3 ms·

Perhaps they should cut the price in half. And double the screen resolution.

• mgkimsal 14y ago
  at least cut the price. I don't get why companies are keen to dump hundreds of millions in development, but don't want to cut price on something because they'll "lose money" on the product. There's probably more accounting issues and 'predatory pricing' arguments and such that could be made, but at the end of the day, they've already spent the money on all the development of the mobile/surface/phone stuff. If more people aren't using it enough to be a serious long-term player, they've "lost" the money already. "Losing" a bit more by selling the hardware at cost or below cost to establish an installed base doesn't seem wrong. Don't console manufacturers do that, and it's accepted in that market?
  • danso 14y ago
    Cutting the initial price near rollout sets a bar for every future iteration of that product. Just like how every iOS game has to grapple with the fact that Angry Birds is only 99 cents, and a load of other very popular games are "free". There are ways for higher-priced products to prevail against the expected price, but it's not easy.
    • mgkimsal 14y ago
      But... they do it with xbox (IIRC), because everyone else is doing it. In the short term (next 2-4 years) no one is going to be able to compete with ipads in the $500 range. Kindle Fires have enough tie to Amazon to be OK there for a while. MS could fight better in that market. Or... goodness, just have shipped the $499 Surface with the keyboard/cover bundled, just so people are getting something "extra" with the $500.
• rwallace 14y ago
  Losing money on every unit and trying to make it up in volume is not a winning move! But doubling the screen resolution yes. Low-resolution screens don't cut it anymore now Apple has set the new standard.