The Pepsi P1 Smartphone Takes Consumer Lock-In Beyond the App (thestack.com)

An anonymous reader writes: On the 20th of October Pepsi will launch its own smartphone in China. The P1 is not just a cowling brand, but a custom-made device running Android 5.1 and costing approximately $205. At that price it's almost a burner, but even so it represents new possibilities for a brand to truly control the digital space for its eager consumers in a period where mobile content-blocking is becoming a marketing obstruction, and where there is increasing resistance on Google's part to allow publishers to push web-users from the internet to 'the app'.

Comments

$205 is "almost a burner"

[Anonymous Coward]

When did $205 become "almost a burner"? That's "almost a decent mid-end smartphone off contract", not "almost a burner". And this is in China to boot...

Re:"At that price it's almost a burner"

[Anonymous Coward]

A $40 Walmart feature phone or a sub-$20 off Craigslist could be a "burner". $200 isn't even notably cheap by general smart phone standards.

$200 is "almost a burner"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Submitter must be a privileged Silly Valley cocksucker who has never experienced a minute of hardship in his life.

Re:"At that price it's almost a burner"

[Nite_Hawk]

The 16GB version of the ASUS zenfone2 is $199.99 carrier-free and is considered to be a reasonably good mid-grade phone.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00VW...

Re:"At that price it's almost a burner"

[Fwipp]

I bought my phone new for $80 a year ago, and I didn't even have to look hard for it. 2013 Moto G. This year's model (just came out) is $180; the Moto E is even cheaper, $120. You can save more money by buying it from a carrier (still unlocked, no obligation to use with that carrier). They aren't the only company making cheap Android phones, either.

There's also a whole bunch of cheap Windows phones out there.

Re:"At that price it's almost a burner"

[mopower70]

"In the 1%" means you make $32,400 a year.

Source: globalrichlist.com

I personally sit in the top 0.38%.

Now you're just being pedantic. "The 1%" was a phrase popularized by the Occupy Wall Street movement, and refers almost exclusively to wealth inequity in America. The median income for the cohort to which the phrase "The 1%" refers is $400,000. Global wealth has no seriously meaningful value when considered on the scale of the individual. By your metric, the average homeless person in the US will be in the top 15 - 20%.

Re:Count your teeth. 30 calories vs 150

[ColdWetDog]

Pasteurizing milk literally kills it. Whole, raw milk is shelf-stable, and perfectly safe to consume. Left too long it simply turns into cheese. Once processed however, after a mere few days it grows highly toxic mold and fungus at a rate in direct proportion to the amount of processing (whole vs 2% vs skim). Interesting, no?

Pasteurizing milk wasn't done to piss goofball foodies off. It was done as a public health measure. Look up Listeria and see if it's 'perfectly safe'.

TL;DR - read the quote from the Wikipedia article:

The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) says improperly handled raw milk is responsible for nearly three times more hospitalizations than any other food-borne disease outbreak, making it one of the world's most dangerous food products.[15][16] Diseases prevented by pasteurization can include tuberculosis, brucellosis, diphtheria, scarlet fever, and Q-fever; it also kills the harmful bacteria Salmonella, Listeria, Yersinia, Campylobacter, Staphylococcus aureus, and Escherichia coli O157:H7,[17][18] among others.