Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 114 posts

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#31

Post by jrbj »

danilocampos wrote: post #18
gabrielroth wrote: post #7

One factor that the author doesn't mention is Apple's success at lining up deals with component manufacturers. A couple years ago (before anyone had heard of the iPad) they locked in great prices on flash memory and LCD displays. They could do that because they were about to invent a huge market, and they knew it. Anyone trying to get into the tablet business in 2010 had to pay much, much more. Steve Jobs and Johnny…

A hundred upvotes, really. Tim Cook turned Apple from a sloppy, cluttered mess to a perfectly tuned and calibrated machine. He designs business processes like Ive designs hardware enclosures. He's still at it, too, telling investors during the last earnings call that Apple once again snapped up a boatload of supply on an unnamed type of component . I bet he'd be amazing at Starcraft, once he learned the ropes.

I believe it. In Starcraft, Macro beats Micro.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#32

Post by martythemaniak »

Somehow, having a crapload more hardware hasn't entered the author's analysis anywhere. Why would you expect 1GB of RAM to cost the same as 256mb?

I can't believe people are buying this tripe. I'm willing to put down $20 that by the holidays, you'll see cheaper android tablets (same specs, not this bullshit), any takers?

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#33

Post by vaporstun »

fuzzmeister wrote: post #22
flyt wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple 'outsources' all of its marketing to TBWA\Chiat\Day but that doesn't affect the quality of the output, or their control over what gets produced. Just because they don't own the tools doesn't mean that they aren't telling people exactly how to use them.

Of course. I'm simply saying it makes them less vertically integrated.

But in spite of the fact that they outsource manufacturing, they have their own OS, hardware they've designed for the external (such as the chassis), and components they've designed internally (like the A4) - they're still far more vertically integrated than any competitor.

Do you have any more vertically integrated player in the market that has yet to be discussed? The rest of the companies use off-the-shelf parts and an OS they haven't designed. They all are far less vertically integrated.

Certainly Apple is not completely integrated vertically, but that doesn't mean they aren't more so than any of their competitors.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#34

Post by Cadsby »

edtechdev wrote: post #29
flyt wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and it's competing with a product announced over a year ago, not the next generation of iPad due any day now.

For that extra $100 you get 2 cameras, dual core instead of single core processor, 1gb ram instead of 256mb ram, 1080p instead of 720p, 1280 resolution instead of 1024, android 3.0 (built for tablets) instead of ios 4, expandable storage up to 32gb microsd, flash support, hdmi, usb 2.0, gyroscope, 4g (for the more expensive model), and a motherfrackin' barometer :) And by the way there are perfectly good android tabl…

Are you seriously comparing an iPad to a Nook Color?

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#35

Post by Cadsby »

edtechdev wrote: post #30

This article didn't get the prices right (which is suprising since that was the sole point of the article), and it got the history exactly backward. The main shock people had about the ipad was how expensive it was priced ($500-$750). They weren't 'surprised' at how low it was priced. And to Apple's credit, we now know that even at that price it would sell well, and also we know that this price is actually not so unr…

I disagree. I remember much of the Tech press predicating a $1000 price point and being rather surprised at the existence of a low end model at $499. It was only the cross section of nerds that really dislike Apple that called it expensive and panned it as a crippled piece of junk. (Engadet had to shut down their commenting system for a few days due to all the vitriol)

Also, I think you're missing the point on pricing. It really hurts Motorola that there isn't a low end model at $499, because there are a lot of non-technical users for whom 16GB is perfectly adequate. We don't have direct data AFAIK, but I'm willing to bet the low end iPad is Apple's best selling model by far.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#36

Post by nika »

gabrielroth wrote: post #7

One factor that the author doesn't mention is Apple's success at lining up deals with component manufacturers. A couple years ago (before anyone had heard of the iPad) they locked in great prices on flash memory and LCD displays. They could do that because they were about to invent a huge market, and they knew it. Anyone trying to get into the tablet business in 2010 had to pay much, much more. Steve Jobs and Johnny…

This makes Time Cook my dream date. Seriously, and I hear he swings my way too.

There are many ways to innovate in business and technology and design get a lot of time in the spotlight.

Operations, especially of a very large enterprise, with thousands of suppliers which also demands highly precise manufacturing and quality control, while having operations spread around the globe, and a public awareness factor that makes it vulnerable to any "Watchdog" who wants to make news... running a less-than-30-days-inventory system is playing on the Nth level.

Can anyone name anybody who has done something like that? Amazon's distribution network is a lot easier, as they control all the infrastructure. Dell doesn't have the volume or quality requirements or focused product lineup (which reduces substitution- eg: if dell is out of a particular laptop model, they have others to substitute, apple doesn't have that luxury.)

It is no wonder Apple is doing long term contracts for supplies like this.

Some have accused them of cornering the market, but this is not like cornering the market on Silver (look up Hunt Brothers) -- as anyone with reasonable technology can make a substitute for electronics components which are fungible commodities for the most part.

This is just good management of a very sophisticated manufacturing network.

Dude deserves and Oscar in Operations!

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#37

Post by nika »

martythemaniak wrote: post #32

Somehow, having a crapload more hardware hasn't entered the author's analysis anywhere. Why would you expect 1GB of RAM to cost the same as 256mb? I can't believe people are buying this tripe. I'm willing to put down $20 that by the holidays, you'll see cheaper android tablets (same specs, not this bullshit), any takers?

I don't see what will change between now and christmas. Many of the android tablets are vaporware at this point so there is nothing to stop them from advertising that they'll be cheaper... yet they seem to be more expensive for the most part.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#38

Post by nika »

Cadsby wrote: post #34
edtechdev wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For that extra $100 you get 2 cameras, dual core instead of single core processor, 1gb ram instead of 256mb ram, 1080p instead of 720p, 1280 resolution instead of 1024, android 3.0 (built for tablets) instead of ios 4, expandable storage up to 32gb microsd, flash support, hdmi, usb 2.0, gyroscope, 4g (for the more expensive model), and a motherfrackin' barometer :) And by the way there are perfectly good android tabl…

Are you seriously comparing an iPad to a Nook Color?

... and a MacBook Pro is a ripoff because AT&T has a netbook for 1/10th the price (on 2 year contract)!

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#40

Post by SoftwareMaven »

Cadsby wrote: post #35
edtechdev wrote: post #30

This article didn't get the prices right (which is suprising since that was the sole point of the article), and it got the history exactly backward. The main shock people had about the ipad was how expensive it was priced ($500-$750). They weren't 'surprised' at how low it was priced. And to Apple's credit, we now know that even at that price it would sell well, and also we know that this price is actually not so unr…

I disagree. I remember much of the Tech press predicating a $1000 price point and being rather surprised at the existence of a low end model at $499. It was only the cross section of nerds that really dislike Apple that called it expensive and panned it as a crippled piece of junk. (Engadet had to shut down their commenting system for a few days due to all the vitriol) Also, I think you're missing the point on pricin…

I completely agree with you. There was a collective jaw drop when Steve put the $499 slide up. The lowest the rumor mill had gotten was $800 leading up to that point.
Post reply on HN