Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
HP Looking to Undercut iPad Pricing With 3G-Capable Slate Device
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
apple is paying nokia, just not as much as nokia wants. there are also issues that some patents that nokia wants royalties for are part of international standards bodies where the royalties are supposed to be paid to
Well said, I would guess that Steve would never come out and give away all the goodies so easy. Plus this is only first Gen, I figure by years end who knows what that iPad OS will be able to do.
It may even be able to do something useful. Or maybe it won't contain oversized, ridiculous looking icons spaced awkwardly on a screen!
Big mistake here: Apps provide a huge advantage for iPhone vs competitors because there are almost no Apps for the other phones. BUT for something like the slate, running W7, there are zillions of Apps out there for basically anything you want to do, from games to utilities, etc. That has always been a field in which Windows was far superior to Macs: tones of free apps in the internet to choose from. No need to pay. There's nothing delivered by Apple apps that could not be delivered by windows apps, except the stupid tight control Apple exerts over them.
People keep repeating this, and while it may have been true in 2002, it hasn't been true for several years - in 2007 the iTunes store made a profit of $600 million for apple, and it has only been going up since then. It's not their most profitable line, of course, but it's clearly nothing to sneeze at, either.
if it's anything like my HP Compaq 8510p $1500 business laptop the keyboard will die as well. the LCD will break and HP will say it's your fault and the replacement will start acting up in a year as well
I think if you want to hack around on a tablet, the iPad is not the right choices. An infinate number of applications from an infinate number of skilled and unskilled developers following THEIR own standards you will have an infinate number of issues.
The problem with the open OS is that while it might have good for the PC Generation, its not the same "time" as it was when almost anyone who had a PC ran out to buy the parts and put together a system. It is about the entire experience and that is where Apple has the market on these devices.
I say get the Windows, Android or Linux based tablet. I know you and others will really enoy it. I know you and others will have a screening system that does all kinds of cool stuff. I bet sometime in the future that I would get a non-apple tablet.
I also know that my wife, my in-laws, my dad, my mom and myself will all be using Apple Tablets for the exact oppisite reasons that you went for the other options. That is cool, I just don't see the average person really enjoying the tablet experience with a more generic system.
That is exactly what all the DOS fanboys said about the original Mac when we showed them a mouse operated UI.
And some of us have to make a living. My netbook runs Microsoft Project and Primavera P3 quite well as well as Video Conferencing back to the office when I'm on a job site. As a matter of fact, it will do just about anything I need to do my job when I'm out of my office.
Sounds to me like the iPad is just a little playtoy - maybe Apple can call it the "Funnest tablet ever".............
once i told my wife who has no idea what Flash is that the itampon won't play farmville, all interest was lost
Well there are lots of free apps on the App store, I've got tons of apps for my iPhone and most of them are free or Advertiment supported.
The problem with Windows Applications is that they were designed for a keyboard and mouse and there is a huge difference between an application for a tablet and an applications for a keyboard.
However the REAL KICKER for applications is the central distrabution that the app store provides developers. When Apple talks about a "Gold Rush" they are talked about people getting some very serious cash becuase that are providing FREE distrabution!!!
There is no other system that exists, that provides an eco-system like the app store, that has millions of customers where a single person can come up with a good idea, or even a lame idea, submit it an then have the oppertunity to sell 10,000 copies at $0.99 each. Even with the Apple "Cut' that is about $6000 in revenue. To sell 10,000 of anything for a $0.99 you would have to spend much more than 6k just in marketing.
Then when the end user purchases the application, they know at least 2 things about the application:
1. It works becuase Apple tested it
2. It is not going to hurt there devices becuase it was tested.
All that in combination of many things is what makes the iPad and iPhone work.
Again, as I have stated.. There is room for a more generic device but the numbers will be small as compared to the iPad.
Which is why Apple is going to sell a bunch of Ipads...
I agree. A WiFi-only model is a silly move. Wouldn't it be a smarter business move to have 3G in every model knowing the consumer is likely to subscribe to 3G service at some point? Why not have that automatic upsell potential in every single model?
3G capability by default should be a no-brainer for a device like this.
Can you practicially play farmville without a mouse and keyboard? (I've never played it. I am just one of the millions annoted by the updates...)
Yes, this is so 2003. It looks like many don't realise they can get a Windows touchscreen PC since the early 2000's and try what's working or not on those.
To summarize, these aren't smooth-running devices. They need to drag the whole Windows OS behind them, need large batteries for the X86 etc.
Better have a computer that's optimised for multitouch with a fast ARM CPU.
That's why the iPad is an improvement. An X86 Mac Tablet with no touch optimisation would have been a 1.0 version: the obvious non-innovative choice. For those in doubt, go try an Archos 9 Win7 tablet.
Good for you. On a netbook though?
Maybe you need to make a better living and buy a full size laptop - Can't imaging its much fun hunching over a tiny screen all day.
You are talking about two separate markets. There is tight control over the iPhone OS Applications, however the Macintosh has an open market of applications, with thousands of free options, just like Windows. I also don't think Windows is far superior in that respect, at least, not anymore.
Still, you pay less for an iPad subscription than you would for a netbook subscription. Verizon wants $40/mo for their 250MB netbook plan, $60 for their 5GB netbook plan. Compare that to $15/mo for 250MB and $30/mo for "unlimited" (really, that's probably 5GB too, if they enforce it).
The outlet is not very close to my dining room table or my couch. When it's charging, I can't use it very well.
$600M looks like a gross profit, and it's a sliver of their business at that. What is the net profit & net profit margin?
Is anyone else here as sick as I am of watching other companies copying Apple?
No. I like competition. Plus. the iPad is not that revolutionary. It's an iteration that other manufactures have pursued.
Is anyone else here as sick as I am of watching other companies copying Apple?
It's going to happen, unfortunately. The thing is, these lousy copies never quite reach the Real Thing.
ROFL! Complex? What is "complex" about Android?
All these scenarios assume your Android device is locked.
- Did you struggle changing settings on the device you used? (Unlock> Open App drawer > Settings).
- Did you have problems enabling wifi, bluetooth or changing screen brightness? (Unlock> click on Wifi/Bluetooth/brightness widget.)
- Did you have problems finding and running apps? (Unlock> Open App drawer> Tap on app icon)
- Wallpapers? (Unlock> Tap menu button> Wallpaper)
- Acessing search? (Unlock> Hit search button)
All of the above is EASY and you also have the ability to customise your homescreen any way you like (unless that was too complex too). Please educate me on these Android complexities.
How are Apple already paying Nokia?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8321058.stm
I thought that neither party could come to an agreement on what was to be paid (hence the lawsuit).