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

61–70 of 114 posts

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#61

Post by idlewords »

regularfry wrote: post #47
nika wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ma…

I'd be tempted to say that automotive just-in-time processes are, if anything, more impressive in terms of the industry integration. There you'll have hundreds of suppliers coordinating so that custom builds roll off the production line in an arbitrary order, with no more stock in hand than there are builds in the system for the next shift or so. I've seen it at work at BMW, and it is frankly terrifying to consider w…

Yeah, I was going to say, look at Toyota. They pioneered a lot of this stuff and are still at it.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#62

Post by masklinn »

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #24
staunch wrote: post #15

> "Designing in-house means Apple doesn’t have to pay licensing fees to third parties to use their intellectual property. For instance, the A4 chip" Isn't the A4 an ARM + PowerVR and doesn't Apple pay design licenses on both those?

More than just licensing the tech, Apple buys the companies who make it. Apple owns Intrinsity, which designed the A4 processor. Apple also owns P.A. Semi, which contributed to the A4 SoC. Apple partially (10%) owns Imagination Technologies, the makers of PowerVR.

> Apple owns Intrinsity, which designed the A4 processor.

That's a pretty long shot. Intrinsity clearly improved the A4, but overall A4 is a very standard Cortex A8 SoC.

> Apple also owns P.A. Semi, which contributed to the A4 SoC.

I have not seen any analysis or information pointing to actual PA Semi input in A4. Where Intrinsity is well known for improvements to existing designs (power-wise, mostly), PA Semi is generally credited with brand new and unique design, which the A4 isn't. I also understand most of PA Semi left after its acquisition.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#63

Post by [deleted] »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #57
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #39

nook color is $250 (sold at a loss, but available nontheless) xoom is $600 Archos 70 and 101 are $300 notion ink is $425 I call shenaningans

Facts don't matter. This is a new article of faith for Apple fans. Some Apple commentators still think that all Android phones cost the same as the iPhone because of Apple's magical supply chain. In reality, the competitors are delivering more raw hardware, at a lower price than Apple, mostly via building from generic, mass-produced, commodity parts. Clearly the same is true in tablets. Ironically Apple's true advant…

[deleted]

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#64

Post by antirez »

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?

Unless you are able to create a superior experience for the final customer, how much hardware you have is not relevant...

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#65

Post by apl »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #49
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…

So is it buying in bulk or planning ahead that make Tim Cook the greatest COO in history? Because neither seem particularly amazing to me. Is it just the fact that the sums of money involved are quite large? Or is it the subtle undertones of sticking it to the competition so they can't compete fairly that makes this story (and the ones about patents) resonate so strongly with Apple fans?

It's both, as a matter of fact, and judging from the struggling competition neither is particularly easy. When discussing Cook's qualities and Apple's refined processes, there isn't much fanboy-ism involved.

They're simply really, really good at it.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#66

Post by eik3_de »

> Designing in-house means Apple doesn’t have to pay licensing fees to third parties to use their intellectual property. For instance, the A4 chip inside the iPad is based on technology developed and owned by Apple (not Intel, AMD or Nvidia). The operating system is Apple’s own, not something licensed from Microsoft or Google.

Apple doesn't/didn't pay licensing fees to ARM or PowerVR for the A4 components?

What exactly do you have to pay to Google to "license" Android?

It seems like the author doesn't quite know what he's talking about.

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#67

Post by Samuel_Michon »

masklinn wrote: post #62
Samuel_Michon wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More than just licensing the tech, Apple buys the companies who make it. Apple owns Intrinsity, which designed the A4 processor. Apple also owns P.A. Semi, which contributed to the A4 SoC. Apple partially (10%) owns Imagination Technologies, the makers of PowerVR.

> Apple owns Intrinsity, which designed the A4 processor. That's a pretty long shot. Intrinsity clearly improved the A4, but overall A4 is a very standard Cortex A8 SoC. > Apple also owns P.A. Semi, which contributed to the A4 SoC. I have not seen any analysis or information pointing to actual PA Semi input in A4. Where Intrinsity is well known for improvements to existing designs (power-wise, mostly), PA Semi is gen…

> Intrinsity clearly improved the A4, but overall A4 is a very standard Cortex A8 SoC.

Agreed. According to the Times, Intrinsity only made the Cortex A8 perform at a higher frequency [0]. An another Times article suggests PA Semi worked on the A4 [1], but no details are given.

[0] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/technology/28apple.html

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/technology/business-comput...

Re: Why Nobody Can Match the iPad’s Price

#70

Post by [deleted] »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #60
vaporstun wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

Samsung designs and builds chips (the A4 with another name basically), AMOLED screens, RAM, flash, chassis and OS (Bada) for some of its smartphones. Probably even more so for its dumbphones. I'm guessing Nokia is also more "vertical" than Apple. And that's just immediate rivals in this industry, I'm sure there's better examples if you only limit it to "in the world".

[deleted]
Post reply on HN