Slashdot Mirror
HP Drops Price Again For Its WebOS-Based iPad Challenger
oxide7 writes with this selection from IBT: "Hewlett Packard reduced the price of its TouchPad tablet computer again, highlighting the uphill battle manufacturers will need to overcome as they go head-to-head against the dominant Apple iPad line of tablets. Much of a tablet's success is based on the ecosystem of apps that is available to the end-user. HP is far behind Apple or even the No.2 tablet platform, Google's Android."
"I'll buy that for a dollar!"
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
There was a time many tech users and writers were excited about WebOS. I have read many reviews claiming it was possibly the best OS, compared to iOS and Android at the time.
But HP has taken an extremely long time to ship anything running WebOS. They have a tablet out, but still have not shipped a phone with competitive hardware.
They lost their momentum......
Until there is a robust application ecosystem for the tablet, it will remain niche. Who cares if you save $100, but you can't do anything fun with it? Hundreds of apps - even if they're all good - means very little competition on pricing and features, and lots of black market segments (insert fart app joke here). It the reason I skipped the android tablets this past spring - a dearth of full screen apps.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Folks, if you want to beat iXYZ (of which I'm not a fanboi):
1. You have to have better hardware
2. A lower price
3. Or both (best)
Otherwise, why would anyone move to your platform?
That said, WebOS is an awesome open-sourceish platform. It looks great too, and it's easy to make apps.
I hope it gains traction to preserve some sanity in the marketplace and prevent a total Steve Jobs monopoly.
I see it as a partner, and not enemy of Android in this endeavor.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
You can buy a $99 tablet at Walgreens. Of course, it's a piece of shit compared to the iPad, but if you really want a cheap tablet, they are available.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
"Bring the price down to less than $200."
Computer businesses want to preserve margin. That's why they don't keep producing older models and dropping the price. Anyone not liking that can buy a used machine instead.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Which is a damn shame, because WebOS is such a damn good mobile OS.
I'm not sure if it's this price drop or the fact that it showed up on Woot for 20 bucks off a few days ago that really is the final bell for WebOS.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Apple fans have too much money, huh? That must explain why many of the iPad competitors actually cost more?
The fact you are, 1) calling the iPad a "tablet", and b) comparing its hardware specs to a netbook, tells me you don't get what makes the iPad the dominant device in its segment.
"Much of a tablet's success is based on the ecosystem of apps that is available to the end-user."
It seems like the summary author needs to be reminded that this was precisely Apple's dilemma for decades, and to a degree still is with its desktop OS versus Windows.
Personally I'm inclined to resist any browser-as-OS solution with every fiber of my being, just as I have been software subscriptions. The writing is on the wall: the browser-as-OS gambit is intended to warm people up to the notion of software in the "cloud", and software in the cloud will inevitably lead to subscriptions. Once the instructions no longer even execute on your hardware, you're a hostage.
so why are so many iPads syncing to Windows machines?
I like the fact that browsing and doing stuff doesn't have to be constrained either by small screen size or having to gently handle a laptop.
I can flip open my iPad's smart cover and be ready to browse. Can't do that on a cheap ass netbook or laptop.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
So, 30 million people though that they needed Apple's new thing?
Or maybe 30 million people thought it was better than any laptop out there, for their needs, for the same price?
Or maybe you're just plain wrong.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
the ipad is not a tablet, it's a rectangular slab of magic !
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Grindr.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
anything they touch turns to sand.
They could have written the book on 'How to take over a profitable business and destroy it' or 'Business Destruction for Dummies'.
I should know, having worked for them for 20+ years and seen it all happen.
Now I'm an HP Pensioner my opinion of them is that they couldn't make a decent product to save themselves.
It is a shame really. Once upon a time the was a lot of really good talent there but the Dilbert PHB says everything you need to know about HP management,
Carly was known as the 'Wicked Witch from Elbonia' in my former group (which she disbanded despite increasing business by 25% year on year).
If software titles were platform independent then people wouldn't get locked in to a certain platform, and wouldn't care about buying what their friends have in order to have apps/games that talk to each other nicely. More people probably would be buying HP (or other) tablets if it weren't for this.
Apple still supports HTML5/Javascript apps and developers can make cross platform apps using this technology. Some do, but most don't see value in cross platform and are focused on developing something quickly.
Funny, because Apple originally wanted only web-clips and not native apps...
Apple originally championed HTML5/javascript as the only native development platform, but developers wanted a more full featured dev environment and toolset so Apple adapted their existing Xcode.
Of course then devices probably could not run any apps locally.
Why not? Apple has a very nice standard HTML and javascript engine on the phone and you don't need an external server to host it as javascript runs client side. Heck Apple even committed to supporting phonegap so you can compile Web apps for sale in the app store. There are hundreds of apps, some fairly major that are cross platform using this dev platform.
When is Shashdot going to get a "like" button?!
What? The Newton wasn't a failure at all, let alone a "massive" one. Jobs axed it, along with a lot of other things at Apple, to streamline their focus. Apple was working on the iPad for years (and in fact, the iPhone came out of this project).
The only thing it failed was Jobs' return to Apple. What it wasn't was a massive success, like almost everything Apple has done for the past decade.
you don't get what makes the iPad the dominant device in its segment.
Marketing?
No, delivering a product people want. Marketing tells people about your product, but you can't keep something as popular as the iPad (and the iPhone and the iPod) popular for as long as it has been primarily on marketing.
That's what you guys have been saying about the iPod for a decade now. When the truth is much simpler: most people don't like what you like.
What is it if not a tablet?
Not a netbook, which was his point.
(posted from my Xoom :)
Funny, I recall a rather strong marketing campaign for the Xoom. As I understand it, Motorola has sold many thousand of them. But since it's what you like, these sales had nothing to do with marketing. Only the "mindless drones" who like things you don't like are that stupid!
Even this Slashdot thread quickly diverges into talking about the iPad. HP and the others struggle because not only fans of the iPad are constantly talking about it, but "enemies" of it, too. So the iPad becomes the de facto tablet.
Exactly, somehow *your* choice had nothing to do with marketing, because you're so superior, but anyone who chooses something you don't like? Why, that can only be due to marketing!
At least, that's what your one-liner response of "marketing?" conveys. The iPad dominates the market because people buy it. People buy it because they like it. You bought a Xoom because you like it. Just because someone likes something you don't like is no reason to lash out at them.
There is more to the computer then just hardware and software young grasshopper. There is the User Experience, ergo, a consistent and well-designed UI for a touch device, or I should say, lack of them, is what makes all the other touch devices look like toys compared to the iPad.
Take a look at WebOS and the QNX OS on the PlayBook -- both are vastly superior in terms to the iPad in both the UI and the nebulous "User Experience".
They make the iPad look like a clunky antique. Hell, they STILL haven't managed a notification system that's even comes close to what a 10-year-old blackberry!
Maybe someday Apple will catch up to the competition, but I'm not holding my breath. They seem to be doing quite well selling the myth that their product is easiest to use and had the best "user experience"; why bother innovating when you can dominate the market on that basis alone?
Required reading for internet skeptics