|
photohounds
19 August 2011
|
What anticometitive company precipitated this? Just GREAT for consumers when some good products that were obviously capable of beating apple at their own game showed up! Now we HAVE to buy apple if we want a smartphone or tablet???
To conscuentiously object by boycotting Apple for unfairly squashing competition is not "hatng" as some blind apologists will claim.
I am considering going the this way.
Pity I like their suff, just not their dirty tricks.
Comment made about the PC & Tech Authority article:
RIP: HP abandons TouchPad ?
The HP TouchPad tablet, which has been available in Australia for less than a week, is already dead.
What do you think? Join the discussion. |
|
amcmo
19 August 2011
|
Photohounds,
Completely predictable response from you, however totally lacking in fact (AGAIN)](*,) .
HP have killed this, not because of any Apple (or Google for that matter) actions.
They killed it because it is a market FLOP. Shame, I thought it had potential, though not capable of beating Apple in it's present version.
Best Buy received something like 270,000 HP Touchpads, sold around 25,000 before returns for refund (apparently quite a few). Told HP they will not pay for the balance. The story is the same worldwide.
And just to put a scare up the Android tablet fans, it’s now been confirmed that the ‘overwhelming’ Android tablet sales are in fact shipments to outlets, not end customer sales, and like HP, they are sitting on shelves worldwide. If the current (and soon to be increased) discounts don’t move them, we may well see some big Android names killing their tablets also.
Nothing to do with any anticompetitive plot per your usual claim simply a case of end users not wanting the product.
Seems at present there is no tablet market as such – just an iPad market.
Just to make the point Photohounds - NOT A DIRTY TRICK IN SIGHT - try for once not rushing to blame Apple for other product failures.
|
|
jakentta
19 August 2011
|
I agree, no dirty tricks here. Just consumer ignorance. WebOS is actually miles better than iOS, but.. well, there's not fruit logo on the back of HP's tablet! |
|
taylorb100
19 August 2011
|
Yes, it's certainly is unfortunate. Maybe they should have placed a piece of fruit logo on the back - a pear. |
|
Myrish Swamp
19 August 2011
|
@taylorb100 a lemon would have been more appropriate. |
|
pvisser
19 August 2011
|
Very disgraceful to sell it for a short time and then pull the plug. I am not surprised that it dies - when I read the early stories of HP wanting to use its own OS I figured it was a lost cause. Google is large enough to pull it off with Android and they went about it the right way: open for anyone to use. A closed environment works for Apple with the marketing skills, status and innovations but HP does not have enough to pull it off. Even the big BlackBerry I expect to struggle with their tablet. Fact is that the iPhone and thereby the iPad are rapidly becoming very credible for business users. Android phones will catch up soon.
Quite simply put, Apple competitors should make their tablets easier to manage (the one thing I dislike about my ipad is having to sync with itunes rather than just sticking a SD card or USB stick in it with new files) and make it cheaper than Apple - surely that can be done? |
|
amcmo
19 August 2011
|
pvisser,
Just a minor point, Honeycomb is not open source.
Google closed it 'to achieve a better user experience' or some such.
Apparently Ice-cream Sandwich should be open.
Seems Apple's scale and their strategic investments in production facilities (LCDS/Flash etc) get's them first dibs and best price.
Witness this mag getting excited about the new Samsing 11" Ultrabook getting close to the 13" Air price.
That said, shame about the HP. WebOS is a good OS and could have done well if released earlier, and a bit of creative marketing/app store support.
Edited by amcmo: 19/8/2011 02:10:00 PM |
|
cpchin
19 August 2011
|
on fruit logo comments, it might be altered to look like an apple and sued :-) |
|
blockcentre
19 August 2011
|
@Photohounds
Please note that your need to preach your agenda is getting quite old. There are plenty other threads where you can continue the Anti-Apple campaign.
In regards to this topic, this has nothing to do with Apple being anti-competitive and everything to do with the difference in quality between an iPad2 and the competition. It's pretty much iPad2 - daylight - everyone else. I'm not talking about the OS, but more the quality of the hardware and it's price. HP had, like many others, tried to bring a product to market that isn't good enough to steal marketshare from Apple or any other tablet vendor.
This has nothing to do with Apple, Motorola, ACER, ASUS, Lenovo, Toshiba, Samsung or any other manufacturer and everything to do with a product being released that's not up to market demands.
|
|
amcmo
19 August 2011
|
@Blockcentre
+1
Well put.
Edited by amcmo: 19/8/2011 03:12:00 PM |
|
rubaiyat
19 August 2011
|
jakentta wrote:I agree, no dirty tricks here. Just consumer ignorance. WebOS is actually miles better than iOS, but.. well, there's not fruit logo on the back of HP's tablet!
Spot on. If it doesn't have a fruit logo on it most people immediately buy any sh!t believing it to be cheaper, despite the fat price tag. |
|
lrd390
19 August 2011
|
The thing I find fascinating is that anyone uses tablets for anything more than entertainment - try using them for real work and they are useless. As far as I can see they are simply fashion accessories - that's why i-Crap is so successful. |
|
amcmo
19 August 2011
|
@Ird390
I took our company iPad2 on a recent 4 week overseas trip as well as the Win notebook I normally use.
The notebook was used perhaps twice.
I remoted in to my desktop on the iPad, collected email, in fact everything I normally do on the notebook, so the iPad is definitely more than a fashion accessory.
The only point I might add is that one of the others on part of the trip had a MacBook Air. I tried it for weight etc, and could possibly be swayed to use one of those (or the ASUS if they could get the price down in Apple territory)
To get back to the HP tablet. HP are already making noises about being possibly interested in licencing webOS to other manufacturers.
If it could get a little traction, with one of the Eastern mfr's behind it, could be a worthwile competitor. It has some benefits over Android. |
|
photohounds
19 August 2011
|
The quality is being 'shielded' from consumers on some pretext. I am not anti-apple, I am anti 'anti-competitive'. Looks to me like it's hot in the kitchen and Apple like many greedy businesses can't stand competition. I used to work for such an outfit.... we'll see in the coming months.
Thanks to to usual apologists ... |
|
amcmo
19 August 2011
|
@Photohounds
WTF????? Sorry, but you've lost the plot on this one.
How do you get HP deciding they cannot sell their tablets and somehow translate that to Apple being Anti-Competitive. Apple had nothing to do with HP's lack of sales.
End customers decided they did not want to buy them. No one stopped them being sold, no legal action anywhere.
And as for the Android Tablets sitting on shelves, only some of which are Samsung and the subject of action. They likewise are not being purchased by end customers.
The end customer has spoken at this stage. That may well change in the future with the large discounts comming.
If you want to get up anyone, stop ranting about Apple, who have not been involved in this decision in any way.
Get out on the street and abuse the end customers, walking out of stores with an iPad instead of your favourite, for not buying into your Anti-Apple paranoia.
Better not - you might get put in your place.
Edited by amcmo: 19/8/2011 05:02:45 PM |
|
photohounds
20 August 2011
|
Anti-competitive behaviour and dirty tricks.
Observing this in action (this time by a different offender) is fact - not paranoia. And now the smart-phone BS? Egged on by an injunction that was granted on flimsy pretext.
The "community design' claims that apple make DO say "rectangular, black with a clear screen. What a load of BS, those design ideas and materials were in use long before Apple used them.
That much is incontrovertible. |
|
amcmo
20 August 2011
|
Photohounds,
This thread is about HP's decison to admit defeat on it's WebOS tablets and phones, because consumers didn't want to buy them.
It has nothing to do with your continued paranoid attacks on Apple.
There is no way, unless consumed by paranoid delusion that you can possibly connect HP's commercial decision to scrap WebOS devices (and sell/hiveoff/close their PC division - how are you going to blame Apple for that) to some evil Apple plot.
If you insist on this blind hatred of Apple, please start a thread "I have an irrational hatred of Apple and an equally irrational belief that any failure of Google/Android to dominate the market must be the result of an evil Apple/MS/Oracle/CIA plot to rule the world" and restrict comment on other threads to something that at least has a vague connection to the subject of the thread. The rest of us can then go back to commenting on the subject at hand without having to wade through your endless stream of (refuted) drivel on how evil Apple is.
I realise, I am not a moderator, however I for one have had enough and would prefer to focus on robust discussion with other contributors who may have differing views, however a healthy ability to move on once a point has been responded to (many times!)
Edited by amcmo: 20/8/2011 09:00:19 PM |
|
photohounds
20 August 2011
|
Paranoia is when it is an unreasonable complaint or fear. Think it's in the dictionary, presume you can read.
HP is probably too fragile ATM, so the belligerent incumbent could well make the think - what's in it for me. Pity as it robs customers.
Your expert psychoanalysis is noted - and for free, too - thanks. |
|
amcmo
22 August 2011
|
Yes, Photo,
Unreasonable complaint or fear. Seems to fit your fixation in Apple....
Yes, Photo, I can read.. Thank you for your concern about my level of education.
Just to ease your mind, I have 4 degrees (plus several Post Grad Dips), with subjects including the psychology of management and psychology of markets.
I might add my degree's are from top 2% in the world universities.
In addition, I have 30+ years of real world management experience, including heading multi-million $ p/a multinationals. (edited the b to m - sloppy typing and poor review before Post)
I would normally charge substantial fees for the analysis, however have taken you on as a pro-bono...
Edited by amcmo: 22/8/2011 08:50:42 AM
Edited by amcmo: 22/8/2011 09:58:04 AM |
|
amcmo
22 August 2011
|
Photo,
News update, the 'fragile' HP you mention just spent $10Bn on an English software company. |
|
photohounds
22 August 2011
|
Thank you AM, for the free work, it is much appreciated to see I am in good hands!
A few weeks ago HP claimed they'd rule the tablet scene, well, or words to that effect. Sounds like market optimism to me.
In view of their spending spree, are you suggesting they simply had a change of heart and thought tablets were a bad idea? Are they playing some clever game or simply scared off?
A 180 degree attitude change in a few weeks.
Sudden market pessimism? Or ... why bother when there's a wealthy, belligerent incumbent?
Best to wait for the anti-trust case ... this could be paranoid - they seem to satisfy some of the criteria - no?
|
|
amcmo
22 August 2011
|
With almost all stock sitting on shelves going nowhere, the Asian tablet manufacturers talking of slashing prices just to move stock,e ven at a loss, guess reality struck and they decided it was not a market worth being in.
If you look at it in the context of them also exiting the PC market, they figure, why sell $billions at 5+% when the rest of their business achives double digit profits.
The Asian manufacturers without health care, super etc costs are the masters at living on those margins, the US just can't, especially as they have shareholders only too ready to sue for insufficient profit.
Apparently queues at Harvey's for the $98 HP tablets, though at moment can only browse, play a few games, though there is talk of an Android Hack for them in the pipeline.
Guess Kogan's tablet's a lousy deal now.
As for anti-trust, as long as there are a few low end competitors selling tablets they can probably stave that one off.
Edited by amcmo: 22/8/2011 03:01:45 PM |
|
photohounds
22 August 2011
|
$98 - pretty good buy at that price. A book reader and web browser. Yes, Kogans at $49 now? Makes them almost disposable, eh?
'Ahem', most apple products are MADE by "Asian manufacturers without health care, super etc costs". As the great majority of Apples costs do not include these costs, that observation is largely a phurphy.
Research does cost, but any tablet at the state of the art is now, is hardly seminal ground-breaking research unless count market research - which the Big A has done brilliantly.
This may turn out to be seminal. Watch for others to claim to have "invented" it later ... http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20810-ibm-unveils-microchip-based-on-the-human-brain.html |
|
amcmo
22 August 2011
|
My reference to the Asian mfrs was connected to HP, not Apple, who's margins are much larger.
While much of HP's assembly was probably Asia, they have a huge US overhead that needs more than 5%.
You mentioned Apple being Asian assembled. Where assembly take splace is immaterial as, with 5% margins and the US overhead they have in design, admin, stores etc, they would not be able to exist on those margins.
Edited by amcmo: 22/8/2011 05:39:20 PM |
|
photohounds
22 August 2011
|
Sire, AM.
All marketing involves something like 'store overhead', whether they do it themselves or finance it via profits to resellers. Some marketers do very well with their online stores.
I don't actually know, but do you think the cost of design is even a blip compared to the cost of ongoing manufacture of tens of millions of units? |
|
amcmo
23 August 2011
|
Photo,
I have headed multinationals with manufacturing in multiple countries.
The realities of costs for a US or European head office are significantly greater than an Asian one.
With the specific example of Apple.
They have a huge overhead in the US, including stores etc.
With their large margins they can cover these costs and leave substantial profits. End result, shareholders continue to worship Jobs etc and are prepared to pay obscene share prices just to have a slice of a company that gives no dividends, leaving them reliant on increasing share value for their profit.
HP, have even greater infrustructure in the US, with it's overhead. They are forced to exist on an extremely slim margin in their PC business, relying on more profitable divisions to generate the profits to satisfy shareholders.
I mentioned shareholders in an earlier post. Where the issue of slim margins becomes most important is in a litigious nation such as the US. HP are in a lousy position with their tablet/phone and PC divisions in that they underperform substanitally compared to the other HP divisons. On a straight ROI basis, it is hard for them to justify being in that market when the funds can be invested in substantially more profitable divisions. They risk a shareholder revolt and class action suits over corporate governance if they stick to such markets in a weakening economy that is certain to see further sales and profit decline. Hence their decision to fold/sell.
Just as a quick aside, apparently a major OEM is in talks to licence WebOS.
The Asian manufacturers have an advantage in that they have far more scope to minimise costs, and shareholders far more compliant when it comes to profit margins. Even so, we are seeing a substantial decline in ASUS and Acer's value, with them both probably taking a very hard look at where they go next to maintain profit.
Do they also exit the Tablet market (and possibly netbooks) to focus on higher margin products?
In the context of this thread, it is easy to see why the decision to exit the market. Lousy sales, lousy profits, little chance of improving either. Greater investment required to catch up with Apple/Samsung etc, and still the probability of just being an also-ran.
Looking at their recent notebook track history, and the tablet, they appear to have a problem in their R&D not being able to respond quickly and look to where they can lead the market, rather than just try to catch up. Did they have the capacity to change that mindset, or did they just decide it was all too hard?
Nothing to do with any dirty tricks, throwing of weight, just cold hard economic facts.
Additional aside. Apparently WebOS ran much faster on an iPad2 than on HP's own hardware.
There is room for it to resurface as it is based on the same standard open source as Chrome, Safari etc. It could run as a fast, classy OS on other people's hardware.
Edited by amcmo: 23/8/2011 08:40:26 AM |
|
photohounds
23 August 2011
|
AM, Very informative, and no doubt very well researched. RD and retailing in (say) US, manufacturing in Asia.
There still seems to be a common thread in the how/what/where locations, although one can see that one-brand stores are up against it when the mothership falters ... much to fear.
webOS on 'pad - delicious, and interesting reading, thanks. |
|
pvisser
19 September 2011
|
amcmo - thanks for the correction, i did not know that Honeycomb was closed. Android tablets apparently are not selling all that well either I just read, with figures more representing shipments to retailers rather than customers. Seems like RIM's Playbook is heading the same way as HP according to today's news item... |
|
amcmo
19 September 2011
|
PVISSER,
Yes, it's a bit scarey. Sell through is abysmal on prety-well everyone's tablets, apart from obviously Apple and some very low cost kit coming out of China which is moving at the bottom of the market.
Shame, I'd like to see at least one other higher end product moving to 'keep the bastards honest', however reality is at present any other high end tablet apparently needs to be significantly lower cost to generate interest from any other than enthusiasts.
Edited by amcmo: 19/9/2011 04:52:34 PM |
