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......
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."
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.
Care to give some examples? And when you say 'better hardware', remember that physical dimensions are one of the most important aspects of the hardware to a typical user, while CPU power is significantly less important. So, your mission (should you choose to accept it) name one Android tablet that:
Last time I checked, there were no Android tablets that even met the first requirement, and the ones that matched the second two failed the third. I don't really see the point of this kind of device, so I've not looked very closely, but I have read comments from Samsung about how difficult it was to compete with Apple because they could get the components significantly cheaper due to their large volumes (purchasing volumes, that is, not the girth of their users).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
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).
It depends on what you do. I'll admit I got my iPad (v1, after the 2 came out so I could save ~$300) because I knew it had certain apps in the store that would be good (I have an iPhone, which won out over the Nexus 1 about 20 months ago).
There are some apps that work regardless - web surfing, netflix, local streaming, email, text input. Then there are productivity apps, like the software for the remote storage service (aka cloud) I use, PDF reading and annotation, calendaring/journaling, structural steel design and property apps (I'm a struct engr) etc. And, of course, stuff that's just fun - like a good piano app, games that my 9 yo likes, flipboard, and a host of others.
I actually use it for a pretty wide variety of tasks. It's the cheapest way (at $15/mo) to get cellular data so I can pull up calculations, cut sheets, specs, and drawings from my office server when I'm in the field or in a project meeting. I can also store and synchronize my entire sheet music library for my chorus, quartet, and special event groups on it so I can review/practice music wherever I am. When my daughter went on a vacation this summer with my wife and in-laws, we loaded up a couple of books and about 2 dozen movies for the trip. She watched about 4-5 movies and read something close to 1000 pages, while my wife got directions and planned side trips on it, all in a form factor that fit easily into her mini-backpack.
Mine is actually quite useful, and I prefer the form factor for reading, sharing, and consuming information. It sucks rocks at creating, and I still have a small notebook for when I'm going to go somewhere and have to do work (reports, drawings). It fills a niche, and does it very well - but it would be useless, or at least cumbersome, without a wide variety of purpose-built software.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
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.
After years of having "internet" buttons and the like on my cell phone, which was just code for "charge me a lot of money for something that does't really work when I hit it accidentally" I am a fan of Apple's approach. In fact I'm mystified by Android approach to put a mess of buttons for specific functionality right there on the front of the device. It seems like a throwback to a less happy time to me.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
To which I counter with: the home button is far too overloaded.
-]Phreak Out[-