iPad 2 Forces Samsung To Reevaluate Galaxy Tab 520
An anonymous reader writes "Apple's iPad competitors are still spec-obsessed, and Apple's next-gen iPad coupled with the same price point is forcing Samsung to rethink its tablet strategy and pricing methodology altogether. The South Korean Yonhap News Agency relays a quote from Lee Don-joo, executive VP of Samsung's mobile division, about Samsung's upcoming Galaxy Tab 10.1 compared to the new iPad. 'We will have to improve the parts that are inadequate,' Don-joo said. 'Apple made it very thin.' Features aside, Samsung also finds itself in a bind price-wise. The upcoming Galaxy Tab model, complete with a 10.1-inch screen and Android 3.0, was initially going to be priced higher than the current 7-inch Galaxy Tab. Apple's iPad 2, however, is forcing Samsung to 'think that over.'"
Excellent! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is awesome news. Competition is good for us!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not if the competition is over how "thin" it is.
Maybe I'm just completely out of touch, but I'd much rather have a full-featured tablet than one that is 2mm thinner but doesn't have the features I want.
"Out of touch"...get it?
Seriously, instead of chasing iPad, is it really impossible for Samsung to maybe ask some prospective customers who haven't already bought iPads what features they want and "compete" based on that? Most people haven't bought iPads yet.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd much rather have a full-featured tablet than one that is 2mm thinner but doesn't have the features I want.
Probably a thicker tablet means a bit more weight, too. After using an iPad on the couch for some weeks, I noticed that it's slightly too heavy to hold it up like a book. Lesser weight means easier holding.
Re:Excellent! (Score:5, Interesting)
You are completely out of touch if you think the difference in depth between the iPad and IPad 2 is as inconsequential as a 2mm change would be. Setting up a strawman (a fictional 2mm change) and attacking that, rather than 4.6mm (35% thinner) and also 127g lighter (16%).
Obviously the size of the device is important, otherwise we'd all be happy walking around with devices the thickness of a novel. You might be both informed and think that the difference in this specific incidence is not important. Frankly I doubt it. I can say that having played with both devices the size and weight difference is noticable, and beneficial.
I won't be buying an iPad because I have numerous issues with Apple's business practice. I do however greatly admire their current hardware. Hopefully other manufacturers won't ignore this in the next batch of android tablets because, frankly, I'm getting tired of waiting.
Re:Excellent! (Score:4, Informative)
I think what they're getting at is we still haven't seen anything particularly special from tablets. iPads are essentially just large iPhones with an almost identical OS and very few tablet specific features.
The difference is that the much larger screen allows for much richer applications. The minimum size of an interactive element is limited by the size of a finger tip. The minimum size of text is limited by what's easily readable. In both cases there's a lot more that can therefore be put on an iPad screen. And I'm not talking about more application icons on the home app. I'm talking about different UI architecture.
Consider the many apps that involve drilling down through data. e.g. In eMail: Mailbox->List of Emails->Contents of email. On the iPhone, that involves a hierarchy of lists/content to navigate, with each list on a separate screen. On the iPad the experience is more like a PC email app. With different panes for list and content.
OK that's a very pedestrian example, but pretty important because people use email so much.
A more sexy example is Garageband for the iPad. A multi-track recording and editing app. Take a look. The richness of it's UI just would not be possible on a screen the size of an iPhone.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, but these 'tablets' don't act or work like a real computer.
Depends what you mean by a real computer. Does it used punch cards for input like the first real computer 65 years ago. No.
Does it have a command line so you can tell it what to do using typed commands like the real computers of 50 years ago. No.
Does it use a desktop metaphor and mice like the real computers of 25 years ago. No.
Does it use direct manipulation of objects on screen like the real computers of yesteryear were not capable. Yes it does.
Is it a machine with a CPU, capable of running arbitrary stor
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe I'm just completely out of touch, but I'd much rather have a full-featured tablet than one that is 2mm thinner but doesn't have the features I want.
If you think that this is a competition about the feature-list, you're really completely out of touch. Apple designs a user experience, not a USB port or a front-facing camera. Note that they only added the latter after they had FaceTime to make it actually useful for the user.
Re:Excellent! (Score:4, Interesting)
I guess I'm waiting for the company that will design a tablet.
Why would you need a tablet? You don't really need a tablet, you want a tool to help you do what you want to be done. User experience is just the fancy word for "the way someone does something".
I like to design my own experiences, thank you very much.
That's because you're technically minded (I can say that just by the fact that you are posting on /.). Technicians like to know how things work and like to tinker with it. Everybody else doesn't give a crap and just wants the work to be done. There's a market for both (think Debian vs. Mac OS X), but the former is tiny compared to the latter.
If I want someone to "design an experience" for me, I'll watch a movie, read a book or have dinner with my wife at a restaurant.
Why would that be any different?
I don't need a "user experience" to carry in my pocket or pack when I'm running around town trying to get something done.
Why not? Bad user experience means that you're standing for 1h in a store in front of a TV looking up the price on the Amazon webpage on a 2" display. Good user experience means that the phone scans in the barcode and tells you the price in a matter of seconds. Which one would you prefer?
I need a tool.
Then you're in luck, because that's what the iPad is. It's a tool where a lot of brainpower was invested in thinking about how it's going to be used (by Apple itself and all the app developers).
You make them sound more like a dungeon master than a tech company.
Well, I'm a desktop software developer, but in secret I'm also a game developer in training, and let me tell you that books about user experience design and game design are eerily similar to each other. The reason probably is that both are trying to generate enjoyable emotions in the user. There are huge overlaps, for example, /. karma points are just like experience points in roleplaying games. Did you know that Flickr was developed by a game company [wikipedia.org]?
Anyone know... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
But mostly they've been trying to keep profit margins healthy.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple's competitors have been up-speccing their machines quite a lot compared to the iPad. The original iPad has a paltry 256MB of memory compared to the GB most of the Android tablets are packing. They also include faster processors, fancier screens, tons of ports, etc...
I've not heard of any with better screens than the iPad. Usually they have smaller screens or widescreens (both of which are worse for a tablet). Maybe that's 'fancy'?
The memory and ports mean very little outside of the geek realm.
But mostly they've been trying to keep profit margins healthy.
At the cost of market share? No. They are so expensive because they can't beat or even match the iPad's price. Do you really think they can build their tablets cheaper than Apple does theirs, but are marking the products significantly more than Apple? Isn't the mantra here that it's Apple who is overpriced? So when Apple's prices are cheaper, instead of rethinking that assumption, you just assume Android tablets are so fantastic that they can mark their prices even higher? Really?
Re: (Score:2)
Proprietary hardware and software doesn't hurt. And then there's the guarantee of loyalty-purchases as opposed to the PC market which is mostly of the "let's see who is genuinely better" type of scrutiny.
Add in the massive premium that comes with minor increases in product (+$100 for +16GB of SSD or +$130 for 3G WITH a contract) and the likelihood that those who already loyally buy apple will likely want a maxed out iPad (admittedly pure speculation on my part) and you'll get some decent money on return.
Wit
Re: (Score:3)
The most popular ones, based on my visits to an Apple reseller here in the UK are the WiFi only ones, not the maxed out ones. You could buy a maxed out one any time, but there was always a wait list for the WiFi only models.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Analysts and industry experts point to a number of reasons. Primarily, they say, Apple’s deep pockets — a staggering $60 billion in cash reserves — have allowed it to form strategic partnerships with other companies to buy large supplies of components, for example, expensive flash memory. By doing this, the company probably secures a lower price from suppliers, ensuring a lower manufacturing cost.
At the same time, they say, Apple has sidestepped high licensing fees for other items it needs, like the A4 and A5 processors within the iPads. Those parts, designed in-house at Apple by a company that Apple bought, are among the costlier components needed to make a tablet computer.
NYTimes [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I found the demo of the webOS tablet very impressive, much more impressive than what other non-Apple companies have shown in their demos(Dell didn't even have a functioning prototype). However how do you know the pricing will be similar? I haven't seen any confirmed pricing or release date.
HP is a long shot because apple has thousands of apps, huge marketing, carriers giving additional marketing, and strong word of mouth. HP has good a good reputation for printers and high end server systems I don't quit
Re: (Score:2)
True, the iPad has a touchscreen and those cost a bit, but the netbook has a lot more parts and the cost of a Windows 7 license.
I'm trying to figure out why we're not being flooded by $200 iPad clones.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember everyone saying iPad was overpriced? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is amazing how the conversation changes. I remember a year ago, there was a lot of people dumping on the iPad as overpriced, that they could get a more powerful netbook for hundreds less.
Now today, it is all about how is Apple making them so inexpensive.
Strange...
Re: (Score:2)
Before the first iPad launched all the analysts expected it to be priced over $1000. Maybe people who post of slashdot thought it was overpriced, but the business sector certainly didn't and competitors still don't know how to compete with similar price and quality.
Re:Remember everyone saying iPad was overpriced? (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you tried any of those? (Score:3)
They look like toys compare to the iPad — very buggy toys. And none of them even compares to the iPad in the one feature at made me buy one: 10h battery life. And that's not even mentioning the touchscreen quality.
Re: (Score:2)
They can price it so low because the are more vertically integrated than their competitors. They have a lot of power over suppliers and manufacturers so they can get the quality they want. They have a very good R&D team. They design their own OS so they have lower licensing costs. They also have their own stores. Samsung pays fees to use Android and their resellers demand a cut of sales. Apple doesn't have to deal with that because what they don't sell in their own stores is a small amount used primaril
Re: (Score:2)
According to isuppli even the cheapest version is making money...not a huge margin but respectable.
http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Mid-RangeiPadtoGenerateMaximumProfitsforApple,iSuppliEstimates.aspx [isuppli.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Among other things, R&D spread out over millions of units is a lot less than R&D spread out over 100k units.
Re:Anyone know...Yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it is very easy actually.
1) They have huge quantities of scale. While other manufacturers are making 100's of models, Apple focuses on a few. Easier to get great prices on millions of the same part, then to get prices on thousands of different parts with retooling in between.
2) That huge cash reserve? They are using it to hedge prices. For example they are pre-purchasing key components so that the manufacturer does not have to add in risk costs for unknown future prices. They are also sharing the cost of new manufacturing facilities as part of a contract to get better prices. Hard to compete when you can't buy components because they have bought up half the supply, leaving everyone else to fight over the other half.
3) The entire company is ran very lean, probably the biggest lean manufacturing company in existence. Since all their effort is very focused, they do not have the overhead that most other companies their size have. Check out their R & D spending versus sales. Incredible.
For those that think they are running razor thin margins to get iPad hardware sales to make it up on the back side, you do not know Apple very well. They make healthy margins on everything they do. They have even hinted that they could drop the prices on iPads if they need to and still make a lot of profit. They are a public company, check it their filings.
Re: (Score:2)
iTunes
No manufacturer that is shipping Android based hardware has the option to subsidize the hardware with a 30% cut of all the media, apps and content that gets loaded on the device.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Informative)
No one who knows anything about electronics manufacturing thinks this. The $499 16GB iPad, by all estimations, costs under $250 to manufacture.
Manufacturers love tablets because they are cheaper to manufacture than netbooks (smartphone-type SOC CPU, smaller battery, etc.) yet they sell for more.
This works because tablets are differentiated products, not commodities. Android is going to change that by doing the same thing it did in the smartphone market. Expect to see 10" Android tablets for $300 or less by the end of the year.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Expect to see 10" Android tablets for $300 or less by the end of the year.
I hate to bring it up, but that's what everyone said *last year* when the iPad 1 launched (at several hundred dollars under the estimates that people were quoting), and that "cheaper, better" Android tablets would waltz in and crush the iPad. Any day now, just you wait... etc etc for 9 months.
As yet, it has still not happened for tablets of the same spec as the iPad - the Xoom is as close as anyone has come and it is still more/about the same give or take.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Interesting)
>"I hate to bring it up, but that's what everyone said *last year* when the iPad 1 launched"
Not that *I* remember, and I follow this stuff pretty closely. People did NOT expect any good iPad competition until AFTER Google optimized Android for tablet use, which is what 3.0 (Honeycomb) is all about.
As an aside, Apple went through the same thing with necessary changes to iOS for tablet use.
Now that 3.0 is released, Android tablets will, indeed, take off. Samsung ridiculously overpriced their pre 3.0 tablets, just because they could get away with it. That will certainly end this year. Even the $600 price tag on the Xoom will probably fall significantly within this launch year. (People have spotted reliable intel that it will even be at Sam' s Club for $539 when first released, placing it below the iPad price). Even so, I am not sure if reasonable (powerful, complete) 10" 3.0 tablets will hit the $300 price point this year, though. $500? Certainly. $450? Probably. Anything else might be pushing it. The point is they will be priced lower than the respective iPad model (they HAVE to if they want to compete).
Competition is a great thing... Samsung is just greedy and will (thankfully) have to stand aside if they can't play the game :)
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
I do remember thinking that Apple simply had a glorified iPod touch. Then I tried one. Is the device "magical?" No. But it is a game changer, in more ways than people realize yet. I believe Apple has very big plans for this device, and the size of the case is just the tip of the iceberg.
Apple isn't hiding what they are doing. They are being very deliberate and open. In the iPad2 product release Jobs stated that they believe tech and art are not mutually exclusive. Their competitors are still all tech oriented. Even Google and Android is tech oriented. Most of the Apple haters here are still tech oriented and think that the art side just needs some flashy doo-dads and window transparency to come out on top. So it's not surprising to see so many people think that Android will blow the iPad out of the water.
Android tablets will come, but until companies realize that the consumer market really wants computing devices which don't feel like computing devices, they will simply be in a race to the bottom and Apple has already made it clear they aren't interesting in winning the race to the bottom. That said, their competitors need to keep in mind that as Apple's economies of scale get larger they will be pushing the bottom farther down.
It will be very interesting to see how the market responds. Windows on any clone isn't the target anymore. Now it's tight integration between excellent industrial design and user interface. I can't think of any company oriented to even start seriously competing and if Apple continues raising the bar every year like this then they will continue to lead the market space until someone can push the bar higher or until Apple brings a piece of crap to market.
Re: (Score:3)
Broken up into what? What do they have a monopoly on....good design? Foresight? Attempting to make things useful for people rather than just geeks?
Re: (Score:3)
3. Flash works fine on:
a. Symbian
b. Android
c. Several other major mobile OSs'
d. iOS is the only mobile OS that doesn't support it
Please define "fine". I have a couple of friends with Galaxy S and Nexus One phones, and it is nowhere near "fine", at least by my definition of fine.
Re: (Score:3)
There are people, like me, for whom not being able to freely copy whatever I want from/to device from my PCs/Notebooks is simply not acceptable. Doesn't iPad have this "feature"?
That depends what exactly you mean. If you mean the iPad doesn't mount as a disk drive when you connect it to a PC, that's true. You have to transfer things through iTunes. In the future I expect "Airdrop" will be another way of transferring stuff to from the iPad.
But no, they don't and won't ever simply expose the iPad file system to users. To non-geeks file systems are a maze of twisty passages, all alike. They are places where they lose track of their documents, where there are lots of things that they d
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Interesting)
Just to preface my comments, I may be an Apple fanboy, but I love Android too, despite what it may sound like here. At the very least, I want to see Android thrive so that Apple is constantly spurred on to innovate. Even better, I want to see it surpass iOS in all regards, because as much as I love Apple, I love good products better. Also, I, personally, don't get this whole tablet thing yet. I think they're great for some people, but I have no plans to buy one for myself anytime soon, since I'd much rather just use my laptop.
Moving on, you follow stuff closely. That's why you, quite reasonably, didn't expect Android to take off in the tablet market last year. Most people don't follow it as closely as you do. That's why there were quite a few people saying that it would happen.
As for pricing, if the competition is going to try and price their products at 80-90% that of the iPad 2, as you suggest, they're in a bad place. At those numbers, the price difference between the "normal" device and the "premium" device is small enough that plenty of people will make the jump. Low-end PCs are significantly cheaper than Macs, so they can make it up in volume by filling in at a price point that is far lower than Apple wants to go, but when going head to head against Apple in the premium market, none of them can hold their own (the last numbers I saw were that Apple had ~90% market share in computers over $1000). The same has been true in the MP3 player market as well, of course.
What really has allowed Android to be the exception is that Android has had a large retail and advertising presence thanks to the backing of the carriers that are using it to fend off market share advances by the iPhone's carriers (normal people don't actually know or care what Android is, so it certainly isn't because of consumer education and awareness, or even branding of Android as a platform). Those Android smart phones were being pushed heavily in their stores, oftentimes as a free upgrade, hence why it was able to pick up so much steam as a platform.
In general, however, iOS adoption is still much higher than Android adoption (see GigaOm [gigaom.com] from last October, and note also that Apple announced 100M iPhones and 15M iPads sold to date as of this last week), since Apple has their own line of retail and online stores that have been successfully pushing out iOS devices for years. They are leveraging those stores for the iPad 2, but Honeycomb tablet manufacturers have nothing like that going for them. Carriers aren't advertising on TV or making big displays of Honeycomb devices at their retail stores, Apple gets better product placement and treatment in stores like Best Buy or Walmart, and the manufacturers don't have their own retail chains like Apple does.
Not only that, but with the iPad and iPad 2 Apple is starting aggressively in terms of pricing, and no one has managed to make a device in its class that comes in at the sorts of discounts we see in the consumer PC space that allow them to sell in volume. Basically, they're trying to compete in the premium category without premium retail space, or, in many cases, even devices that could be reasonably considered to be premium in terms of build quality and features. And since they lack an ally that will use them as leverage against Apple, I don't see that situation changing anytime soon.
Yet 3.0 Android is very unstable (Score:3, Interesting)
Ars Technica reviewed the Xoom and it came out sounding like another typical shipped to early product laden with buggy software. From crashing apps to an expensive tablet with many advertised features not working, one of which requires the owner to ship it back to Motorola to enable!
The market is not being helped by products like the Xoom nor Honeycomb being in the state it is. Instead of stealing the iPad2's thunder they emphasize how much more refined it is and come off instead looking like cheap knockoff
Re: (Score:3)
I know you are attempting humour. But there is a large market base who will not buy apple products out of sheer irrationality.
My brother would be one of these. He would happly pay more for a non-Apple device.
The irrational hatred for Apple devices is incredible to watch.
Re: (Score:3)
From a iOS standpoint- some people simply don't want to be forced to use iTunes. Which, by the way, also doesn't run on Linux, BSD, or Solaris. Others don't like the iApp situation.
Re: (Score:3)
So it is "comparable" between a $45,000 Infiniti and a $13,000 Kia because those are the two cheapest in each of their respective company's respective lineups? (Yes that is extreme, but it makes the point)
The *comparable* Xoom (32GB WiFi, $600) to an iPad is the 32GB WiFi $600 iPad not the 16GB iPad.
Now, if you want cheap *entry price* into a tablet, then look at the $250 Nook Color (which can run Android 3.0, but is missing a lot of features, and is smaller). Rest assured, there will be a LOT more Androi
Re: (Score:2)
That's not what I or anyone who knew what they were talking about said. Until very recently Google was actively discouraging manufacturers from making Android tablets, so the only devices were those from second-tier manufacturers without support from Google. They're chea
Re: (Score:3)
The most in-depth review of the Xoom was by Ars-Technica, and they use words like: rushed to market, lack of completeness, beta release.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2011/03/ars-reviews-the-motorola-xoom.ars/10 [arstechnica.com]
Is your personal opinion based on actually using both the Xoom and the iPad 2, or are you just comparing spec lists?
Re: (Score:3)
And they were pretty much spot on [time.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Most Archos tables use resistive touch screens. That is oldschool technology without multitouch, and you have a really press your fingers on it to get registered. It is not in the same league as the iPad, and I think it is way overpriced.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they don;t have to be as feature-full as the iPad to sell well. If sub-$100 tablets have a market, then more power to them.
My point was that people on slashdot have been saying since before the iPad came out that there would be cheaper, better specced Android tablets, pretty much every month they were "just around the corner". Then it was "just wait for Honeycomb!". We're still waiting. I think the hardware vendors, and the tech community in general really *were* astounded that the iPad is selling so well (one of the best tech product launches ever) , and they were expecting better specced tablets to come along at a lower price... and it just hasn't happened. Either the price is the same or more than the iPad, or it's compromised considerably to get the cost down.
I think the fundamental issue seems to be that they just can't make them much cheaper than the iPad already is, with the same featureset, without it being uneconomical to do, otherwise we would have seen it already - Honeycomb or no Honeycomb.
Re: (Score:3)
The Herotab C9 is a 7" tablet. So that's failed your claim at the very first hurdle.
Re: (Score:2)
> The $499 16GB iPad, by all estimations, costs under $250 to manufacture.
I'd be shocked to find Apple paying more than $175 for em off the docks in China and I'd put my money on $150. That is for the basic WiFi version.
Listen up folks, there ain't nothing in a tablet. Compare a typical low end netbook that retails for $300 to a typical tablet.
Tablet has a touchscreen, and motion sensor over a netbook. The OS is basically free if Android or the Apple Tax if a iPad. The whole point of ARM was lower pa
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
> The $499 16GB iPad, by all estimations, costs under $250 to manufacture.
I'd be shocked to find Apple paying more than $175 for em off the docks in China and I'd put my money on $150. That is for the basic WiFi version.
Listen up folks, there ain't nothing in a tablet. Compare a typical low end netbook that retails for $300 to a typical tablet.
Tablet has a touchscreen, and motion sensor over a netbook.
The iPad has an IPS display, which you most certainly *don't* find on a typical $300 low end notebook. Also, it's much more/much different inside, not much less (unless you are talking simply mass and volume which is not relevant to the price of the parts and assembly). You have all sorts of additional sensors and IO. The iPad is also made of aluminum and glass, not plastic and plastic.
This story is a sign that market forces are likely to start working more normally. $250-$350 tablets by Xmas that have capacitive touchscreens, motion sensors and robust ARM chips is my prediction.
And if you really think they cost $175, fully packaged and ready to ship, then Apple will still be able to undercut these tablets. Tablets which are somehow magically going to cost 1/3 of what they cost now. Tablets which have sold extremely poorly and if they actually *could* undercut the iPad by half, they should have done so long ago.
No, we won't see proper tablets, Android or otherwise, for $250-$350 by the end of the year. There might be some laughable attempts, but nothing that really competes with an iPad or a compelling Android tablet.
Re: (Score:3)
The difference with Android tablets is that they're not going to be competing armed with simple apps like Angry Birds and DoodleJump. They're going to go head to head with things like GarageBand and Pages. So far I don't see anything for Android that's on that level of software at this time.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Interesting)
if you have to wait a year for a third party to develop your useful apps then you have already lost.
if you have to wait 18 months and then hack a security update onto your system because it is being blocked by your carrier you have already lost.
Apple is developing good apps already paving the way for IOS developers. Google is letting other people do the heavy lifting and porting.
Re: (Score:3)
This assuming Apple stands still and doesn't introduce even more impressive applications. Seems Apple has been moving much faster than most expected.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
No one who knows anything about electronics manufacturing thinks this. The $499 16GB iPad, by all estimations, costs under $250 to manufacture.
No one who knows anything about products thinks this. The tear-down component price estimations are deliberately lowballed, and it costs a lot more than just the sum of the components to take those components and combine them into boxed and shelved iPad, ready for purchase.
Android is going to change that by doing the same thing it did in the smartphone market. Expect to see 10" Android tablets for $300 or less by the end of the year.
Not going to happen, except possibly for some humorously bulky, crappy-screened, and overall completely inadequate caricatures of a proper tablet.
You Android folks were saying this was going to happen by Summer of 2010, then it was Fall 2010, then it became "sometime in 2011" (skipping over the Winter, which was clearly lost by the time Fall came around). If you think there will be iPad-quality Android tablets for under $300, you are going to be quite disappointed when 2012 rolls around. It's not even a sure thing that there will be proper Android tablets for the same price as an iPad by then, let alone $200 cheaper.
Re: (Score:2)
The iPad has a higher quality screen than any netbook. (And any notebook under $3500)
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
but they aren't losing money on the parts.
Instead Apple is using it's massive cash reserves to buy 10 million of each part ahead of time knowing that they CAN sell them.
Samsung is only buying 2-3 million at a time. he who buys 5 times the parts you are is going to get a better price.
Re: (Score:3)
That was my (uninformed) conclusion too. They know that unless they _really_ screw up somehow, they are going to sell these things as fast as they can make them, so they don't need to hedge their bets on manufacturing capacity and part volumes. They also have a pretty good idea of the lifetime of their previous products and that while some people will be willing to replace the battery etc, most are just going to chuck it in the bin and buy a new one once the battery starts losing capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is buying many of these parts from Samsung. Samsung wins either way.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Samsung is only buying 2-3 million at a time. he who buys 5 times the parts you are is going to get a better price.
The funny thing is, Samsung makes some of these parts. Flash memory and displays (although maybe not tablet-sized displays).
Re: (Score:3)
Processor too.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple's financials still show a majority of their profits come from the hardware. The App store is grouped in with the overall iTunes store, and remains a smidge over break even. That 30% Apple gets from paid apps helps to also pay for all the bandwidth free apps consume, along with the other free content in iTunes such as the podcasts they cache and help host.
Apple is able to make the iPad and other devices cheeper due to controlling the supply chain and manufacturing to a very deep level. They made a strategic investment in flash (storage) years ago to ensure they always had access to what they need. They did the same again recently for displays. Apple has also moved to making their own batteries, enclosures and other components to help strip out any unnecessary cost. The unibody design they use in so many products, including iPad helps reduce manufacturing labor quite a bit. Instead of having a worker sit there screwing together all the internals to make a frame, then slapping a case around it, they instead just screw in all the components directly to the unibody case the machine spits out.
Apple is one of the few companies out there that takes a lot of time to design everything down to the screws. A little bit of time spent paying a few designers to come up with a more efficient PCB layout and cabling assembly adds up when you make millions of a particular device.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
That is why apple is secret. don't tell people you have a full port for intel, or sparc chips. just make sure it works, wo when you do switch no one will know when until it is too late.
the apple phone rumors started in what 2005? that means apple had 2-3 years more development time than everyone else on the market. The ipad 3 is already under design, it's spec's may have already been mostly set too. competitors are designing to the original ipad, and maybe the ipad2 if they are lucky.
It took the competition 3 years before they couldn't really start to challenge the iphone. First movers have the advantage you can shift target goals easier.
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Insightful)
They have? You mean I can buy a Blackberry tablet or an HP tablet now?
I think Apple is quite happy making 50% of the industry profit in cell phones compared to 14% for RIM.
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/30/iphone-4-of-market-50-of-profit/ [cnn.com]
Or do you think that market share is more important to a publicly traded company than profit?
Re:Anyone know... (Score:5, Interesting)
This idea of "Apple making it back in the app store" needs to be squashed. Apple's financial disclosures make it clear how much money they make on the App Store/ iTunes Store. The profits are just beyond break even. Apple is and always has been a hardware company. Not only that, but they're now a hardware company that can leverage economies of scale with their suppliers.
The reason the iPad is so cheap is because Apple buys components to make it in bulk. In some cases they'll buy the entire output of a supplier. There are also documented instances where Apple have provided the capital for suppliers to expand their production facilities in return for buying the complete output of those new facilities. This is easy to do for certain items that get used across your entire product line, such as flash memory. Doing this means Apple can get parts at prices their competitors can't match, and in return they can sell their products for lower prices. When you have Samsung making and selling you flash memory at a price they can't match for their own subsidiaries, you know you're doing something right. It's amazing planning on Apple's part and a testament to the faith they have in being able to deliver on their product roadmaps. Whatever Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook is getting paid has clearly been worth it.
It's their retial strategy. (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple runs it's own retail chain that is extremely cost effective (I believe they make the most $/square foot of any retailer). So while their competitors sell products wholesale and end up with two layers of markup (one for them and one for the retailer), Apple handles the marketing and retail aspect itself, and that's where they achieve their savings over the competition. Even the article you're responding to is free advertising for Apple, savings in action. So next time you're complaining about the free advertising Apple gets, keep in mind it's part of the reason you can buy an iPad for $500.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple recently announced that it will be taking a 30% cut on subscriptions. They already take a 30% cut on the App Store. The iPhone5 will probably have NFC and then they will take a cut of every purchase you make in a store, and once again, the size of their cut will shock people.
So, they might be making the bulk of their money from hardware now, but imagine how lucrative all of those 30% are going to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is not losing money on the iPad. In fact, they are probably prepared to drop the price by $100 if necessary (and in spite of predictions last year to the contrary, it has not been necessary). They are so cheap because of volume and their highly efficient manufacturing and shipment processes.
Take the unibody enclosure of the iPad (and MacBooks) for example. It's *very* expensive to figure out how to do it and you have to build dedicated factories, but once you've done that, you can make a superior case
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is only known for overpricing things among people who don't actually run the numbers. If you look carefully, Apple generally prices their hardware reasonably compared to similar hardware from other manufacturers, except for things like BTO RAM. What they don't do is offer a budget, cut-the-corners option.
With the iPad Apple has existing experience and supply agreements from the iPhone, they have some chip and industrial design capability in-house and they have all the software infrastructure already
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Like it or not, Apple is selling these iOS devices in huge quantities. Even if Android total sales douobled iOS, we would still be talking about one companny mass manufacturing 33% of the sold units. As anyone knows, with such high production numbers, you can save a lot of money by buying parts at discount prices.
The funny part is that Samsung is the one selling the LCDs to Apple. If there is one company you may think be able to challenge them in pricing, it would be them.
Re: (Score:3)
how is Apple making the iPad so cheap?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economies_of_scale [wikipedia.org]
It's not like the iPad 2 had a quantum leap in technology. All devices/tech goes this way. Either upgrade features/maintain price or lower price.
Re: (Score:3)
Apple's had the iPad in the works for a long time, they got to take their time choosing suppliers and components and buying/making deals when it was cheap. Right now everyone else is on the last minute "Me Too" concord to try to catch Apple's business class 747 that arrived last year.
Re: (Score:2)
The iPad starts at $500. I think it's safe to say that your $500 figure is off by at least the cost of the parts (whatever that is).
Re: (Score:2)
What?
The base iPad costs $499.
So the parts cost -$1?
That's an interesting theory.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Toons of people are rooting them, perhaps literally tons of people. Because it is probably a few hundred to a thousand worldwide. I don't think anybody at Apple is sitting up late at night worried that the normal consumer is going to root ereaders. People want something that works with little configuration. Home users buy the iPad because it's like a small laptop that starts apps instantly , can browse they web, doesn't require constant virus scan updates, and little configuration.
Nerds might not mind r
Change (Score:2)
Re:Change (Score:5, Insightful)
but would you pay more to beta test it too?
The xoom is shipping with a broken sd card slot, no flash(other than the ads saying it has it) and if you want the full 4G modem your paying for you have to mail the unit it)
spending more for a crippled unit doesn't sound right. Apple should be doing that not everyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
The SD slot isn't broken, it is just problematic with the fast release of Android 3.0. It will be "fixed" pretty soon, I am sure.
Flash will be available in a few weeks according to pretty reliable sources. Apple doesn't have Flash anyway, so that is a poor comparison point.
4G modem only matters on the overpriced non-WiFi-only model, which few people want.
Not that I am defending Motorola... they pushed the product out a little too quickly. They were desperate to beat Apple's release of the iPad2. And the
Re: (Score:3)
The SD slot isn't broken, it is just problematic with the fast release of Android 3.0. It will be "fixed" pretty soon, I am sure.
Flash will be available in a few weeks according to pretty reliable sources.
In other words: Android 3 was released in beta state, with at least two important features missing: sd card reading and Flash.
Apple doesn't have Flash anyway, so that is a poor comparison point.
He did not compare Flash, he stated that it's a promoted feature that is missing at launch, making it feel like a Beta.
4G modem only matters on the overpriced non-WiFi-only model, which few people want.
If few want that model, then there is no Xoom for anyone else that cares since the wifi only model has not been released yet.
Not that I am defending Motorola... they pushed the product out a little too quickly. They were desperate to beat Apple's release of the iPad2. And they made it, but so what? Since they didn't release the WiFi-only version, which is what 90% (?) of prospective customers want, it is a hollow "victory". I just wouldn't characterize the Xoom as "crippled" like you did.
My theory, for the little it's worth, is that Motorola found out about the iPad 2 release date and rushed release of an unfinished unit in
Re: (Score:3)
The SD slot isn't broken, it is just problematic.
This parrot isn't dead, it's just pining for the fjords.
Re: (Score:3)
really where?
I will buy a wifi only version of the galaxy tab right now if some one can point it out to me.
The wifi only version of the xoom isn't out yet and is suspected of having to buy a 1 month period of 3G in order to get it functional.
I have asked this question many times and no one is willing to give me an answer. Where can it be bought?
Hopes (Score:2)
bigger costs more, say it isn't so (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What Samsung really needs to rethink... (Score:2)
is their updates to software and the quality of those updates. As an example, Samsung Epic 4 owners have waited many months for the update to Froyo. Finally, an update was pushed out recently, and promptly withdrawn. A working update is still not shipping.
Comment removed (Score:3)
Umm actually this isn't true...Samsung Denies it (Score:3)
http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/20110305/samsungs-10-inch-tablet-to-ship-as-announced-despite-apples-ipad-2-announcement/?mod=ATD_rss [allthingsd.com]
“We will continue to make every effort to provide the most powerful, well-designed and productive mobile device to customers,” Executive Vice President Lee Don-Joo is quoted by Yonhap as saying.
A Samsung spokesman told the outlet the release plan for the Android-based Galaxy Tab 10.1 has not been affected, but declined to say when the device will ship.
Re: (Score:2)
A company denying something doesn't make it not true. Doesn't make it true either.
This is ridiculous (Score:2)
Apple's iPad competitors are still spec-obsessed, and Apple's next-gen iPad coupled with the same price point is forcing Samsung to rethink its tablet strategy and pricing methodology altogether.
Seriously. What kind of moron CEO's and board members exist these days? Its obvious that Apple released a killer product and yet these idiots do nothing to try and compete. It was pretty much already known what the iPad 2 would have in it, and yet they did nothing but wait until it was released and NOW they are trying to rethink their strategy? Any two-bit / . moron could do a better job than these idiots and yet they are pulling in hundreds of thousands to millions a year plus bonuses. It just goes to sho
Re: (Score:2)
Waitaminute... (Score:2)
Competitors come out with new products? When did this start happening?!
Oh well, back to the drawing board, Samsung. It should only take a year or two to develop something that you can be assured, will totally crush your all competitors' 2011 products.
Stop it, now! (Score:2)
Big players like Samsung must stop playing catch up, now. Stop looking at Apple and monkeying them, that'll get you nowhere. Nobody wants a copycat. Branch out in your own directions or *gasp* outpace Apple. Pour money into research. Raise the quality of your products. Release more timely updates for longer. Yes, it can be risky, but look where that got Apple. They literally created the tablet market.
You can innovate, but not if you're doing your best to be a follower.
don't compete on specs (Score:5, Insightful)
The Price Magician: Tim Cook (Score:3)
I really, really wanted a Windows tablet five years ago, but the prices were way too high. Whatever your feelings about Apple, their ability to crank tablet prices down to a reasonable range has been a big boon for everyone wanting to buy the form factor. They may lead right now, but when suppliers catch up and can get parts to all manufacturers (in a year or two), we'll all be better off that this is no longer considered a luxurious exclusive of the high end like the Windows slates used to be.
But how do they do it? Jobs may be the PR showman, but Tim Cook is the Compaq-alumnus who is the real price magician.
Remember back in 2005 when Apple made a huge exclusive deal for 5 years of Flash RAM with Samsung? That was more than a year before they even introduced the iPhone, but Tim Cook locked up supplier deals people thought were insane at the time. Apple only makes Macs and iPods, what the heck are they going to use all that flash RAM for?
Apple now has a lot of cash on hand to get the best prices and to make exclusive deals like that, which they said they just did for three more critical parts in their last earnings report (and people are speculating over what those three parts are).
But finally, when suppliers aren't able to deliver on time, in quantity, and at a good price, they haven't been shy about pitting suppliers against each other.
Even with the cheapest supplies, might Apple be selling the iPad at a loss? At least for the 1st generation iPad, it's unlikely. Though Apple doesn't break out many numbers they show that iPad revenue over Christmas was almost equal to Mac revenue. Considering the larger sales of the iPad, more sold at a loss would be more loss, and that doesn't seem to have happened with their record profits over Christmas. Second, Phil Schiller last year said after the introduction but before it went on sale that Apple still had some pricing flexibility (meaning they could cut deals with big companies or bring the price down to the public, if no one bought it). Those two things together really suggest that this isn't a loss leader for Apple like the XBox was for Microsoft back in 2005. This may all change with iPad 2, but it doesn't really look like they added any expensive features to the (minor?) upgrade this time around.
With as many of the iPad parts coming from Samsung (including the A4 & A5 system-on-a-chip) you'd expect Samsung would be in the best position to make a real competitor. Apple's price advantage (though painful to competitors, right now) is short term. It's good that the market is getting competitive with low power, touch input, tablet supplies. And it will be even better for users when tablets in 2012 will be significantly better and maybe even cheaper from a variety of sources.
Just be patient, Samsung and the iPad competitors will be back soon with better products.
Comment removed (Score:3)