Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 119
  1. #81  
    what's up with that price? Tablets don't have the specs of 700 dollar laptops why do they insist on charging laptop prices. 0_o? C'mon HP doesn't have enough to put out a product at that price is a market dominated by apple. Cut 150 off that price and you've got a winner.
  2. #82  
    Tablets are trying to be more portable laptop replacements. I think the prices are somewhat decent because you know newer hot technology costs more in the beginning, and also they have to make a profit. Although some of the really high prices do indeed make you want to just buy a netbook.

    But I remember when the old Windows portables and tablets were horribly expensive and limited. Those were truly overpriced. Remember these streamlined tablets of today really aren't the first tablets out of the gate, that includes the iPad. MSFT had these sponsored through manufacturers. But they never caught on.
    Last edited by The Phone Diva; 02/13/2011 at 08:26 PM.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  3. #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by Martin Blank View Post
    Always? Do you realize that for decades, HP has been one of the premier computing research organizations on the planet? The first laser printer was from HP. Some of the first atomic clocks came from HP, as did the first commercially-viable LEDs. The first scientific pocket calculator came out of HP, as did some of the first commercially-viable ultrasound.
    actually the laser printer was invented by Xerox and the first commercially available laser printer was made by IBM. The Xerox Star was the first "office" laser printer. It is true that HP made the technology affordable and ubiquitous with their original LaserJet in 1984, but even that machine used a print-engine designed and manufactured by Canon. HP's driver software made it work with standard PCs, but the laser printer was a viable device fully 20 years before HP "invented" it. The first medical ultsound machines were made in Sweden using modified naval sonar systems and were widely available in Europe before HP's machines made it into US hospitals. The first commercial atomic clocks were made by Atomichron in the 1950s, it is true that HP refined the design to rack-mountable device, but not until the mid 1960s. The infrared LED was invented and first marketed by Texas Instruments researchers and the first visible light LEDs were invented by General Electric researchers and the first commercialy available LEDs were made by Monsanto Corporation. HP's first LEDs were built with materials provided by Monsanto, though agan it's true HP made them commercialy successful with improved manufacturing techniques, in part accquired from partnership with Fairchild Semiconductor, without who HP would not have been able to make them cheaply. It is true that HP pioneered the pocket-scientific calculator, but Sharp, TI, Casio, Sinclair, and a number of other British, Japanese and even Soviet(!) pocket calculators existed prior to HP's machine. The HP-65 was the first pocket-size programmable calculator, but again Sharp and Casio had been making desktop units with similar function for years. HP did rule the scientific pocket calculator market for many years, but the last models, the 38g and 48(9)g(x) are now extreemely outdated and HP has basically given up on that particular market.

    not to be pedantic or anything.
    HP is very good at finding cheaper ways to manufacture technology invented by others this is true. And despite the age the 49gx is still a reitious calculator. I own one and it's awesome... Though the modern TIs and Casios are much faster and offer color and etc... HP's visual notation system for equations is still top notch (if slow to render) and the ability program the calculator in Basic, complete with access to memory, screen, ommunicatiom ports, and audio functions makes it an unrivaled general purpose computing device as far as calculators go.
    Last edited by Jawzx2; 02/13/2011 at 10:03 PM.
  4. #84  
    I first thought It had to be 500 or more cause of the xoom, but then I ran into the notion ink adam, and with fairly similar specs manages to sell it's tablet for 379.99, and that's some small random company that needs to make money in order to survive (think palm before being acquired by hp, profits were necessary in order to see tomorrow). Hp can easily make their tablet for atleast 30 dollars cheaper than notion ink can make theirs for (notion ink is a small company, ordering small supplies, hp can order bigger shipments at lower cost). It's also very possible that hp doesn't care much about making money, or is even perhaps willing to loose some for the first generation to get the market share, and developers. Which has me thinking why couldn't they sell it for that cheap? The original ipad cost about $260 to make, and the galaxy tab cost $200.

    Personally, at 599.99, I would get 0; at 400-450 I'd perhaps get 1, at 350.00, I would get 2-3 (not all for myself of course.)

    Notion Ink Adam: Tech Specs

    Because they want to compete with the ipad 2, but they have a slightly thicker device (compared to most believable ipad 2 rumors), is made out of plastic, has only one camera, and doesn't have the apple name (this is perhaps the most important one. Like Engadget pointed out, the ipad is like the ipod. When most people think of tablets, they don't think tablets, they think ipad. When people thought of mp3 players, they thought of ipods)
    ***I know many of those are too important to us, but to the average consumer they mean everything.


    While hp has integrated some very nice features, and will most likely announce other nice ones, Apple has it's own set of features that hp can't quite match yet. itunes (i know, hp has that sync thing coming, but that's still very early at best), or airplay. Hp has the advantage of being in every retail location, but that won't really help, unless theres a great price attached to it.
  5. cgk
    cgk is offline
    cgk's Avatar
    Posts
    3,868 Posts
    Global Posts
    9,494 Global Posts
    #85  
    It's also very possible that hp doesn't care much about making money, or is even perhaps willing to loose some for the first generation to get the market share, and developers. Which has me thinking why couldn't they sell it for that cheap?
    Because

    1) Leo is trying to increase the quality of profits by increasing margins across HP's lines.

    2) If you start at bargain basement prices, you set that as the upper celling on your products and also cut into your margins.
  6. #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by CGK View Post
    Because

    1) Leo is trying to increase the quality of profits by increasing margins across HP's lines.

    2) If you start at bargain basement prices, you set that as the upper celling on your products and also cut into your margins.
    Seems to me they chose their price ceiling when they chose to make an ipad knockoff. 299/399 might work for them.
  7. #87  
    I honestly don't expect to see any tablet sell for $300-$400 unless it's a low end brand or on contract. Depending on build quality and operation, we do have to see if HP's TouchPad will end up a low end tablet. I saw LG has released a decent tablet(though it may be expensive), coming in March. Lots of competition and HP will be late to the game. That's a bad start. That could indeed force HP to sell at a loss. But I'm still skeptical of $300. That puts HP TouchPad in the same class as Viewsonic and Cruz.
    Last edited by The Phone Diva; 02/14/2011 at 02:45 PM.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  8. #88  
    I think the problem here is that the smartphones actually costs around $400 to 600 (or more) without contract. The manufacturers cannot justify making the tablets cheaper than the smartphones. The tablets are more powerful than the smartphones, right? Therefore they have to cost more than smartphones. And nobody's going to buy tablets with contract so that they will be cheaper. I'm not sure how HP will bring down the tablet cost to affordability.
  9. #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by bmagee View Post
    I think the problem here is that the smartphones actually costs around $400 to 600 (or more) without contract.
    I'm no engineer, but I don't think that scales. It is more expensive to make a smartphone because it is smaller, with more radios. It is a much harder engineering feat than, say, a more powerful desktop computer that can be easily manufactured and purchased for less.

    Expanding smartphone components to a tablet enclosure has to be far simpler to engineer and manufacture. The price of components are a small factor, as a large screen is more expensive than a small one in most cases. The battery size makes a difference as well. But there is no phone and signal issue to speak of. That greatly reduces the complexity.

    I see no reason why a tablet has to be more expensive than a phone.
  10. #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    I'm no engineer, but I don't think that scales. It is more expensive to make a smartphone because it is smaller, with more radios. It is a much harder engineering feat than, say, a more powerful desktop computer that can be easily manufactured and purchased for less.

    Expanding smartphone components to a tablet enclosure has to be far simpler to engineer and manufacture. The price of components are a small factor, as a large screen is more expensive than a small one in most cases. The battery size makes a difference as well. But there is no phone and signal issue to speak of. That greatly reduces the complexity.

    I see no reason why a tablet has to be more expensive than a phone.
    Don't forget that palm wasn't actually selling the pre to sprint for 600, that's the increased price to force you into a contract. Now Motorola is doing that, because they most likely need Verizon, but HP doesn't. This may have been why they were responding to every question with "hp is everywhere, HP's got scale", they realize no ones going to be forcing a contract on their device.


    edit: (that's for tablet only. for smartphones they need people like verizon cause you can only sell so many phones through bestbuy.)
  11. #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by dandbj13 View Post
    I'm no engineer, but I don't think that scales. It is more expensive to make a smartphone because it is smaller, with more radios. It is a much harder engineering feat than, say, a more powerful desktop computer that can be easily manufactured and purchased for less.

    Expanding smartphone components to a tablet enclosure has to be far simpler to engineer and manufacture. The price of components are a small factor, as a large screen is more expensive than a small one in most cases. The battery size makes a difference as well. But there is no phone and signal issue to speak of. That greatly reduces the complexity.

    I see no reason why a tablet has to be more expensive than a phone.
    Only in US versions is there no phone capability. Carrier lock downs . But it does me off that we still have to pay a nice penny for gimped products.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  12. #92  
    A price like that just reassures that I'm getting a Thinkpad X120e to replace my Eee PC.
    Palm IIIc -> Sony CLIÉ T650C -> Sony TJ-37 -> Palm TX -> Palm Centro -> Palm Pre Bell -> Palm Pre Plus Bell/Verizon Hybrid -> HP Veer -> HP Pre 3 NA -> BlackBerry Classic -> BlackBerry Priv

    It's a Late Goodbye, such a Late Goodbye.

    Need OEM Palm Pre parts? See here
  13. #93  
    I expect it will cheaper. Moreover released at summer will make Touchpad more obsolete when Xoom / Galaxy Tab II & Optimus Tab already hit market months before Touchpad available to buy.

    -- Sent from my Palm Pre using Forums
  14. #94  
    I think the short term goal of webos devices is to gain market share, and make HP laptops/printers more popular/more attractive in the eyes of the average consumer. If hp can be in the top 3 for smartphones, or be unheard of. The tablet strategy will help the smartphone one.
  15. #95  
    Xoom's pricing has been released:

    • $799 for unsubsidized Verizon model
    • $600 for Wifi only model

    Via Motorola's Xoom tablet priced at $799 | Reuters

    Given that, I think a $699 price point is competitive, especially if that's their top-tier pricing. I would prefer it to be a few hundred cheaper to really compete. I think a lot of their pricing model is depending on what Apple does with the iPad 2 pricing (generally second generation models see far more bang for the buck with Apple products).
  16. #96  
    It's competitive only if it's the data version. The Xoom and iPad are less if you're using only wifi.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  17. #97  
    Quote Originally Posted by waylonrobert View Post
    Xoom's pricing has been released:

    • $799 for unsubsidized Verizon model
    • $600 for Wifi only model

    Via Motorola's Xoom tablet priced at $799 | Reuters

    Given that, I think a $699 price point is competitive, especially if that's their top-tier pricing. I would prefer it to be a few hundred cheaper to really compete. I think a lot of their pricing model is depending on what Apple does with the iPad 2 pricing (generally second generation models see far more bang for the buck with Apple products).
    WiFi iPad is $499 for 16GB. Anyone releasing a tablet now that has a base model that costs more money is dead in the water. Apple is considered the 'Cadillac' (perhaps Mercedes is a better choice) of phones and tablets. A vendor (Motorola, RIM, HTC, Samsung, HP, LG, etc) would have to have a rather amazing feature set to convince the public that they have a better device than Apple, even if it has better specs. The public does not really care about specs, they care about what the device can do. So far there has not been any vendor that has made a major leap beyond the iPad.

    An active digitizer might be the compelling feature that allows a device to make that leap. There will be many devices with active digitizers coming soon, but it doesn't look like the TouchPad will be one of them.
  18. #98  
    HP may have a brand to protect, but WebOS is not exactly a market leader.

    If HP want to price this thing higher to attract rich cool people, then they need to plan for the fact that rich people likes apple, and not so rich webOS lovers can't afford $500+ for whatever they want to sell as a tablet.
  19. crg28's Avatar
    Posts
    173 Posts
    Global Posts
    222 Global Posts
    #99  
    I'm willing to bet anything (even my house) with anyone in here that the WIFI version will be within +/-$49 pf the IPAD2 Pricing.



    Any Gamblers in here?
  20. #100  
    Frankly I have to agree with the concept that 699 or even 599 is way too much.. i recently purchased a 19 inch acer dual core 64 bit machine, with a top end graphics card. it came with 4 gigs of ram, plus an additional 1 gig just for the video card. yes it is large, yes it is heavier than a tablet. At present, it can also do far more than this new tablet. I run my lightroom 3 and adobe photoshop on it. the tablet can not do that, i run my full office suite, again the tablet can not do that. yes i paid a little more than 699, but not a hell of a lot more. No this was NOT off the back of a truck this was from a major store.
    so not to make to fine a point on it, if it comes in at 699 plus the pre 3 in at who the hell knows how much,, sorry, im gonna go BB and look at say the samsung or ipad. Based on what the new pre will do and size, im betting the damn thing is gonna run around 299 with a contract. too rich for this old man.
    for basic duplication of equipment i already own
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions