asus Xonar D2 / Samsung 275t / Logitech z5500
Munky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 05:58 PM   #64
BladeVenom
Lifer
 
BladeVenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 13,542
Default

Kindle HD costs $174 to make, they sell for $199.
iPad Mini costs $198 to make, they sell for $329.
http://news.techworld.com/mobile-wir...siness-models/
The Kindle is not sold at a loss, Jeff Bezos has said they are sold at a break even price. So Apple probably has about a 50% markup on the iPad mini.
BladeVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 06:23 PM   #65
badb0y
Diamond Member
 
badb0y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BladeVenom View Post
Kindle HD costs $174 to make, they sell for $199.
iPad Mini costs $198 to make, they sell for $329.
http://news.techworld.com/mobile-wir...siness-models/
The Kindle is not sold at a loss, Jeff Bezos has said they are sold at a break even price. So Apple probably has about a 50% markup on the iPad mini.
Seems about right, Amazon is not looking to profit off hardware as they are trying to get people invested in their ecosystem.
__________________
i7 2600k @ 4.4 ghz with NH-D14 - GTX 780 SLI (Stock) - 12GB DDR3 1600 G.Skill Ripjaws RAM - SilverStone SG10 - NZXT Hale90 750W PSU -ASUS Maximus V Gene - Crucial MX100 512GB
Heatware: badboydiablo 23-0-0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil deGrasse Tyson
God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance.
badb0y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 06:36 PM   #66
golem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
Competition is an incentive for the manufacturers to innovate and give the consumer what they want. Some manufacturers are less competitive than others, some go out of business, but that happens in many industries. I would still rather have more competition than less.

Acer can create compelling products if they make the effort. I remember a year ago they had an AMD Brazos Windows 7 tablet that could spank anything from Apple or Android in terms of capabilities, and if I was in the market for a Windows tablet at the time I would have probably bought one. Now that Windows 8 is making a strong entry into the tablet market, that's just one more market where a manufacturer can compete and innovate if they weren't as successful with Android.
But how do you compete with Google and Microsoft in the Android and Windows 8 tablet arena? Any hardware innovation that you come up with, unless it's a unique innovation that only you can create will be copied from you in the next generation. You have to keep on coming up with new hardware innovations each product launch or patent the hell out of everything.

But on the other hand, both Google and Microsoft have a huge advantage, first to market with a new version of the O/S. They will have this each and every new generation of the O/S.

So OEMs have no cost/price advantage (how do you compete with a company price wise when you have the same cost, but they don't look to make a profit?), a fleeting or non existent hardware advantage, and a constant O/S disadvantage?
golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 08:51 PM   #67
ChAoTiCpInOy
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,379
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BladeVenom View Post
Kindle HD costs $174 to make, they sell for $199.
iPad Mini costs $198 to make, they sell for $329.
http://news.techworld.com/mobile-wir...siness-models/
The Kindle is not sold at a loss, Jeff Bezos has said they are sold at a break even price. So Apple probably has about a 50% markup on the iPad mini.
Apple's gross profit margin for the last quarter was around 40%. The last quarterly conference call for Apple had CFO Peter Oppenheimer say that the iPad mini margin was significantly below the average for the company. I would interpret that as 20-30% for the iPad mini.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/25/3...porate-average
ChAoTiCpInOy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 09:37 PM   #68
Munky
Diamond Member
 
Munky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,377
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by golem View Post
But how do you compete with Google and Microsoft in the Android and Windows 8 tablet arena? Any hardware innovation that you come up with, unless it's a unique innovation that only you can create will be copied from you in the next generation. You have to keep on coming up with new hardware innovations each product launch or patent the hell out of everything.
So what if it's copied? You still get to enjoy the benefits of innovation before the competitors catch up.

Quote:
But on the other hand, both Google and Microsoft have a huge advantage, first to market with a new version of the O/S. They will have this each and every new generation of the O/S.
Google and MS are software companies. I don't need Acer, LG or Samsung to create their own OS which only leads to further software fragmentation. As long as they make competitive hardware to use the available OS, they can sell their products.

Quote:
So OEMs have no cost/price advantage (how do you compete with a company price wise when you have the same cost, but they don't look to make a profit?), a fleeting or non existent hardware advantage, and a constant O/S disadvantage?
What OS disadvantage? Unless MS and Google somehow cripple the OS they provide to the OEMs then I don't see how they would be disadvantaged.
__________________
Core i7 @ 3.2-3.8 / AMD 6950 / 12GB DDR3 1600 / Asus Xonar D2 / Samsung 275t / Logitech z5500
Munky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 09:54 PM   #69
golem
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
So what if it's copied? You still get to enjoy the benefits of innovation before the competitors catch up.


Google and MS are software companies. I don't need Acer, LG or Samsung to create their own OS which only leads to further software fragmentation. As long as they make competitive hardware to use the available OS, they can sell their products.


What OS disadvantage? Unless MS and Google somehow cripple the OS they provide to the OEMs then I don't see how they would be disadvantaged.
It's much more expensive and risky to be the innovator. It's much cheaper to copy a popular innovation.

Google and MS can use any manufacturer to make their hardware, what I'm saying it's a even playing field whether you're a hardware manufacturing or a software company outsourcing to a hardware company.

Jellybean 4.1 came out 5 months ago on the Galaxy Nexus and Nexus 7. Jelly bean on competitor phones and tablets have just started coming out and 4.2 is about to roll out. You don't consider that a advantage?

Last edited by golem; 11-06-2012 at 09:56 PM.
golem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2012, 10:38 PM   #70
Chiropteran
Diamond Member
 
Chiropteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Arlington VA
Posts: 7,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by golem View Post
Jellybean 4.1 came out 5 months ago on the Galaxy Nexus and Nexus 7. Jelly bean on competitor phones and tablets have just started coming out and 4.2 is about to roll out. You don't consider that a advantage?
That is by choice. The manufacturers choose to modify android with various skins, which adds to the time required before putting out the OS update. Also many manufacturers simply skip updates.

It's both an advantage and a disadvantage. In the manufacturer's mind, the skins they add somehow add value. I'm not sure I agree, but that is what they think. As far as skipping updates, it saves them money they would otherwise spend in testing and writing drivers.

A manufacturer *could* release vanilla android versions and as long as they had drivers and such ready I don't see why the delay would be nearly as big as it has been in the past. Thus far, no manufacturer has wanted to do this.
__________________
http://writeangry.blogspot.com/
Chiropteran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 10:04 PM   #71
lothar
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 6,496
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by golem View Post
It's much more expensive and risky to be the innovator. It's much cheaper to copy a popular innovation.

Google and MS can use any manufacturer to make their hardware, what I'm saying it's a even playing field whether you're a hardware manufacturing or a software company outsourcing to a hardware company.

Jellybean 4.1 came out 5 months ago on the Galaxy Nexus and Nexus 7. Jelly bean on competitor phones and tablets have just started coming out and 4.2 is about to roll out. You don't consider that a advantage?
Not at all.
Asus tablets has had Jelly Bean since August(only a month after the Nexus did which came out in July).

If other manufacturers choose to heavily skin Android such that it delays their own updates, that's only a problem for the manufacturer and the people that bought such manufacturer's products.
lothar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 05:57 PM   #72
gotsmack
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Bloomington, MN - For now
Posts: 5,664
Default

eh, I don't care. We'll have like 2 or 3 players in the high end android tablet space, Amazon Google and B&N in the 200-300$ space and a rotating list of players in the ultra low end.

For phones we'll see more variety because of the subsidies from the carriers but the prepaid non low-end android phones will be mostly Nexus.

I don't see how OEMs having slow updates is a problem. They made their bed now its time to lie in it. F them for putting on their stupid skins and they deserve to lose business.

there is no near tern or mid term concern of OEMs going outbid business. The US is not the only market and Nokia hasn't made any money off phones in a while and they're still kicking around. I think Sony has been losing money for a while now too and they are still around.
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by: meltdown75
don't take any lip from her. good job on pretending to sleep, i hadn't thought of that yet.
what's in the briefcase? Stupid pills?
-mizzou
gotsmack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 07:14 PM   #73
Puddle Jumper
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DLeRium View Post
I honestly think that HTC and Moto deserve a place in this world. They provide hardware and software choices. I like HTC particularly. Moto just fails all around. But wasn't that the point of Android? It's a base OS for the OEMs to do whatever they want to it.

I'm fine with Nexus phones too, but why do they have to come in and severely undercut the ENTIRE MARKET. It's not just Apple. It's the OEMs also. I think many of us would be fine with a Nexus phone priced at $599 just like a $599 SGS3. The Nexus eats into OEM sales. It's not just Apple. So while ASUS gets paid off for the Nexus 7, SOMEONE absorbs the loss. Furthermore, it probably eats into ASUS' own sales.

Look at the Nexus 10. That will undoubtedly eat into the Galaxy Tab 10.1 So The Nexus 10 makes a profit and Google probably pays Samsung for it too, it cuts into the GTab 10.1. The question is whether Samsung nets anything out of this or would be better off selling Gtabs and Gnote 10.1s. I'm not sure.

Does LG have an incentive to sell the Nexus 4? If it's Google subsidizing, then I think that's wrong. Traditionally, hardware is meant to profit, and now we're throwing a curve ball at them. I mean what's acceptable? Do you want Apple's iPad division to run in the red and have the iOS App Store pay for it? Or maybe cut the iPad prices even more and pay it back with iPhone sales? What's acceptable?
You are crazy if you think anyone would be willing to pay $599 for a Nexus when*a $299 Nexus is an alternative. I know I wouldn't.
__________________

Puddle Jumper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 07:45 PM   #74
sjwaste
Diamond Member
 
sjwaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 8,769
Default

The editorial's conclusion is complete bullshit. Setting prices the way Google and Amazon have doesn't "set expectations" for the consumer. It prices their products in the fat part of the demand curve. These devices are toys, and given the choice between $600 to have one or $0 to not, which is what you had with the iPad only, many chose the $0 option. All that Google and Amazon have done is identified the price at which the majority of the market starts to shop, and are selling accordingly.

It's basic fucking economics. The appalling part is that the author doesn't understand that.
sjwaste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 07:59 PM   #75
magomago
Lifer
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,690
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiropteran View Post
That is by choice. The manufacturers choose to modify android with various skins, which adds to the time required before putting out the OS update. Also many manufacturers simply skip updates.

It's both an advantage and a disadvantage. In the manufacturer's mind, the skins they add somehow add value. I'm not sure I agree, but that is what they think. As far as skipping updates, it saves them money they would otherwise spend in testing and writing drivers.

A manufacturer *could* release vanilla android versions and as long as they had drivers and such ready I don't see why the delay would be nearly as big as it has been in the past. Thus far, no manufacturer has wanted to do this.
LOL YEAH. Agreed. I have no clue why they think fancy skins that annoy people, aren't fully functional, and restrict updates severely are preferred. I'd argue that its a reason to AVOID a manufacturer...and that is exactly of the main, and the initial, appeals of the Nexus Phones
__________________
Heat 19-0-0
magomago is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.