8 ms·

Motorola XOOM priced at $800

66 points by srik1234 16y ago

It is surprising that motorola priced xoom at $800 when iPads are starting at $499. 3G iPad version starts at $630. What do you think?

necubi 16y ago
This seems pretty crazy, as the comparable iPad (16GB WiFi+3G) retails for $630. It will also be difficult to build up a large install base without a cheaper, wifi-only model. And while at the moment the Xoom has some features the iPad does not (cameras, for example) the inevitable release of a new iPad in a couple months will no doubt erase that advantage, at the same (or lower, per GB) price. I can't imagine what Motorola/Verizon were thinking. They're not going to sell more than a few of these without lowering the price drastically. Edit: Oops, I misread the ad as saying it had 16GB storage. The more reasonable price comparison is then the 32GB iPad, which is $730. More reasonable, but still too much (especially given that you must sign up for a very expensive data plan to even use WiFi).
- cgranade 16y ago
  Frankly, I was all set to buy one, but if I can't even use WiFi from in Canada, that's a dealbreaker.
- cleverjake 16y ago
  To be fair, it has 32 gigs of internal storage, so comparing it against the ipad with half the storage isn't quite apples to apples (no pun intended.) It would be more fair to compare it with the $730 32gb w/ 3g ipad. When you could that with a higher resolution screen, dual cameras, /and/ a built in barometer, Id say its a near even deal (http://goo.gl/OYVrd http://goo.gl/OYVrd for a full comparison chart). That being said - its still too much. I just hope they give them out at IO this year.
  - zdw 16y ago
    Regarding comparison charts: http://www.marco.org/380868888 http://www.marco.org/380868888 Even with the hardware advantage, it's software that makes the device - Honeycomb looks good, but iOS 5 should be nearly around the corner (hopefully with fixed notifications...).
  - jad 16y ago
    "When you could that with a higher resolution screen, dual cameras, /and/ a built in barometer, Id say its a near even deal" Remember though that the Xoom will spend most of its life competing against the second generation iPad, so most of these feature advantages are likely to vanish. Throw onto that the fact that judging from Apple's pricing history the next iPad will either have the same or a lower price, _and_ the Xoom will require a cellular contract to use Wifi (!), the Xoom will likely compare poorly to most people.
    - mitchellhislop 16y ago
      Although it may still win on the barometer. I bet someone at Apple is trying to figure out 1) How to include one 2) How to leverage one [yes, in that order]
    - cleverjake 16y ago
      very true. But I also guarantee that there will be price cuts almost right after release, much like the galaxy tab, let alone a few months after its release when the 2nd ipad is available.
- kvdr 16y ago
  Everybody is getting hung up on the price of this device, which I admit is high, but a comparison to the iPad's price is not fair. As stated below, the closest iPad is $730. Also the hardware is a generation and a half ahead of the iPad. The iPad doesn't even have a camera, very basic need for any kind of video conferencing (Xoom comes with 2). Please see the comparison chart [1] for more details. But yeah, having to buy the Xoom from a carrier and paying atleast one month of data plan rate before cancelling it is kinda ridiculous. [1] http://static.skattertech.com/media/2011/02/infographic-playbook-vs-streak-vs-ipad-vs-xoom-large.png http://static.skattertech.com/media/2011/02/infographic-play...
  - ugh 16y ago
    You can’t buy a $500 Xoom. It’s just not possible. I think that matters a lot, I doubt many people will check specs. Edit: To expand a little on this point, Apple sold 7.33 million iPads in the holiday quarter and made $4.4 billion in revenue which means that consumers paid about $600 (±$8) on average for an iPad. Considering that, I don’t think it is a wise idea to not at least have a base model that is priced at $600 or less.
  - laichzeit0 16y ago
    You're also missing the fact that the XOOM has 1 GIGABYTE of RAM. The iPad has 256mb of ram. The XOOM also has a DUAL CORE PROCESSOR. There are so many hardware differences between the two devices :)
  - YooLi 16y ago
    Why a generation and a half ahead? Is it so that when the iPad 2 is released (in a couple months), one generation ahead of the first iPad, you'll say the Xoom is still 1/2 generation ahead of the iPad2?
- r00fus 16y ago
  What about I don't want to pay for 3G, and don't want it? Xoom is not an option... I already pay for a mobile data account (with tethering)... why pay for another account? Furthermore, iPad 3G requires no contract. No, there is no real iPad competitor yet.
  - mitchellhislop 16y ago
    This. The main reason that the XOOM, at least at launch, will not snag the top spot is that people will look at it, and then see the more known, cheaper, and contract-less iPad. Keep in mind, many people dont need 1gHz and 32 GB. I nearly got the 16gb myself, and only went with the 32 because I see myself flying more this year.
- laujen 16y ago
  While you are all technically right that the iPad 32GB/wifi+3g is comparable to the Xoom, it isn't in the mind of consumers. Consumers will compare $500 v. $800. After all, Apple's $1500 laptop is not spec-wise comparable to a $500 Windows laptop but that doesn't make a difference. I am betting on Apple releasing a $300 iPad in April.
  - icarus_drowning 16y ago
    Exactly. The problem isn't the price to features ratio, its the "lowest priced version" option. And somehow, its Apple that's offering the most choice there.
cgranade 16y ago
I am especially bothered by the Verizon details here. First off, how can they prohibit WiFi use? Second, it seems like the Xoom is unavailable in Canada, if it really is Verizon-locked. Ouch and ouch.
thought_alarm 16y ago
... and you have to purchase a data plan before you can use WiFi. The iPad is still the only tablet in the history of personal computing that makes any sense.
- zdw 16y ago
  At the low end $20/month plan, assuming a two year contract, that's $1280 total. Yikes. The pricing psychology of the iPad starting at $500, then relatively small incremental updates that increase the size and give it 3G makes for a much easier sell. The Xoom does look like nice hardware - I just wonder if they'll sell enough of them to reach economies of scale and drive the price down.
  - zdw 16y ago
    After further reading, it appears that you only need to buy one month of Verizon service (no 2-year contract), so the total is $819. (Would have fixed the parent post but can't edit for some reason...)
    - orangecat 16y ago
      That's better, although still a bit confusing. It's supposed to be a "Google experience" device meaning no manufacturer/carrier crapware or deliberate crippling, so it's not clear how they'd prevent you from using wifi if you never sign up for data.
    - mitchellhislop 16y ago
      From the way it was described to me at CES, it would be sold as an "on-contract device". That may have changed, but FWIW
- protomyth 16y ago
  Motorola seems to have two big problems: price and distribution. I think this illustrates Apple's buying power for components and the pricing that results. The second is going to be a bigger problem. Having to cripple your device (tying WiFi to cell service) because you best distribution is through the cell carier is going to be painful. They need to find a channel that allows them the ability that sells a WiFi model that can get the price down. Apple has their own stores and can buy big. If an Android tablet is to be successful, they need an entry leve to compete with the $499 iPad and iPod touch.
ashbrahma 16y ago
Not sure how they can compete with the iPad at that price range.
jrockway 16y ago
Times have really changed when the knock-offs cost more than the real thing... Someone just needs to figure out how to install Android or Chrome OS on an iPad, and it will be the tablet without any compromises.
natnat 16y ago
I really don't understand this at all. According to iSuppli[1], Apple pays $229.35 in parts and labor to make the low-end iPad. They develop their own operating system, buy incredible amounts of ads, and yet they still have massive profit margins selling iPads for $500. Meanwhile, Motorola and Samsung and other manufacturers get a free operating system and get cellphone carriers to give them a bunch of money to sell the device with a data plan. Yet their devices are $600-$1000, they often have smaller screens, and are (probably) loaded up with crapware. I fail to see why anyone would ever buy something like this, and I fail to see why anyone thinks someone will buy one. Even if no company has a supply chain as good as Apple's (which I have trouble believing, considering how many components are manufactured by Toshiba and Samsung, for instance) and they need to pay an additional 20% for parts, they could still make the same device, sell it for slightly less and still make plenty of money. [1] http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Mid-RangeiPadtoGenerateMaximumProfitsforApple,iSuppliEstimates.aspx http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Mid-RangeiPadtoG...
- netcan 16y ago
  Must be more to it than that. If it was possible to get a good tablet (of any size) to consumers cheaper than Apple, someone would have. Maybe this project started out with your assumptions and ended up with (possibly unsellable) $800 device.
  - thatoneguy 16y ago
    AFAIK, Apple's supply chain is not only legendary, but they'll commit huge amounts of capital to new hardware products in advance. This allows them to more or less own the output of a given supplier's factory, forcing other companies to pay spot prices for their follow-on products.
    - netcan 16y ago
      I'm sure stuff like that play a part. But, iphones have been out for a while. Long enough for new factories to be set up, old factories to increase capacity, contracts to run out... Should be long enough for things to catch up. Why are iphone's best competitors still about the same price or more?
jsz0 16y ago
This is the practical downside of being too cozy with carriers. A cheaper wifi-only model would be great for consumers but cuts the carriers out of the loop entirely. Probably the same reason there's no 'iPod Touch killer' out there yet. All these companies are in the business of selling equipment to carriers. What the consumer wants is a secondary consideration at best.
- bane 16y ago
  It's a good point. Their end-to-end supply chain assumes carriers are the end customer. I'm guessing some of the price inflation assumes some kind of subsidy from the carrier.
- michaelbuckbee 16y ago
  This is a huge frustration to me as a developer, I wish I could buy an iPod touch style android device.
  - rodh257 16y ago
    Samsung were talking about making a galaxy player, I think they've released it in some places, perhaps not world wide?
    - ugh 16y ago
      Only in Korea. No plans for releasing it anywhere else. Edit: Gadget blogs suck. Everyone I looked at says something different, it might be the case that the Player is also available somewhere in Europe. I can‘t buy it on amazon.de (Germany), though. To continue the theme of this discussion: The price also sucks when compared to the iPod touch (something between 200€ and 260€ for the 8GB model, you pay 230€ for the 8GB iPod touch).
  - MaysonL 16y ago
    The closest thing I've seen is a Zii Egg: they just released an Android 2.1 build to developers.
  - jrockway 16y ago
netcan 16y ago
I think the products that compete with iphones and ipads point to a fundamental shift in how Apple do things these days: Apple now compete on price. I'm not saying they've given up on their high margins on everything policy. Like other commenters have said, they probably use purchasing power to make up the difference, but they are using price nonetheless. We're so used to Apple being the premium option that we keep on being surprised that they aren't being beaten on price and then assume it's temporary. Well, it's several years into iphone and they aren't the macbooks off mobile phones yet. You actually need to pay for a non Apple alternative. They still feel like the premium option though so it seems just silly to pay a $100 premium for the non-apple alternative, like paying a premium for an ipod knock-off. It's quite a strategy. Build a company around products need to command a premium. Then remove the constraint. It's like having a runner run with stones in his pocket all his life then suddenly remove them.
- dkarl 16y ago
  I think what we're seeing is that Apple always did compete on price. We just didn't know it until we saw competitors trying and failing to match their prices.
  - netcan 16y ago
    I'm not a hardware expert, but I don't think so. There are two ways to think about this: a- What would it cost to build a more or less exact hardware replica? b- What would it cost to build a decent substitute? I don't even think they were competing on price in the 'a' sense. But either way, 'b,' is, I think, the important one and Apple certainly weren't competing on price in that sense pre-iphone. You could always get a decent mp3 player or laptop roughly as good as but different to an Apple for a big discount. Still can. If you want to run Windows or Linux, you can do it without hassle on 1/2 - 3/4 of the budget. If you want a music player for jogging, an ipod nano knockoff will do the trick just fine. If you want an android tablet or phone, you seem to need to pay more for (arguably) less.
    - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
bane 16y ago
No thank you, drop the price $500, then we're talking.
nazgulnarsil 16y ago
i think a big question is how much is B&N losing on each nook color sale? 7 inch IPS panel with a decent processor. 10 inch tabets over $300 don't make any sense to me. archos 70 and 101 seem like the only sane products for the casual computing market that doesnt already have an ipad.
- Samuel_Michon 16y ago
  Engadget's impression of the Archos 70 and 101: "incredibly chintzy feel [...] the 70 and 101 look and feel very cheap. Both are primarily made of black plastic [...] We just don't have much confidence in the longevity of the device [...] In hand, the materials feel far from solid, and even after wrapping it in a scarf, we worried about keeping it safe from bumps and bruises in our bag. [...] As you'd expect, the cheap make isn't limited to the surrounding parts of the tablet -- the plastic displays on the 70 and 101 suffer from the same issues. We weren't expecting Gorilla Glass quality here, but both of them are flimsy and when pressed firmly, they start to cave in quite a bit. [...] vertical viewing angles are incredibly bad. Tilting the screens slightly off axis to about 30-degrees caused a ton of color distortion, and if you happen to be standing above the displays while they are propped up on the kickstands, it's nearly impossible to see what is on screen. [...] The VGA cameras on both tablets are incredibly sluggish, and when we finally were able to snap some stills, they came out blurry and grainy. Similarly, when we shot some video, the footage was very choppy and the audio wasn't in sync with the video at all." http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-internet-tablet-review/ http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-interne...
EwanG 16y ago
I suppose now would be a bad time to mention Viewsonic's G-Tablet which has a Tegra 2 chip (just like the XOOM), a 10" display (not quite as nice as the XOOM's), and 16 gigs of RAM for a bit under $400? :-)
- rje 16y ago
  Have they announced honeycomb support for it yet? I haven't seen any news on it.
  - georgemcbay 16y ago
    No, and they probably never will...officially The official software story on the G-Tablet is a total disaster that Viewsonic will likely never fix. However the hardware is great and 3rd party developers are supporting the device with proper software. You can currently run CyanogenMod7 (which is based on Gingerbread/2.3) on the G-Tablet, though it is fully a community project that Viewsonic has nothing to do with. I'm sure the same will be true of Honeycomb soon after it hits full ASOP status. If you're willing to hack around with the device and not rely on the official software, the G-Tablet is great at <$400. My only complaint is the viewing angles on the LCD aren't that great (the panel is not IPS), if not for that it would be a pretty ideal Android tablet platform for people willing to install community roms.
- Samuel_Michon 16y ago
  The Viewsonic gTablet has no 3G radio, half the RAM size (512MB) of the Xoom, and half the storage capacity (16GB). The gTablet has a 1.3MP camera, the Xoom has a 5MP camera. The gTablet has a 1024x600 screen, the Xoom has a 1280x800 screen. IMHO, the specs of the gTablet are more in line with the entry level iPad, not the Xoom.
thedeuce 16y ago
fail. next?
earl 16y ago
$800? And if you read the subtext of the picture carefully, it says, "To activate WiFi functionality on this device, a minimum of 1 month data subscription is required." My god, is it rude to just point and laugh?
- zmmmmm 16y ago
  > "To activate WiFi functionality on this device, a minimum of 1 month data subscription is required." I'm gobsmacked by that - is there any precedent for it? Anywhere? I've literally never heard of any manufacturer locking Wifi support. I'm almost not believing it yet until I see some kind of other confirmation - I can only think that it was meant to say "Wireless" or "3G" or something else, because locking Wifi is just ridiculous.
- defeed 16y ago
  It actually spells "activative". I wonder why.
OoTheNigerian 16y ago
I am sorry Moto, this would not fly. Too expensive. I am just pissed to think I have told everyone around to wait for it. The next iPad will have all this features at a far better price. I have to give it to Steve Jobs. They certainly had a better iPad but decided to release something slightly basic first at an awesome price point, make loads of profit then have the ability to match the specs of the new comers who will think they can better the iPad1 specswise
dstein 16y ago
This will bomb really badly. I am simply in awe at how far ahead of the competition Apple remains after all these years. I would have thought eventually the smartphone and especially the mp3 player market would've normalized by now but Apple is now telescoping their lead. By the time the iPad 2 ships every Android tablet not even on the market yet will be obsolete by an entire generation.
blocke 16y ago
I'm a huge Android fan and while I would buy a laptop from Apple I wouldn't touch an iOS device due to disagreement over how the Market is handled. However it doesn't take an Apple fanboi to know this pricing is horrid. This isn't a laptop. People are not going to shop around on specs. $800 vs $500 for similar functionality is fscking retarded, especially when the $500 device is from the BMW of computers.
chamakits 16y ago
And with this, all interests I had on the XOOM are gone.
eftpotrm 16y ago
Would someone care to explain why these things still cost double what an equivalent netbook with additional parts does?
- forgottenpaswrd 16y ago
  Netbooks use way cheaper hard disks, instead of ssd. Netbooks don't have touchscreens. Netbooks don't have GPS, accelerometers, and gyros. Netbook don't have a battery that last 9 hours. If there is a netbook with this specs,witch they are, it is going to be as expensive as tablets. So, there is no "equivalent netbook" with half the price. Putting a pixel qi screen to my netbook cost me $275, a touchscreen $100 plus shipping cost, plus my time, plus the risk I break my netbook(I nearly broke it when bending one of the screen connection pins).
  - eftpotrm 16y ago
    You certainly can get netbooks with 9h battery life. http://www.compuplus.com/ASUS-Eee-PC-1015PED-MU17-1166505.html http://www.compuplus.com/ASUS-Eee-PC-1015PED-MU17-1166505.ht... for example. GPS - when I can get a standalone satnav unit for $70 with its own processor, screen battery et al, that's hardly adding up to a huge extra cost. The accelerometer and gyro can be handled by a single relatively cheap chip from what I remember. Netbooks also have keyboards, touchpads and extra interface parts such as USB and SVGA that tablets don't tend to have - not expensive components in themselves but extra parts to integrate into the design that aren't supplied with tablets. And, in a large number of cases, they come with a Windows license. So, we're left with an SSD rather than HDD (retail, marginal cost about $70 for bigger drives than tablets use) and a touchscreen rather than a non-touchscreen (don't know the component suppliers for them to research it). I still don't see why they're so much more expensive, beyond 'because we can' novelty value. The numbers simply don't stack up for me.
scrrr 16y ago
The way Motorola has handled updates for the Droid and the high price will make the Xoom flop.

66 points by srik1234 16y ago

It is surprising that motorola priced xoom at $800 when iPads are starting at $499. 3G iPad version starts at $630. What do you think?

necubi 16y ago

This seems pretty crazy, as the comparable iPad (16GB WiFi+3G) retails for $630. It will also be difficult to build up a large install base without a cheaper, wifi-only model. And while at the moment the Xoom has some features the iPad does not (cameras, for example) the inevitable release of a new iPad in a couple months will no doubt erase that advantage, at the same (or lower, per GB) price. I can't imagine what Motorola/Verizon were thinking. They're not going to sell more than a few of these without lowering the price drastically. Edit: Oops, I misread the ad as saying it had 16GB storage. The more reasonable price comparison is then the 32GB iPad, which is $730. More reasonable, but still too much (especially given that you must sign up for a very expensive data plan to even use WiFi).

cgranade 16y ago
Frankly, I was all set to buy one, but if I can't even use WiFi from in Canada, that's a dealbreaker.
cleverjake 16y ago
To be fair, it has 32 gigs of internal storage, so comparing it against the ipad with half the storage isn't quite apples to apples (no pun intended.) It would be more fair to compare it with the $730 32gb w/ 3g ipad. When you could that with a higher resolution screen, dual cameras, /and/ a built in barometer, Id say its a near even deal (http://goo.gl/OYVrd http://goo.gl/OYVrd for a full comparison chart). That being said - its still too much. I just hope they give them out at IO this year.
- zdw 16y ago
  Regarding comparison charts: http://www.marco.org/380868888 http://www.marco.org/380868888 Even with the hardware advantage, it's software that makes the device - Honeycomb looks good, but iOS 5 should be nearly around the corner (hopefully with fixed notifications...).
- jad 16y ago
  "When you could that with a higher resolution screen, dual cameras, /and/ a built in barometer, Id say its a near even deal" Remember though that the Xoom will spend most of its life competing against the second generation iPad, so most of these feature advantages are likely to vanish. Throw onto that the fact that judging from Apple's pricing history the next iPad will either have the same or a lower price, _and_ the Xoom will require a cellular contract to use Wifi (!), the Xoom will likely compare poorly to most people.
  - mitchellhislop 16y ago
    Although it may still win on the barometer. I bet someone at Apple is trying to figure out 1) How to include one 2) How to leverage one [yes, in that order]
  - cleverjake 16y ago
    very true. But I also guarantee that there will be price cuts almost right after release, much like the galaxy tab, let alone a few months after its release when the 2nd ipad is available.
kvdr 16y ago
Everybody is getting hung up on the price of this device, which I admit is high, but a comparison to the iPad's price is not fair. As stated below, the closest iPad is $730. Also the hardware is a generation and a half ahead of the iPad. The iPad doesn't even have a camera, very basic need for any kind of video conferencing (Xoom comes with 2). Please see the comparison chart [1] for more details. But yeah, having to buy the Xoom from a carrier and paying atleast one month of data plan rate before cancelling it is kinda ridiculous. [1] http://static.skattertech.com/media/2011/02/infographic-playbook-vs-streak-vs-ipad-vs-xoom-large.png http://static.skattertech.com/media/2011/02/infographic-play...
- ugh 16y ago
  You can’t buy a $500 Xoom. It’s just not possible. I think that matters a lot, I doubt many people will check specs. Edit: To expand a little on this point, Apple sold 7.33 million iPads in the holiday quarter and made $4.4 billion in revenue which means that consumers paid about $600 (±$8) on average for an iPad. Considering that, I don’t think it is a wise idea to not at least have a base model that is priced at $600 or less.
- laichzeit0 16y ago
  You're also missing the fact that the XOOM has 1 GIGABYTE of RAM. The iPad has 256mb of ram. The XOOM also has a DUAL CORE PROCESSOR. There are so many hardware differences between the two devices :)
- YooLi 16y ago
  Why a generation and a half ahead? Is it so that when the iPad 2 is released (in a couple months), one generation ahead of the first iPad, you'll say the Xoom is still 1/2 generation ahead of the iPad2?
r00fus 16y ago
What about I don't want to pay for 3G, and don't want it? Xoom is not an option... I already pay for a mobile data account (with tethering)... why pay for another account? Furthermore, iPad 3G requires no contract. No, there is no real iPad competitor yet.
- mitchellhislop 16y ago
  This. The main reason that the XOOM, at least at launch, will not snag the top spot is that people will look at it, and then see the more known, cheaper, and contract-less iPad. Keep in mind, many people dont need 1gHz and 32 GB. I nearly got the 16gb myself, and only went with the 32 because I see myself flying more this year.
laujen 16y ago
While you are all technically right that the iPad 32GB/wifi+3g is comparable to the Xoom, it isn't in the mind of consumers. Consumers will compare $500 v. $800. After all, Apple's $1500 laptop is not spec-wise comparable to a $500 Windows laptop but that doesn't make a difference. I am betting on Apple releasing a $300 iPad in April.
- icarus_drowning 16y ago
  Exactly. The problem isn't the price to features ratio, its the "lowest priced version" option. And somehow, its Apple that's offering the most choice there.

cgranade 16y ago

I am especially bothered by the Verizon details here. First off, how can they prohibit WiFi use? Second, it seems like the Xoom is unavailable in Canada, if it really is Verizon-locked. Ouch and ouch.

thought_alarm 16y ago

... and you have to purchase a data plan before you can use WiFi. The iPad is still the only tablet in the history of personal computing that makes any sense.

zdw 16y ago
At the low end $20/month plan, assuming a two year contract, that's $1280 total. Yikes. The pricing psychology of the iPad starting at $500, then relatively small incremental updates that increase the size and give it 3G makes for a much easier sell. The Xoom does look like nice hardware - I just wonder if they'll sell enough of them to reach economies of scale and drive the price down.
- zdw 16y ago
  After further reading, it appears that you only need to buy one month of Verizon service (no 2-year contract), so the total is $819. (Would have fixed the parent post but can't edit for some reason...)
  - orangecat 16y ago
    That's better, although still a bit confusing. It's supposed to be a "Google experience" device meaning no manufacturer/carrier crapware or deliberate crippling, so it's not clear how they'd prevent you from using wifi if you never sign up for data.
  - mitchellhislop 16y ago
    From the way it was described to me at CES, it would be sold as an "on-contract device". That may have changed, but FWIW
protomyth 16y ago
Motorola seems to have two big problems: price and distribution. I think this illustrates Apple's buying power for components and the pricing that results. The second is going to be a bigger problem. Having to cripple your device (tying WiFi to cell service) because you best distribution is through the cell carier is going to be painful. They need to find a channel that allows them the ability that sells a WiFi model that can get the price down. Apple has their own stores and can buy big. If an Android tablet is to be successful, they need an entry leve to compete with the $499 iPad and iPod touch.

ashbrahma 16y ago

Not sure how they can compete with the iPad at that price range.

jrockway 16y ago

Times have really changed when the knock-offs cost more than the real thing... Someone just needs to figure out how to install Android or Chrome OS on an iPad, and it will be the tablet without any compromises.

natnat 16y ago

I really don't understand this at all. According to iSuppli[1], Apple pays $229.35 in parts and labor to make the low-end iPad. They develop their own operating system, buy incredible amounts of ads, and yet they still have massive profit margins selling iPads for $500. Meanwhile, Motorola and Samsung and other manufacturers get a free operating system and get cellphone carriers to give them a bunch of money to sell the device with a data plan. Yet their devices are $600-$1000, they often have smaller screens, and are (probably) loaded up with crapware. I fail to see why anyone would ever buy something like this, and I fail to see why anyone thinks someone will buy one. Even if no company has a supply chain as good as Apple's (which I have trouble believing, considering how many components are manufactured by Toshiba and Samsung, for instance) and they need to pay an additional 20% for parts, they could still make the same device, sell it for slightly less and still make plenty of money. [1] http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Mid-RangeiPadtoGenerateMaximumProfitsforApple,iSuppliEstimates.aspx http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Mid-RangeiPadtoG...

netcan 16y ago
Must be more to it than that. If it was possible to get a good tablet (of any size) to consumers cheaper than Apple, someone would have. Maybe this project started out with your assumptions and ended up with (possibly unsellable) $800 device.
- thatoneguy 16y ago
  AFAIK, Apple's supply chain is not only legendary, but they'll commit huge amounts of capital to new hardware products in advance. This allows them to more or less own the output of a given supplier's factory, forcing other companies to pay spot prices for their follow-on products.
  - netcan 16y ago
    I'm sure stuff like that play a part. But, iphones have been out for a while. Long enough for new factories to be set up, old factories to increase capacity, contracts to run out... Should be long enough for things to catch up. Why are iphone's best competitors still about the same price or more?

jsz0 16y ago

This is the practical downside of being too cozy with carriers. A cheaper wifi-only model would be great for consumers but cuts the carriers out of the loop entirely. Probably the same reason there's no 'iPod Touch killer' out there yet. All these companies are in the business of selling equipment to carriers. What the consumer wants is a secondary consideration at best.

bane 16y ago
It's a good point. Their end-to-end supply chain assumes carriers are the end customer. I'm guessing some of the price inflation assumes some kind of subsidy from the carrier.
michaelbuckbee 16y ago
This is a huge frustration to me as a developer, I wish I could buy an iPod touch style android device.
- rodh257 16y ago
  Samsung were talking about making a galaxy player, I think they've released it in some places, perhaps not world wide?
  - ugh 16y ago
    Only in Korea. No plans for releasing it anywhere else. Edit: Gadget blogs suck. Everyone I looked at says something different, it might be the case that the Player is also available somewhere in Europe. I can‘t buy it on amazon.de (Germany), though. To continue the theme of this discussion: The price also sucks when compared to the iPod touch (something between 200€ and 260€ for the 8GB model, you pay 230€ for the 8GB iPod touch).
- MaysonL 16y ago
  The closest thing I've seen is a Zii Egg: they just released an Android 2.1 build to developers.
- jrockway 16y ago

netcan 16y ago

I think the products that compete with iphones and ipads point to a fundamental shift in how Apple do things these days: Apple now compete on price. I'm not saying they've given up on their high margins on everything policy. Like other commenters have said, they probably use purchasing power to make up the difference, but they are using price nonetheless. We're so used to Apple being the premium option that we keep on being surprised that they aren't being beaten on price and then assume it's temporary. Well, it's several years into iphone and they aren't the macbooks off mobile phones yet. You actually need to pay for a non Apple alternative. They still feel like the premium option though so it seems just silly to pay a $100 premium for the non-apple alternative, like paying a premium for an ipod knock-off. It's quite a strategy. Build a company around products need to command a premium. Then remove the constraint. It's like having a runner run with stones in his pocket all his life then suddenly remove them.

dkarl 16y ago
I think what we're seeing is that Apple always did compete on price. We just didn't know it until we saw competitors trying and failing to match their prices.
- netcan 16y ago
  I'm not a hardware expert, but I don't think so. There are two ways to think about this: a- What would it cost to build a more or less exact hardware replica? b- What would it cost to build a decent substitute? I don't even think they were competing on price in the 'a' sense. But either way, 'b,' is, I think, the important one and Apple certainly weren't competing on price in that sense pre-iphone. You could always get a decent mp3 player or laptop roughly as good as but different to an Apple for a big discount. Still can. If you want to run Windows or Linux, you can do it without hassle on 1/2 - 3/4 of the budget. If you want a music player for jogging, an ipod nano knockoff will do the trick just fine. If you want an android tablet or phone, you seem to need to pay more for (arguably) less.
  - ZeroGravitas 16y ago

bane 16y ago

No thank you, drop the price $500, then we're talking.

nazgulnarsil 16y ago

i think a big question is how much is B&N losing on each nook color sale? 7 inch IPS panel with a decent processor. 10 inch tabets over $300 don't make any sense to me. archos 70 and 101 seem like the only sane products for the casual computing market that doesnt already have an ipad.

Samuel_Michon 16y ago
Engadget's impression of the Archos 70 and 101: "incredibly chintzy feel [...] the 70 and 101 look and feel very cheap. Both are primarily made of black plastic [...] We just don't have much confidence in the longevity of the device [...] In hand, the materials feel far from solid, and even after wrapping it in a scarf, we worried about keeping it safe from bumps and bruises in our bag. [...] As you'd expect, the cheap make isn't limited to the surrounding parts of the tablet -- the plastic displays on the 70 and 101 suffer from the same issues. We weren't expecting Gorilla Glass quality here, but both of them are flimsy and when pressed firmly, they start to cave in quite a bit. [...] vertical viewing angles are incredibly bad. Tilting the screens slightly off axis to about 30-degrees caused a ton of color distortion, and if you happen to be standing above the displays while they are propped up on the kickstands, it's nearly impossible to see what is on screen. [...] The VGA cameras on both tablets are incredibly sluggish, and when we finally were able to snap some stills, they came out blurry and grainy. Similarly, when we shot some video, the footage was very choppy and the audio wasn't in sync with the video at all." http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-internet-tablet-review/ http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-interne...

EwanG 16y ago

I suppose now would be a bad time to mention Viewsonic's G-Tablet which has a Tegra 2 chip (just like the XOOM), a 10" display (not quite as nice as the XOOM's), and 16 gigs of RAM for a bit under $400? :-)

rje 16y ago
Have they announced honeycomb support for it yet? I haven't seen any news on it.
- georgemcbay 16y ago
  No, and they probably never will...officially The official software story on the G-Tablet is a total disaster that Viewsonic will likely never fix. However the hardware is great and 3rd party developers are supporting the device with proper software. You can currently run CyanogenMod7 (which is based on Gingerbread/2.3) on the G-Tablet, though it is fully a community project that Viewsonic has nothing to do with. I'm sure the same will be true of Honeycomb soon after it hits full ASOP status. If you're willing to hack around with the device and not rely on the official software, the G-Tablet is great at <$400. My only complaint is the viewing angles on the LCD aren't that great (the panel is not IPS), if not for that it would be a pretty ideal Android tablet platform for people willing to install community roms.
Samuel_Michon 16y ago
The Viewsonic gTablet has no 3G radio, half the RAM size (512MB) of the Xoom, and half the storage capacity (16GB). The gTablet has a 1.3MP camera, the Xoom has a 5MP camera. The gTablet has a 1024x600 screen, the Xoom has a 1280x800 screen. IMHO, the specs of the gTablet are more in line with the entry level iPad, not the Xoom.

thedeuce 16y ago

fail. next?

earl 16y ago

$800? And if you read the subtext of the picture carefully, it says, "To activate WiFi functionality on this device, a minimum of 1 month data subscription is required." My god, is it rude to just point and laugh?

zmmmmm 16y ago
> "To activate WiFi functionality on this device, a minimum of 1 month data subscription is required." I'm gobsmacked by that - is there any precedent for it? Anywhere? I've literally never heard of any manufacturer locking Wifi support. I'm almost not believing it yet until I see some kind of other confirmation - I can only think that it was meant to say "Wireless" or "3G" or something else, because locking Wifi is just ridiculous.
defeed 16y ago
It actually spells "activative". I wonder why.

OoTheNigerian 16y ago

I am sorry Moto, this would not fly. Too expensive. I am just pissed to think I have told everyone around to wait for it. The next iPad will have all this features at a far better price. I have to give it to Steve Jobs. They certainly had a better iPad but decided to release something slightly basic first at an awesome price point, make loads of profit then have the ability to match the specs of the new comers who will think they can better the iPad1 specswise

dstein 16y ago

This will bomb really badly. I am simply in awe at how far ahead of the competition Apple remains after all these years. I would have thought eventually the smartphone and especially the mp3 player market would've normalized by now but Apple is now telescoping their lead. By the time the iPad 2 ships every Android tablet not even on the market yet will be obsolete by an entire generation.

blocke 16y ago

I'm a huge Android fan and while I would buy a laptop from Apple I wouldn't touch an iOS device due to disagreement over how the Market is handled. However it doesn't take an Apple fanboi to know this pricing is horrid. This isn't a laptop. People are not going to shop around on specs. $800 vs $500 for similar functionality is fscking retarded, especially when the $500 device is from the BMW of computers.

chamakits 16y ago

And with this, all interests I had on the XOOM are gone.

eftpotrm 16y ago

Would someone care to explain why these things still cost double what an equivalent netbook with additional parts does?

forgottenpaswrd 16y ago
Netbooks use way cheaper hard disks, instead of ssd. Netbooks don't have touchscreens. Netbooks don't have GPS, accelerometers, and gyros. Netbook don't have a battery that last 9 hours. If there is a netbook with this specs,witch they are, it is going to be as expensive as tablets. So, there is no "equivalent netbook" with half the price. Putting a pixel qi screen to my netbook cost me $275, a touchscreen $100 plus shipping cost, plus my time, plus the risk I break my netbook(I nearly broke it when bending one of the screen connection pins).
- eftpotrm 16y ago
  You certainly can get netbooks with 9h battery life. http://www.compuplus.com/ASUS-Eee-PC-1015PED-MU17-1166505.html http://www.compuplus.com/ASUS-Eee-PC-1015PED-MU17-1166505.ht... for example. GPS - when I can get a standalone satnav unit for $70 with its own processor, screen battery et al, that's hardly adding up to a huge extra cost. The accelerometer and gyro can be handled by a single relatively cheap chip from what I remember. Netbooks also have keyboards, touchpads and extra interface parts such as USB and SVGA that tablets don't tend to have - not expensive components in themselves but extra parts to integrate into the design that aren't supplied with tablets. And, in a large number of cases, they come with a Windows license. So, we're left with an SSD rather than HDD (retail, marginal cost about $70 for bigger drives than tablets use) and a touchscreen rather than a non-touchscreen (don't know the component suppliers for them to research it). I still don't see why they're so much more expensive, beyond 'because we can' novelty value. The numbers simply don't stack up for me.

scrrr 16y ago

The way Motorola has handled updates for the Droid and the high price will make the Xoom flop.