I find this sort of thing rather amusing. You didn't trust the Android software shipped on the phone...
So you download ten million or so lines of source code, build it, and install it all using tools running on yet another OS with it's own drivers and on hardware with its own BIOS and roms and controllers. Hundreds of millions of lines of code you've never seen, and never will see...
And yet the end product of THAT result is somehow more trustworthy.
"No. Most of those people would NOT have bought an extra PC, even if no tablets of phones existed."
Really? People didn't buy notebooks when they had desktops? People didn't buy super small and light netbooks when they already had a 10 lb. "desktop replacement" notebooks? People who had 15" MBPs didn't buy Airs for meetings and on the go type things?
People didn't buy a newer, lighter notebook because the bought an iPad? And people -- like me -- didn't give his mom an iPad so she could have email and stuff, and not a desktop or notebook.
From TFA: Retrevo’s Andrew Eisner wrote on a company blog. “As popular as the Kindle Fire appears in this study, whether it lives up to expectations on things like battery life, performance, image quality, etc, the picture could get brighter or less bright for the Kindle Fire.”
The picture could get brighter OR less bright for the Kindle Fire. Yep. That's a clear viewpoint.
"...27% said they would upgrade to a Kindle Fire..."
I don't know if you can "upgrade" to a Fire, unless they're counting current Kindle e-ink owners in the mix. I own an iPad AND I'm buying a Fire to dink around with. $199 is cheap enough that surely I can find some use for it, if only to keep in the bathroom... (grin)
"What's funny is that you seem to think that categorically, every single iOS feature beats every single Android feature... is just showing ignorance."
Reread for comprehension, please. "... but it tends to be implemented in a half-assed manner." Tends to be. Tends. As in usually, but not always. Lack of polish in Android applications and development tools is a well-known issue. Garbage and ripoff apps in the Marketplace are well known issues (not even mentioning malware). Carrier bloatware. Abandoned phones and lack of updates. Etc., etc..
Android's primary advantage is that it's sold in more places by more carriers. Without that artificial subsidy and carrier "push" sales would be a fraction of what they are now. Few people buy Android solely because it's Android, just as few people buy Linux desktops and even fewer people buy Android-based tablets.
"Y'all wanna know why desktops and laptops are in decline?"
Well, except for Apple. What is it? Six straight years of end-over-end gains?
"... but it ain't because everyone is using an iPad..."
Okay. But Apple sold 40 million of them, and that's 40 million sales that could have gone to notebooks or netbooks, but didn't. And IDC said that tablet sales will be equivalent to 15% of the PC market in 2011.
"The ones that survive are gonna be smart and doing value add like me."
I think there's still a few places where you can find people to setup component stereo systems too. Doesn't mean that they're mass market products.
Don't get me wrong. There are still plenty of reasons that someone might want a desktop or notebook. But some of those needs are currently being fulfilled with smartphones and tablets, and as those devices get better and better (up to the PC "good enough") PC sales will continue to decline.
Re:Only "troubled" if you're not Lockheed Martin
on
The F-35 Story
·
· Score: 1
"And at the end of it, if they're late, you can't just cut them off because that would mean you've thrown all the money you've given them away."
The problem is that they know all of that, so they deliberately underbid the contract in order to get it in the first place, then deliberately go over budget in order to make up for the lost profits.
"I'd take this a step further, in my state, not only are the scientists and teachers overworked and under payed... I doubt I would have gotten in the field."
There's something a bit scary about a teacher who can't even spell "payed" (paid).
"Something that's better than what you have, because it is. And much like wine, you're never going to convince them that Android has all the same features."
See, that's the problem with Android. If you put a checklist side-by-side, the nerds look at it and say, "Oh, see! Checks win both columns. Android has that feature too!"
But it doesn't. Or rather, it does, but it tends to be implemented in a half-assed manner. Whereas Apple has taken the same exact thing, pared it down to its essentials, and then polished the result until it shines.
Yes, printing prices have increased, but printing and distribution is still not 70% of the cost of a real book. (Your original statement.) Heck, the publisher wholesales the book to the retailer for half the MSRP. If the retailer gets 50%, then printing and distribution, by simple mathematics, can NOT be 70% of the price of a book. (50%+70%=120%, with no profit and no royalties.)
"Even if ebooks were priced 50% of the retail cost of physical books publishers stand to make much more profits with ebooks."
As pointed out, most ebooks ARE basically 50% of the price of the hardback's MSRP. You seem to be saying that publishers need to mark down the cost of a book to 25% of the MSRP, in order for the price to be half of some retailer's 40% discount loss-leader price.
Start over with facts. Retailer's get 50% of the MSRP. Publisher's get 50% of the MSRP. Any discount a retailer makes comes out of his 50%. So when you see a $25 book on Amazon selling for $16, it's Amazon that's discounting the book 36%.
The ebooks are $35. The ebook set is marked down to $29. (not great) The physical books are also $35, but Amazon, the retailer, NOT the publisher, is choosing to mark them down to $21.
Now, what reason might Amazon -- who sells ebook hardware and has an ebook platform -- have for discounting the price of one below the price of the other?
Publishers already mark down the ebook price to half the price of the hardback. It's not their fault that some retailers discount the hardback retail price 30%-40%, or even 50%-60% as loss leaders.
And the physical cost of a typical hardback is about $3. Everything else is base costs, marketing, author royalties, publisher profits, and retailer profits. (The store that sells it likes to make money too, you know.)
All of the other costs you mention would be terrible if they were born by the cost of a single book. But they're printed in batches of thousands at a time, and shipped across the ocean in a single container along with thousands of other containers who are also subsidizing the costs involved. Same for the other trucks, warehouses, and so on. The additional costs, applied to a single book, MIGHT be a buck.
"Also, for reading in bed, there are many covers out that have LED lights. You can buy a clipon LED light for $7. And they work great. They illuminate the text perfectly and evenly."
So in order for my $200 device to work correctly I need to clip a cheap-ass light to it? Wonderful.
As to "Apples" to oranges, they both have screens, the both have Kindle apps, they both allow reading ebooks. You may think they're different, but in many cases they can do the same thing. The only really advantage an e-ink Kindle has is reading in direct sunlight, battery life, and cost.
And with several improvements coming in regard to dual-mode LCD displays and improved power management, the e-ink advantage is fading quickly.
Just out of curiosity I went looking around and may have found out why you're not getting color e-Ink. I found two devices offering color e-ink displays and they cost $400-$500.
You may want color e-Ink, but are you willing to pay 3x the current Kindle price to get it?
"The folks at Forrester Research reversed themselves last week with the recommendation that corporate IT departments need to make it easier for workers to use Mac computers and devices. The tech research firm had long told the same IT departments not to bother accommodating devices from Apple Inc."
"Why the change of mind? Forrester says it is because the most productive employees, what it dubs "power users," are already using Macs, anyways."
"...and the 16:10 aspect ratio virtually everyone considers ideal..."
Virtually everyone? Doubtful. In fact, I suspect that the only people who might find it superior are the ones who tend to watch more TV and movies. Especially since when they get to be that size they seem to be designed for a horizontal format.
We took the kid to a fencing class last night at the community center and about a third of the parents there had iPads. Most were reading or checking email and Facebook. One had a Kindle. Everyone else was on a phone.
"but the "one size fits all" approach combined with Apple's resistance to letting the people who buy their stuff do any changes to it means that very few people are perfectly served by the model range."
USB, FireWire, Thunderbolt, ExpressCard/34, 802.11n, Bluetooth. AirPort Extreme and Express.
I've added a ton of stuff to my system, and it fits my needs perfectly.
"Samsung may be ahead of Apple in terms of phones sold, but they have probably 25 SKUs where Apple only has 3 of them (4S, 4 and 3GS)."
An SKU is a distinct, unique entity. The iPhone is a product line. The 4S is a product.
Hence your statement is incorrect. Apple has 16GB, 32GB, and 64GB 4Ss in both black and white. That's 6 distinct SKUs, not 1. The 4 was worse, in that you had 8GB, 16GB, and 32GB, white and black, and GSM vs CDMA, or 12 SKUs.
"To the mutual fund who doesn't know that mortgage derivative #7 was the pile of garbage loans the bank is trying to ditch and #6 was the pile of good loans they're using to base their projections for all the derivatives off, buying a stake in #6 and #7 look like equivalent choices."
Actually, the pile of garbage loans were often split up and merged into the better group, all while maintaining the better group's rating. In some cases, an even higher percentage of risky loans were merged into the good group. This was done so hedge funds could bet against the investment funds, and make money when they failed.
Slashdot Mirror
"Then I was quite sure I had a clean phone."
I find this sort of thing rather amusing. You didn't trust the Android software shipped on the phone...
So you download ten million or so lines of source code, build it, and install it all using tools running on yet another OS with it's own drivers and on hardware with its own BIOS and roms and controllers. Hundreds of millions of lines of code you've never seen, and never will see...
And yet the end product of THAT result is somehow more trustworthy.
Right.
"No. Most of those people would NOT have bought an extra PC, even if no tablets of phones existed."
Really? People didn't buy notebooks when they had desktops? People didn't buy super small and light netbooks when they already had a 10 lb. "desktop replacement" notebooks? People who had 15" MBPs didn't buy Airs for meetings and on the go type things?
People didn't buy a newer, lighter notebook because the bought an iPad? And people -- like me -- didn't give his mom an iPad so she could have email and stuff, and not a desktop or notebook.
All of those people add up...
From TFA: Retrevo’s Andrew Eisner wrote on a company blog. “As popular as the Kindle Fire appears in this study, whether it lives up to expectations on things like battery life, performance, image quality, etc, the picture could get brighter or less bright for the Kindle Fire.”
The picture could get brighter OR less bright for the Kindle Fire. Yep. That's a clear viewpoint.
"...27% said they would upgrade to a Kindle Fire..."
I don't know if you can "upgrade" to a Fire, unless they're counting current Kindle e-ink owners in the mix. I own an iPad AND I'm buying a Fire to dink around with. $199 is cheap enough that surely I can find some use for it, if only to keep in the bathroom... (grin)
"What's funny is that you seem to think that categorically, every single iOS feature beats every single Android feature ... is just showing ignorance."
Reread for comprehension, please. "... but it tends to be implemented in a half-assed manner." Tends to be. Tends. As in usually, but not always. Lack of polish in Android applications and development tools is a well-known issue. Garbage and ripoff apps in the Marketplace are well known issues (not even mentioning malware). Carrier bloatware. Abandoned phones and lack of updates. Etc., etc..
Android's primary advantage is that it's sold in more places by more carriers. Without that artificial subsidy and carrier "push" sales would be a fraction of what they are now. Few people buy Android solely because it's Android, just as few people buy Linux desktops and even fewer people buy Android-based tablets.
"Y'all wanna know why desktops and laptops are in decline?"
Well, except for Apple. What is it? Six straight years of end-over-end gains?
"... but it ain't because everyone is using an iPad..."
Okay. But Apple sold 40 million of them, and that's 40 million sales that could have gone to notebooks or netbooks, but didn't. And IDC said that tablet sales will be equivalent to 15% of the PC market in 2011.
"The ones that survive are gonna be smart and doing value add like me."
I think there's still a few places where you can find people to setup component stereo systems too. Doesn't mean that they're mass market products.
Don't get me wrong. There are still plenty of reasons that someone might want a desktop or notebook. But some of those needs are currently being fulfilled with smartphones and tablets, and as those devices get better and better (up to the PC "good enough") PC sales will continue to decline.
"And at the end of it, if they're late, you can't just cut them off because that would mean you've thrown all the money you've given them away."
The problem is that they know all of that, so they deliberately underbid the contract in order to get it in the first place, then deliberately go over budget in order to make up for the lost profits.
"I'd take this a step further, in my state, not only are the scientists and teachers overworked and under payed ... I doubt I would have gotten in the field."
There's something a bit scary about a teacher who can't even spell "payed" (paid).
"Something that's better than what you have, because it is. And much like wine, you're never going to convince them that Android has all the same features."
See, that's the problem with Android. If you put a checklist side-by-side, the nerds look at it and say, "Oh, see! Checks win both columns. Android has that feature too!"
But it doesn't. Or rather, it does, but it tends to be implemented in a half-assed manner. Whereas Apple has taken the same exact thing, pared it down to its essentials, and then polished the result until it shines.
Yes, printing prices have increased, but printing and distribution is still not 70% of the cost of a real book. (Your original statement.) Heck, the publisher wholesales the book to the retailer for half the MSRP. If the retailer gets 50%, then printing and distribution, by simple mathematics, can NOT be 70% of the price of a book. (50%+70%=120%, with no profit and no royalties.)
"Even if ebooks were priced 50% of the retail cost of physical books publishers stand to make much more profits with ebooks."
As pointed out, most ebooks ARE basically 50% of the price of the hardback's MSRP. You seem to be saying that publishers need to mark down the cost of a book to 25% of the MSRP, in order for the price to be half of some retailer's 40% discount loss-leader price.
Start over with facts. Retailer's get 50% of the MSRP. Publisher's get 50% of the MSRP. Any discount a retailer makes comes out of his 50%. So when you see a $25 book on Amazon selling for $16, it's Amazon that's discounting the book 36%.
The ebooks are $35. The ebook set is marked down to $29. (not great) The physical books are also $35, but Amazon, the retailer, NOT the publisher, is choosing to mark them down to $21.
Now, what reason might Amazon -- who sells ebook hardware and has an ebook platform -- have for discounting the price of one below the price of the other?
"Considering 70% of the cost of a real book is wrapped up in printing and distribution..."
How about considering numbers other than those pulled out of your *** in order to make your point? Physical costs are about 11% of the MSRP.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/business/media/01ebooks.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Publishers already mark down the ebook price to half the price of the hardback. It's not their fault that some retailers discount the hardback retail price 30%-40%, or even 50%-60% as loss leaders.
And the physical cost of a typical hardback is about $3. Everything else is base costs, marketing, author royalties, publisher profits, and retailer profits. (The store that sells it likes to make money too, you know.)
All of the other costs you mention would be terrible if they were born by the cost of a single book. But they're printed in batches of thousands at a time, and shipped across the ocean in a single container along with thousands of other containers who are also subsidizing the costs involved. Same for the other trucks, warehouses, and so on. The additional costs, applied to a single book, MIGHT be a buck.
IOW, you're not being blatantly ripped off.
"Also, for reading in bed, there are many covers out that have LED lights. You can buy a clipon LED light for $7. And they work great. They illuminate the text perfectly and evenly."
So in order for my $200 device to work correctly I need to clip a cheap-ass light to it? Wonderful.
As to "Apples" to oranges, they both have screens, the both have Kindle apps, they both allow reading ebooks. You may think they're different, but in many cases they can do the same thing. The only really advantage an e-ink Kindle has is reading in direct sunlight, battery life, and cost.
And with several improvements coming in regard to dual-mode LCD displays and improved power management, the e-ink advantage is fading quickly.
Just out of curiosity I went looking around and may have found out why you're not getting color e-Ink. I found two devices offering color e-ink displays and they cost $400-$500.
You may want color e-Ink, but are you willing to pay 3x the current Kindle price to get it?
"I highly doubt the things the gp was talking about couldn't be done an eInk display."
Can they be done at the same price point?
Right...
"The folks at Forrester Research reversed themselves last week with the recommendation that corporate IT departments need to make it easier for workers to use Mac computers and devices. The tech research firm had long told the same IT departments not to bother accommodating devices from Apple Inc."
"Why the change of mind? Forrester says it is because the most productive employees, what it dubs "power users," are already using Macs, anyways."
"...and the 16:10 aspect ratio virtually everyone considers ideal..."
Virtually everyone? Doubtful. In fact, I suspect that the only people who might find it superior are the ones who tend to watch more TV and movies. Especially since when they get to be that size they seem to be designed for a horizontal format.
"There is also the theory that 7" is a better size than 9.5" for this market."
Because that worked out so well for RIM.
I'd say it because other manufacturers can't build to the 10" form factor and hit a competitive price point at the same time.
We took the kid to a fencing class last night at the community center and about a third of the parents there had iPads. Most were reading or checking email and Facebook. One had a Kindle. Everyone else was on a phone.
"Seriously, the reason those things won't replace desktops is the same reason laptops haven't, except much much more so."
You realize, of course, that laptops have in fact replaced desktops for the majority of people?
"They are premium consumer appliances and are losing in business as a result."
Try gaining business, quarter over quarter, for the last 6 years.
"but the "one size fits all" approach combined with Apple's resistance to letting the people who buy their stuff do any changes to it means that very few people are perfectly served by the model range ."
USB, FireWire, Thunderbolt, ExpressCard/34, 802.11n, Bluetooth. AirPort Extreme and Express.
I've added a ton of stuff to my system, and it fits my needs perfectly.
"... something that severs your needs..."
Ouch!
There's also the fact that, in a year or so, you can sell that 27" iMac for anywhere from 40-70% of the purchase price and buy a new one.
Try getting 50% of the purchase price for a two-year old pile of parts...
"Samsung may be ahead of Apple in terms of phones sold, but they have probably 25 SKUs where Apple only has 3 of them (4S, 4 and 3GS)."
An SKU is a distinct, unique entity. The iPhone is a product line. The 4S is a product.
Hence your statement is incorrect. Apple has 16GB, 32GB, and 64GB 4Ss in both black and white. That's 6 distinct SKUs, not 1. The 4 was worse, in that you had 8GB, 16GB, and 32GB, white and black, and GSM vs CDMA, or 12 SKUs.
"To the mutual fund who doesn't know that mortgage derivative #7 was the pile of garbage loans the bank is trying to ditch and #6 was the pile of good loans they're using to base their projections for all the derivatives off, buying a stake in #6 and #7 look like equivalent choices."
Actually, the pile of garbage loans were often split up and merged into the better group, all while maintaining the better group's rating. In some cases, an even higher percentage of risky loans were merged into the good group. This was done so hedge funds could bet against the investment funds, and make money when they failed.