Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Future of Subnotebook Pricing

Posted by Soulskill on from the cheap-things-come-to-those-who-wait dept.

Corpuscavernosa recommends a story from InternetNews about the development of the subnotebook market. The author notes the beginnings of a trend toward selling the devices bundled with certain services rather than as standalone products. He notes two examples; a free Asus Eee PC with a broadband package, and another for opening a bank account. Quoting: "Soon, the market will be overwhelmed by what I like to call 'mini me too' laptops -- commodity Asus clones that will drive margins for all players toward zero. There will be no real money to be made in direct sales of cheap mini-notebooks to consumers. I'm predicting that the successful pricing model for 'mini me too' laptops will look nothing like the notebook pricing model (where you always pay full price for the hardware), and a lot like the cell phone pricing model where you buy a service, and the hardware is heavily subsidized or given away free."

2 of 145 comments (clear)

  1. Subnotebooks like Cell phone plans? by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I dont think so. Cell phones have something on computers: they have a service that can go away if you dont pay the monthly fee.

    Computers one buys from a store does not. Microsoft and a few other companies have played around with "software as a service", but the smart ones snubbed it. Instead, it'll stay Linux and get cheaper and cheaper.

    --
  2. Re:Why there are no economist billionaires. by SunTzuWarmaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are correct. Economics not a science because it is not correct all of the time. Real sceinces like physics (black holes, wormholes, ultra-small interactions, anti-matter), chemistry (bonding theory, atomic model), biology (the issue of the appendix, 'natural' supplements, numerous other things they have been wrong about), microbiology (advancement of certain fungi, spread of disease, availability of microbiologies in harsh environments), and geoscience (plate tectonics, changing weather patterns, ice ages, global warming) are correct 100% of the time and do not change their theories.

    Do you honestly believe that because we switch dominant economic theories every "few decades" that it is less of a science? I mean, we flip-flop on issues like anti-matter every few years for physics.

    Of course, I'm replying to an anonymous coward, so I get no mod points and no one ever reads my refutation. *Sigh*