Slashdot Mirror
Tablet Makers Try To Beat iPad's $500 Pricetag
The iPad has sold extremely well at a starting price of $500 but "that kind of pricing doesn't work for many tablet vendors," says a story at CNET. And recent price drops reflect this. It's been a rough year for tablet makers, and it's not even Black Friday yet.
Whereas Apple is relying on their lock-in to the "we get a cut of the action, see" iTunes store. It is a tried and true method. For further reference, see cell phones and how they are subsidized by carriers.
And Amazon is selling the Fire at a loss of what, $10?
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Except iOS devices aren't loss leaders for Apple. Apple makes a negligible amount of profit off of its App Store. The bulk of Apple's profit comes from every device that goes out the door—whether it's paid for by you or by a combination of you and your mobile carrier.
Or, they could just apply absurd levels of marketing (especially product placement) to convince everyone that the cool people use your product...
Great Intellect...
The list goes on and on, but all the people who ask the question don't care at all about any of that. Pity, they should.
Why should they? That's a serious question, I'm not trying to troll here or be flamebait.
The demographic for the iPad is completely divorced from the features you have listed as the main reasons you went for a non-iPad tablet, and given that you can get those other types of tablets, and the users getting iPads are also getting what they want, why should they care?
If they want to program on it, or run Python apps, or install custom firmwares and so on, then there's a market that already caters to that. If they want what the iPad does, then they have the iPad.
Just because the iPad doesn't fit your use case doesn't mean that anyone who doesn't want to do the things you do with computing equipment is somehow wrong, or that they should care about what you care about.
I can program it without paying a fee.
You can program the iPad without paying a fee. There's a fee if you want to publish to the store, however.
To get the best tools for developing for iOS, it's true that you want a Mac with Xcode, but it's not your only option anymore.
It's open source.
Could you point me to the Honeycomb source? Last I heard, it's never going to be available.
It's Linux.
Why is this valuable? The kernel that runs the Thrive is Linux, but that's almost completely irrelevant. For underlying OS code, I'm going to prefer that which does the job best. That might be Linux, or it might be something else. "It's Linux," smacks of the same kind of kool-aid drinking of which Apple users are so often accused.
I can run Python apps.
Certainly a nifty feature. However why should "all the people who ask the question" care about that? How many of them are going to care? Almost every one of them will just use apps from the Market.
I'm not hating on the Thrive, which looks like a very decent tablet. I'm just sick of the FUD, and I'm really tired of hearing about how open Android is, when it really doesn't follow FOSS principles at all. Most Android phones have to be hacked just like iPhones in order to replace the ROM. On those which don't, you lose all claim to a warranty (absent consumer protections to the contrary, which you'd have to fight in court in order to keep.)
Android is open in the same way that TiVo is open. You might be able to see the source (not so on 3.1, apparently) but you likely won't be able to modify it and run it on your device.
"Go to a university or place where the younger crowd hangs. Take a look around. Open your eyes. Then come back and tell me what you see *on average*, not under some one-off Linux nerd's desk."
Exactly, I went to a hipster cafe and I saw ZERO desktops being carried around. Oh, wait...
It's funny how you often see Apple fans saying this. But then when someone suggests that Apple should be regulated as a monopoly for its abusive practices surrounding its walled-garden, the fans' tunes immediately change (and I'm not addressing you in particular), and they say nooo there's a thriving ecosystem full of competition.
Though frankly, I think that the latter might be true. A year ago, people were saying that there is no tablet market, only an iPad market, and Apple's market share was hovering around 95% in tablets. At the last keynote, Apple was trumpeting that they control 75% of the market share in tablets. Losing 20% market share in a single year is actually pretty startling.
Now of course they had nowhere to go but down from 95%, but at 75% I think there actually is a tablet market, and not an iPad market, and any heavy-handed government regulation is probably uncalled for.
But if your argument is "I won't buy Apple because they outsource their manufacturing to the third world" then using an Android tablet is hardly taking the high ground.
Your arguments were not based on moral issues though - you were purely talking about the function of the device (unless we go down the road that Free Software is a moral issue, but assuming it's one of a couple of choices for a moment), so conflating this with the issues of globalisation and worker and environmental exploitation seems disingenuous, since in that respect there's not much to choose between any electronics manufacturer (that's not to say it's ok, or that we shouldn't continue to push for a better situation).
Your initial argument essentially boiled down to "people who bought iPads should care that the iPad is not like the Thrive", but I have to wonder why, given that both products are available, serving very different demographics.