Are Tablets Just Too Expensive? 549
An anonymous reader writes "Over at PCWorld they're asking a simple but valid question: Are tablets just too expensive? They point out that, weight-for-weight, pure silver is cheaper than most tablets, and that, like jewelery, tablets are highly thievable. The worst thing might be that the nascent tablet platform gets written-off as a high-priced niche for people with more money than sense."
today's random factoid (Score:4, Insightful)
They point out that, weight-for-weight, pure silver is cheaper than most tablets,
I've also noticed that compared to a microwave oven, tablets are mediocre at thawing frozen dinners.
But, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
The worst thing might be that the nascent tablet platform gets written-off as a high-priced niche for people with more money than sense.
I wrote off the IPad precisely as described as soon as it was announced!
Obviously not (Score:5, Insightful)
Now if the question were different, like "is tablet 'x' too expensive", then it might be an interesting conversation. I've seen several new tablets poised for sale at costs HIGHER than the ipad...which seems like a ridiculously short sighted move. You don't enter a market with a "me too" product priced higher than the established leader (unless you're Apple), unless you have something markedly better to offer. And frankly, "it's android" doesn't rise to that level.
Re:Not too expensive (Score:5, Insightful)
That being said though, the tablet format is the ideal couch computing device. Sure, I could use my EVO, and frequently do while my girlfriend has the ipad, but screen real estate really does have value. Hell, try to use an RDP client on the EVO, it's an exercise in masochism, while on the ipad it works great.
And meanwhile, Apple can't make enough of them (Score:5, Insightful)
You're not the target market (Score:5, Insightful)
I say yes but the market may say otherwise.
It may be that many people have uses for computing devices that don't fit into the desktop or laptop or smartphone models. For example, the iPad can be used to review pictures taken on a digital camera, without the need for a heavy laptop. I've seen them used for task training in industrial plants, and as a handy portable process monitor in a similar plant. Something the size and weight of a clipboard is a lot easier to deal with than a laptop. A thin tablet is easy to handle - particularly if you're not sitting at a desk while you're working.
I don't like how some (iPads) are offered as Wifi only or for 100 more you get 3G. I was under the impression you need to sign up for a plan.
I want both WiFi and cell data for later short-term use like a vacation. Price the one model in the middle of the two and be done with it.
I'm not sure what you don't like about giving the customer the choice of not paying for a 3G radio if they don't want one. For example, a company can save a fair amount of money if they buy the Wifi-only model for use in an industrial plant.
The Wifi-only models don't have a 3G radio in them. The 3G radio costs something. Most likely not $100, but certainly not $0. At some point, there has to be a price difference.
The 3G model can be used without 3G service. You don't have to sign up for anything if you want to use a 3G iPad only over wifi.
It sounds like you're not the target market for this type of product, or you simply don't know much about them.
Re:But... (Score:3, Insightful)
Tablets are currently closed systems for the most part.
Give me an open system and we'll talk.
Re:They are too focused on cost and ignore value (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, I think you missed his point. Laptop form factor is great for being seated at a table. When not at a table, other form factors may be superior for certain tasks. Showing ball players video while standing on a baseball diamond - yes, a tablet form factor is far more appropriate. For my commute, even though I can have a flip down tray to put a laptop on, there isn't enough distance to open it and have a good view of the screen - the tablet form factor is much better for me in that situation - note also that I'm not doing things like typing, I'm reading or watching. I totally agree that if your use of a computer is pounding out text as quick as you can, a tablet would suck - but the convenience and versatility of the tablet form factor gives it a different niche that some people find worth the price. I certainly do!
Ah, "fads." (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure you are putting your money where your mouth is and shorting Apple r buying puts, right Nostradamus?
Re:But... (Score:5, Insightful)
Tablets are currently closed systems for the most part.
Give me an open system and we'll talk.
What is there to to talk about? You don't seem to be the target demographic of tablets. "Open" brings nothing to the table for an end "user". Absolutely nothing. It also is no substitute for a rich and powerful API with deep access to OS functionality.
Speaking as a developer of enterprise systems, I would always prefer access to a complete API that allows me to do what I need to get done rather than having to rely partially on API calls and partially on direct calls to the internal database/private APIs. The main reason why you want to stick to a public API is that have a much higher chance having your code break when a update or new version comes a long when you access unexposed internals than sticking with the public API.
Open systems tend to encourage programmer laziness on the part of both the third party developers and developers of the platform and end users end up suffering because of it with bugs and incompatibilities when a new update is released.
Re:They are too focused on cost and ignore value (Score:4, Insightful)
Was it too hard to hold the laptop up? I think I'm missing your point...
I realize it might be 'handy', but that difference does not justify a new purchase. And if you didn't have a laptop and were to be making a choice between the two types of devices, I wonder if the actual PROS/CONS of the tablet would outweigh those of a laptop. I should note that a physical keyboard is extremely handy for *most* portable computing uses --- like e-mail, or slashdot, or forums, or address bar typing, or search queries... etc.
A laptop is a data in/out device. A tablet is a data out device. The OP presented a good use case for a simple device (light, plain screen, viewable by multiple people in daylight, good video integration, simple UI, instant on) that two people can use as an aid for problem-solving while standing in a field. There's no way that lugging a clamshell notebook out to the player is as convenient.
Re:Not too expensive (Score:5, Insightful)
Laptops are now the middle-ground, and less needed all the time.
Um no. Laptops are still good for what they've always been good at. portable computing. doing real work when you aren't at your desk.
Tablets are just filling the couch niche that laptops were used for but never were very good at.
Between a laptop and a tablet I need a laptop. Once I already have a laptop, then sure a tablet would be useful but not necessary.
I can't wait for the day I can finally stop carrying my "work computer" back and forth every day.
If your work computer (laptop) can really be replaced by a tablet, then you don't do much real work with it.
Re:But... (Score:4, Insightful)
So, do you understand Fiat Currency any better? Why Fiat Currency?
The problem with Fiat Currency is that it has no basis in value, except the faith of people in it. You think that is any better way of valuing something?
It's the same way of valuing something. Gold only works because we agree on it, just like any other kind of fiat currency. Gold is a bit more primitive and reliable, but otherwise it's the same. If people stop accepting gold, it loses its value. It has no inherent value. Unlike a functional device. Or food.
Re:Worth every penny (Score:4, Insightful)
I see that you don't mention battery life. iPad battery life is great. Doing most anything, I get 10 hours out of mine. A handful of games tax it more.
Those cheap laptops everyone loves to compare with iPads so much rarely get 5 hours. 3 hours is fairly common.
Someone's been watching Glenn Beck (Score:2, Insightful)
Gold isn't money.
Gold is simply a marketable commodity.
The value of gold as real money is a myth perpetuated by people who have a lot of it to sell, while paying maybe 1/10th of the worth of it when they go to buy it back.
Re:But... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh my god, a Xeon X5690 weighs only a few grammes and costs $1700, that's 4 or 5 times the price of gold! How dare they make them so expensive!
Re:But... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:But... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:But... (Score:4, Insightful)
By adjusting the fractional reserve requirements for banks in a gold-backed currency, you can increase or reduce the money supply just as easily as with a fiat currency. This is why the goldbugs are such total morons: They imagine that there's some limit on the money supply based on the limit of the gold supply; unless you have a 1:1 correspondence between gold and dollars (an economically crippling thing in itself), there's no effective limit because you can always adjust the ratio--just like with a fiat currency.