01-12-12 07:20 PM
111 1234 ...
tools
  1. app_Developer's Avatar
    Apple will continue to own the lion share, I think.
    I could easily see Apple not having a majority of the market within 2 years. Unless they really change without Jobs.

    But if they stick to the Apple way, they'll have the high end of the tablet market and make a ton of money for their shareholders, and continue to make things that they themselves are honestly proud of. Not a bad niche.

    And then, yes, since tablets are still primarily for content consumption, Amazon is in a really strong position with a great business model around it.
    01-06-12 07:24 PM
  2. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    Impossible.

    Amazon is selling a tablet with the same form factor, almost identical looks, more function, much better media environment and made by the same manufacturer at $200. It has destroyed the 7-8 inch market. Other Android makers might have a dim hope that the availability of full Android Market can justify an additional $50.

    Rim can't and has been painted into a corner.
    The Fire has only 8GB of storage. It's a lower-spec machine in just about every way. They're also reportedly deliberately taking a loss in the hopes of locking users in to Amazon's content environment.

    The Fire should really be regarded as a content viewer rather than a tablet computer. I won't deny that for many users that's just fine, but it isn't a Playbook competitor.
    ahsomsid likes this.
    01-06-12 07:32 PM
  3. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    Then, the real tragedy is how a, uh, "content viewer" can beat RIM when RIM had a year head start. How they can, in essence, force RIM to slash prices with said substandard hardware that cannot be "fixed."

    I hope RIM is NOT wondering like some of still are. Hopefully, they are taking notes, because it is embarrassing, particularly if we are going to continue to call the Fire a bad device.
    Last edited by trelawrence; 01-06-12 at 07:47 PM.
    Trevante, kevinnugent and jntrup like this.
    01-06-12 07:45 PM
  4. app_Developer's Avatar
    Then, the real tragedy is how a, uh, "content viewer" can beat RIM when RIM had a year head start. How they can, in essence, force RIM to slash prices with said substandard hardware that cannot be "fixed."

    I hope RIM is NOT wondering like some of still are. Hopefully, they are taking notes, because it is embarrassing, particularly if we are going to continue to call the Fire a bad device.
    Well, to be fair, the Playbook was designed and priced to compete with iPad. They couldn't have known they would end up competing in the "half iPad" weight class. If they do a Playbook 2, I'm sure they'll make different choices.
    jntrup and ahsomsid like this.
    01-06-12 07:49 PM
  5. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    Well, to be fair, the Playbook was designed and priced to compete with iPad. They couldn't have known they would end up competing in the "half iPad" weight class. If they do a Playbook 2, I'm sure they'll make different choices.
    Agreed, though I am sure they (RIM execs) are not smugly sitting back at this point, and contentedly proclaiming that the Fire is not a competitor to the Playbook, because currently, the joke is on RIM.
    01-06-12 07:52 PM
  6. anthogag's Avatar
    The Kindle Fire doesn't have cameras, microphone, GPS, Bluetooth, compass...only 8GB storage....the speaker is only on one side Does it have a 6-axis accelerometer?

    The playbook has all of this and more. QNX is much better.

    ...and OS2 is coming

    AND, because the playbook has all of these extra features, apps can be that much better!

    AND who knows what is yet to be unlocked in the pb, maybe a radio?
    Last edited by anthogag; 01-07-12 at 09:22 AM.
    01-06-12 07:54 PM
  7. app_Developer's Avatar
    Agreed, though I am sure they (RIM execs) are not smugly sitting back at this point, and contentedly proclaiming that the Fire is not a competitor to the Playbook, because currently, the joke is on RIM.
    oh, I'm thinking the wake up call was loud and clear up there in Waterloo. I don't think they will be calling Amazon "amateurs" any time soon.
    01-06-12 07:55 PM
  8. blackjack93117's Avatar
    There are people who appreciate content and there are people who appreciate hardware - the tragedy is that most view it as the same marketplace. Playbook and Fire should not even be in the same category, but it is to the Fire's advantage that they are. They can skate by with cheaper and less capable hardware and do better because of the content. To most consumers they are the same hardware, even look the same.

    Maybe playbook 2 will be a simple content viewer - playbook's little brother.
    01-06-12 07:56 PM
  9. kbz1960's Avatar
    Then, the real tragedy is how a, uh, "content viewer" can beat RIM when RIM had a year head start. How they can, in essence, force RIM to slash prices with said substandard hardware that cannot be "fixed."

    I hope RIM is NOT wondering like some of still are. Hopefully, they are taking notes, because it is embarrassing, particularly if we are going to continue to call the Fire a bad device.
    Who is calling the fire a bad device? It is good for what it is.
    01-06-12 08:00 PM
  10. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    There are people who appreciate content and there are people who appreciate hardware - the tragedy is that most view it as the same marketplace. Playbook and Fire should not even be in the same category, but it is to the Fire's advantage that they are. They can skate by with cheaper and less capable hardware and do better because of the content. To most consumers they are the same hardware, even look the same.

    Maybe playbook 2 will be a simple content viewer - playbook's little brother.
    Not a bad idea.

    I don't know how RIM fixes it. I don't know if there will ever be a PB2. They have shown they can make some great hardware... and I truly believe the PB2, at introduction, was the best unit on the market. I have said a couple times that RIM was crazy to have priced so high at onset, but in retrospect, what could they have done? They need to make a profit, and I am sure they priced at what they thought the market would bear.

    I still come back to the ecosystem being the Achilles heel. I think that was the biggest factor. I think we (techies) give too little credit to the power of, say, Netflix to help sell a device. I know, t has been mentioned a million of times, but Skype is golden too.

    If they come out with a lower-speced device that has access to a good ecosystem, I think RIM is back in it. Heck, I think if they can figure it out prior to 2.0 coming out, I think they can salvage some market share.
    01-06-12 08:10 PM
  11. cbvinh's Avatar
    first off RIM can never compete with apple, the ball on that was dropped along time ago.
    And who thought Apple could just enter the mobile phone market game against Nokia and RIM and do so well? Their first attempt with Motorola, a dominant player at the time, failed miserable. Even Steve Jobs was only hoping for 10% of the market with the iPhone. Later, who could have thought Google could just jump in and be the dominant player it is today? iPhone was untouchable, right? HTC used to make phones for other people. Now they have their own branding and do pretty well. The mobile market changes fast...

    secondly, what killed the playbook was QNX and no apps.
    Perhaps price point should be in there too...

    If they launched with a BB secure Honeycomb or ICS, or QNX with full on google market support, it would have been a different story.
    Operative words: "BB secure". How would they accomplish that with the moving target of Android? Secure implementations of Android have been a full version back.

    Touchpad says it all, and the fire sale of the Playbook is the nail in the coffin.
    The Touchpad situation is unique. HP bought Palm under Mark Hurd, who left due to allegations of misconduct. The new CEO, Leo Apotheker, wanted to turn HP into a software services company and announced ditching off all hardware and the purchase of a 10 billion dollar software house to get them into the software services game. The Touchpad was caught up in all that. Why else would they ditch the product after just 49 days? Marketing just started.

    If BB wants to save the playbook it needs full on droid app compatiblity. I'll root before I pay $5 for AngryBirds which is free. BB was great for email before smart phones, now the market no longer email based its a portable nerfed pc based market, aka droid and apple. a BB secure version of ICS would just rock for the playbook.
    Full-on Android compatibility isn't possible without Google's interfaces. That's why Amazon and Barnes and Noble have their own stores with tweaked apps.

    For me the Playbook has great hardware, and a great browser, (BB needs to man up and let us have free hulu, not hulu plus and fix browser
    It's obvious you have no comprehension of where apps come from.

    QNX is awsome in its own way, but its missing APPS to bring the people in.
    But who cares, no one but BB nuts, People buy tablets on ease of use and apps and all the fun stuff you can do with it.

    The Playbook its great hardware wise, but is lacking software and that is why the playbook is the second coming of the HP touchpad.

    as for price points
    16gb storage 199, 32 gb storage 249, 64 gb storage 299. Now if the Playbook had an sd chip adjust all prices + 50.
    now if BB can't compete with those prices adjust to 10% above cost of manufacturing. Flood the market that way then turn it slowly to QNX, and promise the QNX System is anti market tracking, snoopware/spyware, give it the BB secure touch.
    Your analysis would have been better if you were more well read on the mobile market.
    Thunderbuck likes this.
    01-06-12 08:10 PM
  12. BBplaybookJS's Avatar
    The price, features etc have nothing to do with it, its all about the marketing. At this point the sheep would line up all night for the chance to buy an etcth a sketch if it had an Apple logo on it
    01-06-12 08:15 PM
  13. cbvinh's Avatar
    The price, features etc have nothing to do with it, its all about the marketing. At this point the sheep would line up all night for the chance to buy an etcth a sketch if it had an Apple logo on it
    Case in point:



    An iPod that doesn't let you pick your songs, just randomly plays whatever is stored on it. "Life is random."
    01-06-12 08:32 PM
  14. jrwarren's Avatar
    And who thought Apple could just enter the mobile phone market game against Nokia and RIM and do so well? Their first attempt with Motorola, a dominant player at the time, failed miserable. Even Steve Jobs was only hoping for 10% of the market with the iPhone. Later, who could have thought Google could just jump in and be the dominant player it is today? iPhone was untouchable, right? HTC used to make phones for other people. Now they have their own branding and do pretty well. The mobile market changes fast...
    Apple still is pretty much untouchable, and they prospered because of the fan base.



    Perhaps price point should be in there too...
    yes you are right on that.



    Operative words: "BB secure". How would they accomplish that with the moving target of Android? Secure implementations of Android have been a full version back.
    still trying to figure out what secure version of android your talking about. With the Boot loader lock on the playbook running droid wouldn't be an issue, plus you take out all the spyware that native droid products come with.

    The Touchpad situation is unique. HP bought Palm under Mark Hurd, who left due to allegations of misconduct. The new CEO, Leo Apotheker, wanted to turn HP into a software services company and announced ditching off all hardware and the purchase of a 10 billion dollar software house to get them into the software services game. The Touchpad was caught up in all that. Why else would they ditch the product after just 49 days? Marketing just started.
    The playbook is almost 1 year old, and nothing has changed since release, except for the price dropping.



    Full-on Android compatibility isn't possible without Google's interfaces. That's why Amazon and Barnes and Noble have their own stores with tweaked apps.
    Seriously? what google interfaces its just software.
    Wrong, only reason Amazon and the Nook have their own stores and custom version of droid is to generate revenue for their brand. That is the reason that the price point is lower is so they can make it with sales from their book sales and app markets.
    And note, the Kindle has no secure boot loader and is fully rootable to any dev's version of droid. While the Nook has a locked boot loader and is being torn apart right now to find work arounds.



    It's obvious you have no comprehension of where apps come from.
    Its quite obvious you don't see to understand that if hulu is free on my pc it should be free on my playbook (not hulu plus)
    Apps come from dev's, None of them seem to realize that BB has a tablet out. but any how about HULU. I can go to any free to view sight with my playbook and watch the content. But when it comes to Hulu, no one will stand up to them and say kiss off this is a portable computer so it should be able to watch the free content. Especially with the great browser the playbook has.


    Your analysis would have been better if you were more well read on the mobile market.
    I really don't see where my price point is wrong. It falls inline with the current fire sale that is going on by Blackberry right now. It also is adjusted for pricing if they would have incorperated a SD slot.

    I priced the playbook as a tablet with an OS that has no app market support but has great hardware but is still lacking. Now if the playbook had a full on app market support, it would be a differnt story, but paying 5 bucks for angry birds is a joke. I'll root it before I pay for free apps, and for the browser fix for hulu, and enjoy the fire sale and pic up a 64gb for $299 to go with my 32gb that I picked up for $249.
    01-06-12 09:46 PM
  15. jrwarren's Avatar
    Not a bad idea.

    I don't know how RIM fixes it. I don't know if there will ever be a PB2. They have shown they can make some great hardware... and I truly believe the PB2, at introduction, was the best unit on the market. I have said a couple times that RIM was crazy to have priced so high at onset, but in retrospect, what could they have done? They need to make a profit, and I am sure they priced at what they thought the market would bear.

    I still come back to the ecosystem being the Achilles heel. I think that was the biggest factor. I think we (techies) give too little credit to the power of, say, Netflix to help sell a device. I know, t has been mentioned a million of times, but Skype is golden too.

    If they come out with a lower-speced device that has access to a good ecosystem, I think RIM is back in it. Heck, I think if they can figure it out prior to 2.0 coming out, I think they can salvage some market share.
    This is so right.
    01-06-12 09:51 PM
  16. jrwarren's Avatar
    Case in point:



    An iPod that doesn't let you pick your songs, just randomly plays whatever is stored on it. "Life is random."
    I know its kinda like waiting almost a year for os 2.0 wishing for the better. And watching the price drop, making you feel like you wasted your money on a dream.
    01-06-12 09:53 PM
  17. fj_cruiser's Avatar
    Is the $299 price profitable? Does anyone know if $299 made any sort of profit or is that selling at a loss as well?

    Maybe some less expensive materials like a non-rubberized casing?
    I am not sure; I believe I read the BOM for the 16g costs something like $206 or $207 (its on this forum somewhere). And we all know doubling the capacity doesnt double the flash storage costs...
    01-06-12 09:59 PM
  18. Thunderbuck's Avatar
    Agreed, though I am sure they (RIM execs) are not smugly sitting back at this point, and contentedly proclaiming that the Fire is not a competitor to the Playbook, because currently, the joke is on RIM.
    Um, okay, so RIM is working to make the Playbook more competitive as a "content viewer" as well.

    The deal with 7digital is producing some interesting fruit. The Music Store that's in beta on the handsets looks like an interesting precursor to the Video Store that's been promised in PB 2.0.

    I don't agree with the notion that the Kindle Fire has ultimately been more successful than the Playbook; yes, they've sold a lot more, but, remember, at a loss. The Fire is only a success if those users buy enough Amazon content (that they wouldn't have bought through some other channel) to overcome that loss. And they need to keep doing it for years.
    01-06-12 10:08 PM
  19. dbwoo's Avatar
    RIM needs a playbook which has same if not better features (hardware and software) than the PAD and price it between the PAD and your barebone FIRE.
    I think for RIM to go after the 199 market will be a mistake. I think for RIM to go head on with Apple at IPAD prices will be a mistake.
    I think people will start to see the value of getting a device like the PB at a lower cost than a PAD.

    Just a off topic note but is related to pricing. I read an article somewhere that the majority of IPAD buyers are younger males with higher disposable income.
    Lets face it , the tablet market is still in its infancy. Most people are not going shell out $500 dollars for a tablet.
    If RIM can tap into the mass market with a product that is of high quality and functionality at a price point the mass market is willing accept, then it will sell like hot cakes.
    01-06-12 10:08 PM
  20. ADozenEggs@aol.com's Avatar
    I guess I'm wondering to myself does BB NEED to manufacture a tablet? Does it? Everyone has jumped into the tab market because they'd like to capture a share of the revenue being generated. But does RIM, or anyone's survival actually hinge on whether or not they sell 2+ million tablets every Q?
    01-07-12 12:27 AM
  21. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    Good question? Can they afford to stay in the tab business? Not many manufacturers can.
    01-07-12 12:51 AM
  22. ADozenEggs@aol.com's Avatar
    Just a off topic note but is related to pricing. I read an article somewhere that the majority of IPAD buyers are younger males with higher disposable income.
    Lets face it , the tablet market is still in its infancy.
    Now this I agree with. I live on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. There are roughly 8 Starbucks locations with 5 sq blocks of one another. Some as close as two blocks apart.

    If you were to judge the Nation's economy by all the Kennedy kids and stay-at-home stay-at-the-gym-while-the-nanny-takes-care-of-the-kids moms with Mac Books, iPhones, and iPads lounging at the local Starbucks, you'd never have believed the country had recently seen a recession.
    01-07-12 01:06 AM
  23. anthogag's Avatar
    I am not sure; I believe I read the BOM for the 16g costs something like $206 or $207 (its on this forum somewhere). And we all know doubling the capacity doesnt double the flash storage costs...


    I saw a playbook teardown article on RIM BlackBerry Playbook Teardown and Product Analysis | OMAP4430, Die Markings, Die & Diffusion Photos and they priced it out (BOM chart you can click on - right side of page) and compared it to the iPad and Xoom. They claim the 16 GB pb is $190 and the 64 GB pb $235.

    They stated flash memory costs as $18 - 16 GB, $33 - 32 GB, $63 - 64 GB.

    These are bill of material costs, it probably doesn't include all the other costs.

    Last edited by anthogag; 01-07-12 at 09:40 AM.
    cbvinh likes this.
    01-07-12 09:37 AM
  24. ADozenEggs@aol.com's Avatar
    I saw a playbook teardown article on RIM BlackBerry Playbook Teardown and Product Analysis | OMAP4430, Die Markings, Die & Diffusion Photos and they priced it out (BOM chart you can click on - right side of page) and compared it to the iPad and Xoom. They claim the 16 GB pb is $190 and the 64 GB pb $235.

    They stated flash memory costs as $18 - 16 GB, $33 - 32 GB, $63 - 64 GB.

    These are bill of material costs, it probably doesn't include all the other costs.

    Gracias!!!
    01-07-12 09:46 AM
  25. Economist101's Avatar
    And who thought Apple could just enter the mobile phone market game against Nokia and RIM and do so well? Their first attempt with Motorola, a dominant player at the time, failed miserable.
    That phone did fail, but let's be honest: that was a Motorola phone with iTunes grafted onto it, and a limited version at that. By the time it was ready, it was clear it wasn't going to be successful, and Apple used it as a misdirection to set up the iPad Nano announcement.

    I don't agree with the notion that the Kindle Fire has ultimately been more successful than the Playbook; yes, they've sold a lot more, but, remember, at a loss. The Fire is only a success if those users buy enough Amazon content (that they wouldn't have bought through some other channel) to overcome that loss. And they need to keep doing it for years.
    It doesn't matter whether you "agree" or not; when you have to announce a $485 million write down on unsold inventory, your product is a disaster, at least on January 7, 2012. The Kindle Fire may be disaster too, but I know it hasn't lost Amazon $485 million, and I know it's outsold the PlayBook, so that makes it more successful in an objective sense. True, Amazon is likely selling the KF at a loss, but I doubt it's losing money like the PlayBook is. Amazon doesn't enter a market to lose money, and they've watched all these other "tablet" makers trip over their feet for the last 18 months. The result has been a product that has managed to capture market interest better than any other non-iPad, sold better than any other non-iPad, and right now has the best upside of any non-iPad.
    01-07-12 10:01 AM
111 1234 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD