Google set to blow open the tablet market later this year with $99 Nexus tablet(bgr.com)
bgr.com
Google set to blow open the tablet market later this year with $99 Nexus tablet
http://www.bgr.com/2012/09/27/google-nexus-tablet-price-99/
100 comments
Apple makes its money on recurring hardware purchases. The iPad owner buys the iPad 2 and the iPad 3 and the iPad 4 and so on and so forth every year.
Losing customers to a low-priced Android tablet before they have the chance to get them on board their "mini tablet" upgrade cycle could be disastrous. Apple effectively had first-mover advantage in the 10" tablet market, but Android is solidly ahead in the 7" market with the existence of the Kindle Fire and the Nexus 7, and it's much more difficult to gain ground in that kind of market. Add in a low-price high-quality competitor and you've got a really steep uphill climb.
Losing customers to a low-priced Android tablet before they have the chance to get them on board their "mini tablet" upgrade cycle could be disastrous. Apple effectively had first-mover advantage in the 10" tablet market, but Android is solidly ahead in the 7" market with the existence of the Kindle Fire and the Nexus 7, and it's much more difficult to gain ground in that kind of market. Add in a low-price high-quality competitor and you've got a really steep uphill climb.
maybe. remember when Apple was going to fade out of the computer business because they refused to make a $200 netbook? do you see anybody making $200 netbooks these days? everybody makes airbook clones at airbook prices.
No, but there are tons of people making $300 laptops. I think that did more to kill the netbook market than Apple did.
Netbooks were superlightweight computers you could take anywhere, just like the tablet market the iPad created. Most people complained that the netbooks were underpowered toys with tiny batteries. The first iPad addressed both of those concerns successfully.
Sure, that's what they were supposed to be. However, my argument is that to most people they were just cheap computers, for both senses of the word cheap.
pardon me, I don't understand your reasoning. Why would apple be less happy with 70% of the market than with 40%?
Do you mean that you expect the total size of the market to double, and then expect apple to own 40% of it (so they have a total number of customers which is slightly more than what they had initially) ?
Do you mean that you expect the total size of the market to double, and then expect apple to own 40% of it (so they have a total number of customers which is slightly more than what they had initially) ?
I think he means, in layman's terms, Apple wants to sell Mercedes...
Someone else can sell Kia's.
Edit: Not sure how that will work out in the tablet market, but it certainly works with cars and laptops.
Someone else can sell Kia's.
Edit: Not sure how that will work out in the tablet market, but it certainly works with cars and laptops.
Newer Kia's are the best value money can buy. They are solid and very reliable automobiles. And, they cost 10 times less than a Mercedes. Smart buyers buy them.
As someone who used to work in the automotive manufacturing sector I'll say this: Mercedes/BMWs/luxury cars are not nearly as overpriced as laymen make them out to be.
There is a lot going on under the hood (literally!) that sets these cars apart.
Which isn't to say that everyone needs a Mercedes, but there's certainly nothing intrinsically smarter about a Kia over a Mercedes.
There is a lot going on under the hood (literally!) that sets these cars apart.
Which isn't to say that everyone needs a Mercedes, but there's certainly nothing intrinsically smarter about a Kia over a Mercedes.
I'm sure that Mercedes puts a lot into making their cars, but consumer reports seem to indicate that the end product is actually worse than low end Asian vehicles. Most of the people I know that have Toyota, Hyundai, and KIA automobiles drive them for a couple hundred thousand miles. The people I know who drive Mercedes, bmws and audis have constant.
problems. I'm not a mechanical expert but my guess is that the extreme standards of precision that high end cars are manufactured to may actually make them less reliable. Maybe it's similar to the way that an AK-47 is the most reliable assault rifle because it is cheaply made, while our m16 jams if you don't clean it constantly because the machining is extremely precise.
The plural of anecdote isn't data ;)
Having actually seen the religiously-collected failure data that all manufacturers keep, I can safely say that your impression is incorrect. The budget brands suffer from substantially more expensive failures than the luxury brands, whose failures tend to be concentrated in non-critical systems (power windows vs. your transmission).
The AK-47 analogy doesn't really work here. There haven't been any "mechanically simple" cars since, what, the 80s? The main differentiator here isn't design or technological complexity, it's part selection and manufacturing rigour. So really you're talking about a hand-made M16 done up in a garage vs. a precision-manufactured M16. We're well past the age of "AK-47" cars.
Having actually seen the religiously-collected failure data that all manufacturers keep, I can safely say that your impression is incorrect. The budget brands suffer from substantially more expensive failures than the luxury brands, whose failures tend to be concentrated in non-critical systems (power windows vs. your transmission).
The AK-47 analogy doesn't really work here. There haven't been any "mechanically simple" cars since, what, the 80s? The main differentiator here isn't design or technological complexity, it's part selection and manufacturing rigour. So really you're talking about a hand-made M16 done up in a garage vs. a precision-manufactured M16. We're well past the age of "AK-47" cars.
This a website where people discuss things, often their opinions. Not every single response on hacker news is going to have a peer-reviewed study attached to it.
I used to inspect auto parts for a factory that made ball-joints for a couple dozen different auto companies. It was a parts supplier for everything from low end asian cars to Humvees, Corvettes, and BMWs.
The part selection you speak of isn't always better. When we pulled defective parts off the production line, they were inventoried and put into storage in case the factory failed to meet their quota. When this happened, the defective parts were shipped to the auto manufacturers along with the good parts.
That being said, I agree that there's nothing wrong with owning a luxury vehicle. People have to take a look at their own finances and determine what the best decision to make is. For the average American, it is much smarter to buy a KIA, because the average American can't afford a Mercedes/BMW/etc. If a person can afford it, then good for them.
I used to inspect auto parts for a factory that made ball-joints for a couple dozen different auto companies. It was a parts supplier for everything from low end asian cars to Humvees, Corvettes, and BMWs.
The part selection you speak of isn't always better. When we pulled defective parts off the production line, they were inventoried and put into storage in case the factory failed to meet their quota. When this happened, the defective parts were shipped to the auto manufacturers along with the good parts.
That being said, I agree that there's nothing wrong with owning a luxury vehicle. People have to take a look at their own finances and determine what the best decision to make is. For the average American, it is much smarter to buy a KIA, because the average American can't afford a Mercedes/BMW/etc. If a person can afford it, then good for them.
No idea about now, but a few years ago BMW had a disastrous batch of onboard computers, which weren't cheap to replace at all.
My stepfather had one with such a problem, and stopped buying BMWs after being a loyal customer for 30 years - his BMW 2002 (model, not year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_New_Class) he could service for himself, while the newer models he can't even touch.
Edit: example complaint http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/bmw-c127.html
My stepfather had one with such a problem, and stopped buying BMWs after being a loyal customer for 30 years - his BMW 2002 (model, not year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_New_Class) he could service for himself, while the newer models he can't even touch.
Edit: example complaint http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/bmw-c127.html
Pre-1995 Mercedes last forever.
Then when they finally do break down, there's like a million moving parts, and the one you have to replace is on back order for five years...
Then when they finally do break down, there's like a million moving parts, and the one you have to replace is on back order for five years...
I bought a VW Jetta instead of any of the above mentioned. Jettas aren't more reliable than any of them, and they certainly come with a fairly hefty price tag when I need them serviced.
But my car isn't just a tool for me. It's a source of enjoyment. I love driving. And I love driving my car. Really, I love it. I would buy an Audi A4 in a second if I could afford it. If you're only judging based on one axis (reliability), you miss a lot of what goes into the purchase a vehicle. Just because it's your most important criteria, it's not mine.
But my car isn't just a tool for me. It's a source of enjoyment. I love driving. And I love driving my car. Really, I love it. I would buy an Audi A4 in a second if I could afford it. If you're only judging based on one axis (reliability), you miss a lot of what goes into the purchase a vehicle. Just because it's your most important criteria, it's not mine.
Yet there is a strong niche for Mercedes buyers as well. (Executives and so on.) But I think you are right that Apple is not likely to be happy to become a niche manufacturer once again.
People purchase products for all kinds of reasons. Don't be "that guy" that says only smart people "buy X".
10 times less? Have to call you on that. Straight from their website for the cheap-o prices: mercedes c-sedan ~35K, kia forte ~15K. Amusingly the Cheap-o kia forte is a manual transmission and to upgrade to an automatic cost extra. But take note there is no way you could ever sell me the 15K kia forte as the low of the low end models manufacture's put out are _bare_ bones. After renting cars the last few years and seeing just how cheap they could be I honestly checked to see if it even had power windows. Unless you really do want a bare bones car you probably are going to be spending more on top of that 15K, but if you are only going on price why aren't you buying a used car again?
You don't have to be smart to buy an Apple device.
Implying Google sells subpar tablets - I disagree with this statement. I believe Jelly Bean is a better OS than iOS5 for tablets (idk about iOS6, but I'd be willing to say it still holds for that one as well). On the hardware side, all you need is enough CPU/GPU to run the OS and apps flawlessly, which I believe both Apple and Android tablets manage to do.
Getting so tired of car analogies with tablets, especially when they're meant to describe such large differences. Nexus 7 is a very good tablet, and very very close to an iPad in quality.
I'd be curious to see if the volume selling "Mercedes tablets" in four years would be enough to sustain Apple's supply chain and logistics advantages, or if it would open the door for someone else to start matching them on build.
I think he means it in inevitable that there will be something below (price-wise) Apple's offerings. If there is, Apple would prefer to see lots of suppliers. That will keep keep margins down for the low end stuff, so the suppliers will not make enough profits to dare invest in high end stuff (traditionally, that has done in workstation manufactures such as Sun and SGI). It also will force those suppliers to compete on price, so that they will not gain experience in building for high quality.
Of course, even if that happens, the risk remains that, eventually, the low end stuff becomes 'good enough'. Half the quality at a third of the price will at some stage look enticing to many.
Of course, even if that happens, the risk remains that, eventually, the low end stuff becomes 'good enough'. Half the quality at a third of the price will at some stage look enticing to many.
Why would apple be less happy with 70% of the market than with 40%?
I think the point is that Apple would lose a segment of the market that generates very low margins (or zero, if > $99 is a barrier to them).
I think the point is that Apple would lose a segment of the market that generates very low margins (or zero, if > $99 is a barrier to them).
Say this Google tablet changes the tablet market from being "lots of early adopters" to "everyone remotely tech-savvy." In that case, Apple would be way happier with 40% of 10x the market they currently have 70% of -- it'd be more than 5x their current business.
Additionally, a popular $99 Android tablet means that Android is now the bargain tablet. Other Android tablet makers will have to compete with Google, leaving Apple the high end, just like Apple currently owns the high end of the laptop PC business.
Additionally, a popular $99 Android tablet means that Android is now the bargain tablet. Other Android tablet makers will have to compete with Google, leaving Apple the high end, just like Apple currently owns the high end of the laptop PC business.
Apple doesn't remotely "own" the high end of the PC laptop business. They're doing very well among web developers, so to a poster here maybe it seems that way. They're merely the largest single manufacturer among a very long list of PC vendors.
And the bit about "bargain" vs. "high end" presupposes there are features there that justify the distinction. A $99 tablet isn't going to have a 4G modem (though it's unclear if Apple's $300 item will either), but beyond that and its physical size the current Nexus 7 is a very feature-comparable device to the retina iPad.
And the bit about "bargain" vs. "high end" presupposes there are features there that justify the distinction. A $99 tablet isn't going to have a 4G modem (though it's unclear if Apple's $300 item will either), but beyond that and its physical size the current Nexus 7 is a very feature-comparable device to the retina iPad.
> Apple doesn't remotely "own" the high end of the PC laptop business.
Hm? Apple went over 90% share of the $1k+ PC market way back in 2009: http://betanews.com/2009/07/22/apple-has-91-of-market-for-1-...
Hm? Apple went over 90% share of the $1k+ PC market way back in 2009: http://betanews.com/2009/07/22/apple-has-91-of-market-for-1-...
That's pretty spun. It's true, of course, but by excluding the $950 laptops of other vendors (which are spec-wise very comparable with the Apple offerings) as "not high end" it's mostly just true by construction.
A similar number for "total units of 15 inch laptops with 4+GB memory and discrete GPUs" (my personal guess at a "high end" definition) would tell a very different story.
A similar number for "total units of 15 inch laptops with 4+GB memory and discrete GPUs" (my personal guess at a "high end" definition) would tell a very different story.
Because it is like the MacBook line. Of the so-called "luxury" laptops, Apple has, for years, owned 9 out of every 10 "luxury" laptop purchase. 9/10 of the most expensive laptops consumers can buy have an Apple on their lid.
So they'll probably try to do the same thing with iPad. They aren't racing to the bottom.
So they'll probably try to do the same thing with iPad. They aren't racing to the bottom.
Also keep in mind the amount of money spent on iTunes and the App Store vs. Google Play. Those $99 consumers may spend less where the margins are more.
What Apple should really do is put iTunes on Android.
What Apple should really do is put iTunes on Android.
I know this is purely anecdotal, but everyone I've seen recently who has bought a tablet, bought a laptop within 6 months or switched back to their old laptop and got rid of it.
I'm still not convinced by the tablet hype. The star trek wow factor wears off pretty quick for most people.
A $99 tablet may change that (temporarily as it's almost impulse buy pricing), but I'm not sure something of that price will have anything groundbreaking to add.
I'm still not convinced by the tablet hype. The star trek wow factor wears off pretty quick for most people.
A $99 tablet may change that (temporarily as it's almost impulse buy pricing), but I'm not sure something of that price will have anything groundbreaking to add.
For me, the tablet clearly does not replace a laptop for serious emailing and browsing. However, it's perfect as a window to the internets. I read my RSS feeds on it, check my facebook, browse some hacker news (although I still find clients lacking). That's about all I do with it, but that sums up to a good 1-2 hours per day so I would hardly call it a waste.
I don't have any feeds or Facebook. That was a far better solution if you ask me.
This is silly, you are telling me that my way of living sucks and I should change it.
I enjoy this stuff, reading articles, stories. I don't read news papers or magazines, this is how I get my information and news.
I enjoy this stuff, reading articles, stories. I don't read news papers or magazines, this is how I get my information and news.
Not at all. I'm saying that it works for me versus buying another device to consume with. To me it doesn't matter what the medium is - it's still the same thing.
I've found a tablet to be handy for maintaining work-life balance.
My laptop is the "work device", and I do not open it at home except if I actually need to do work. The tablet (currently Nexus 7) in the other hand is the "browsing device" that I use for reading stuff, social networking, etc. while at home or travelling.
I've been using internet tablets ever since the early Maemo days of 2006, and that has probably given me time to get used to the idea and integrate it in my daily routines.
My laptop is the "work device", and I do not open it at home except if I actually need to do work. The tablet (currently Nexus 7) in the other hand is the "browsing device" that I use for reading stuff, social networking, etc. while at home or travelling.
I've been using internet tablets ever since the early Maemo days of 2006, and that has probably given me time to get used to the idea and integrate it in my daily routines.
> everyone I've seen recently who has bought a tablet, bought a laptop within 6 months
Yes, my wife got an IPad from work and after the initial excitement, at least around my house, the "I" proves to stand for "IMDB", which is its main use.
Yes, my wife got an IPad from work and after the initial excitement, at least around my house, the "I" proves to stand for "IMDB", which is its main use.
...or switched back to their old one...
Switched back to their old what? Tablet? So these are tablet owners who bought another tablet, didn't like the new one, and went back to their old one?
Edit: Oh, so everyone who has tried a tablet went to a laptop, either an old laptop or a new one. Thanks for clarifying :)
Switched back to their old what? Tablet? So these are tablet owners who bought another tablet, didn't like the new one, and went back to their old one?
Edit: Oh, so everyone who has tried a tablet went to a laptop, either an old laptop or a new one. Thanks for clarifying :)
Clarified - thanks :)
They're fun. I can code on them so long as I don't mind waiting a long time for the compiler to run, and I find the screens are easier on the eyes in the dark.
But I'd never try and use one to do my job.
But I'd never try and use one to do my job.
I like the iPad but I have never owned a tablet. However, if I had one laying around I think I'd make use of it for lots of online reading if nothing more.
There's a dev I know in Houston who has been charging lawyer rates for years to train corporate teams in iOS development. Perhaps some of those gigs are triggered by a C-level guy getting excited by the Star Trek wow factor and wanting the IT department to build lots of dashboard UIs for his shiny new tablet, but I really do think there are lots of such dashboard use cases for employees at all levels of an organization and a tablet makes more sense for many of these employees to use for a lot of their job functions.
There's a dev I know in Houston who has been charging lawyer rates for years to train corporate teams in iOS development. Perhaps some of those gigs are triggered by a C-level guy getting excited by the Star Trek wow factor and wanting the IT department to build lots of dashboard UIs for his shiny new tablet, but I really do think there are lots of such dashboard use cases for employees at all levels of an organization and a tablet makes more sense for many of these employees to use for a lot of their job functions.
I think a $99 tablet could open access to new markets.. for example, those who don't care to replace their laptop with a tablet but wouldn't mind one sitting around in their family room and/or kitchen for quick browsing on a bigger screen than a phone.
Tablets should eventually be sold for $0 with advertising attached. They are entertainment devices and not really a serious machines like laptop or desktop for any productivity work. If we were not willing to attach telephones to our hips, I believe tablets would have been the only device we had bought in addition to computers.
Remember tablets are still not a mass market phenomenon, despite record sales of iPads. Sub $100 pricing might just be what the doctor ordered. I'm rooting for either Google's new Nexus or Apple's new iPad mini to saturate the low end.
look up on ebay. Many tablets under 100 are available with decent specs. Availability of low priced tablets is not what is keeping the market from exploding. It's the utility.
look up on ebay. Many tablets under 100 are available with decent specs. Availability of low priced tablets is not what is keeping the market from exploding. It's the utility.
There's plenty of utility in a tablet. The problem with the current low cost ones is they suck as devices. The N7 is the first relatively low cost device to change that (plus having JB). A $99 N7 would basically take off.
There's plenty of utility in a tablet. The problem with the current low cost ones is they suck as devices. The N7 is the first relatively low cost device to change that (plus having JB). A $99 N7 would basically take off.
True, but 'the average buyer' is wary of buying these tablets - some might be good, but there are also a lot of bad ones, with batteries that only last 2 to 4 hours tops and drop off over weeks of use, and and no simple way to return one for repair or replacement without forking out to send back to China etc.
If it's from a well known brands I am SURE they would do a lot better - heck even Binatone (and low rate cordless phone manufacturer) was able to shift a good number of their android 'ebook reader' (I got one for £30 from ebay, OK for reading books on the tube, not for much else).
So once someone like Google, Asus or Samsung sell a well made unit that stands up to the test of daily family use, then these things ae going to fly.
99% of what I do at home with a laptop (or ipod touch) is basic consumption. These will be a welcome replacement for many users.
If it's from a well known brands I am SURE they would do a lot better - heck even Binatone (and low rate cordless phone manufacturer) was able to shift a good number of their android 'ebook reader' (I got one for £30 from ebay, OK for reading books on the tube, not for much else).
So once someone like Google, Asus or Samsung sell a well made unit that stands up to the test of daily family use, then these things ae going to fly.
99% of what I do at home with a laptop (or ipod touch) is basic consumption. These will be a welcome replacement for many users.
I don't see most consumers being interested in buying their electronics from eBay.
[deleted]
Asus have aparantly already denied this, not that it means much. [1]
It seems pretty unlikely to me, most of the $99 tablets available on AliExpress are significantly underpowered, especially around the areas of battery and screen quality. Google haven't released a sub-standard Nexus device yet, I'm not sure why they'd do it now, when according to all the reports I've seen the Nexus tablet is doing pretty well.
1 - http://www.reghardware.com/2012/09/27/asus_rumored_to_reject...
It seems pretty unlikely to me, most of the $99 tablets available on AliExpress are significantly underpowered, especially around the areas of battery and screen quality. Google haven't released a sub-standard Nexus device yet, I'm not sure why they'd do it now, when according to all the reports I've seen the Nexus tablet is doing pretty well.
1 - http://www.reghardware.com/2012/09/27/asus_rumored_to_reject...
If this is true, I would wager it has the same specs as the current Nexus 7. The Tegra 3 that is currently used is printed on an out-dated 40nm process:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra#Tegra_3
Printing the same chip on say a 32nm or 28nm process (Like the iPad 2,4) would dramatically reduce the cost.
This would also allow them to use a smaller battery and achieve the same battery life.
The major challenge is the LCD panel. It's plausible they could continue to use the same IPS screen, but using a nice TN screen is another place they could cut costs. They could also just wager that these are going to sell like crazy and work out a deal at volume like Apple does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra#Tegra_3
Printing the same chip on say a 32nm or 28nm process (Like the iPad 2,4) would dramatically reduce the cost.
This would also allow them to use a smaller battery and achieve the same battery life.
The major challenge is the LCD panel. It's plausible they could continue to use the same IPS screen, but using a nice TN screen is another place they could cut costs. They could also just wager that these are going to sell like crazy and work out a deal at volume like Apple does.
Well, the low-end N7 has a $152 bill of materials and has some fairly high-end hardware, so putting in slightly lower-end hardware (dual core chip, 1,024 x 600 display etc) can get the tablet close to $99.
The other thing to note is that Google can probably afford to lose a bit of money on these, since it'll only take a few months (say, q2 '13) for them to really drop to $99. Seems like having the only $99 this holiday season is worth a couple of hundred millions (think of it as a huge advertising campaign).
The other thing to note is that Google can probably afford to lose a bit of money on these, since it'll only take a few months (say, q2 '13) for them to really drop to $99. Seems like having the only $99 this holiday season is worth a couple of hundred millions (think of it as a huge advertising campaign).
I hope all Android OEMs are fully aware that Google has tricked them all into a race to the bottom. That's pretty much been Google's strategy against all its competitors to date.
There was essentially no Google Android tablet market before the Nexus 7, only the Amazon & Nook forks. Manufacturers will be happier having a market with no margin, than no market at all.
Android OEMs were never really in the race. They all tried, for sure, but they all fell flat on their faces. At this point, I think it is fair to say that the only competitors in the space are Apple and companies that view tablets as a portal to their real business (Amazon/B&N/Google).
Almost all other Android OEMs fucked up by not providing stock Android or supporting their custom versions. Serves them right, if you ask me.
What's your proposed alternative?
[deleted]
Also known as free market competition at its finest.
I’d be much more willing to spend $99 on a Google tablet then $99 on another cheap Chinese tablet. I bought a Novo 7 several months ago to test out the accessibility of Android verses iOS as a blind user. Since it was Android somewhat modified by the manufacturer I needed sited help to install a TTS engine as well as install the talkback screen reader. I then had to remove a bunch of crapware, and deal with the fact that the tablet was somewhat underpowered providing me with a substandard experience. I was not very impressed with the tablet’s accessibility, but don’t know how much of that is Google’s fault verses the manufacturer. In comparison with iOS I can take a device out of the box, turn it on, hit the home button three times, and it starts talking. After this experience I won’t be buying no name $99 Chinese tablets, and since I have an iPhone that works fine I can’t justify $199 for another device that would be nothing more than an excuse to test the accessibility of an OS I most likely won’t switch to any time soon. If you reduce the price from $199 to $99 and it’s a stock Android experience with the accessibility software preloaded I can justify $99 to test out the accessibility of an OS I most likely won’t switch to any time soon.
I just picked up a Nexus 7 today :| May have been a bad time to buy. Any thoughts on whether I should sell it? It's still completely packaged, haven't opened it yet.
It's unlikely that a 99$ nexus would have the same features of your N7...
Not because a cheaper one is coming, that is always the case, but because pretty soon you will find out that there is not much utility to it... IMO
I'm curious as to what you mean by lack of utility? Could you explain please
iLock just doesn't like tablets. Most geeks are going to want more from any device they own (including a typical computer). The average consumer thinks otherwise though. Consuming and posting little blurbs is the majority of what consumer do, and tablets are great for that use case. The N7 is the first non-Apple tablet that I think really challenges the iPad for that average consumer. The N7 at $99 could change the tablet landscape.
See I know the limits of a tablet. It is not some fancy all singing device. If I want serious power I get on my desktop or laptop. But as a device to surf the web or read an ebook it is much nicer to use a tablet than have a laptop on my lap
[deleted]
If they do that, it will be HUGE here for us in Uruguay and other Latin American countries.
Any reduction in price means a 2x reduction here due to import taxes and other stuff, so a decent U$ 99 tablet will be the first quality sub-U$ 200 tablet here.
They will also be available for direct import - you can't buy most stuff online here without paying heavy taxes, but sub-U$ 200 after taxes and shipping can be imported directly for personal use.
I will personally buy several, if this is the case (one for me, one for my gf, and some for my family members).
Any reduction in price means a 2x reduction here due to import taxes and other stuff, so a decent U$ 99 tablet will be the first quality sub-U$ 200 tablet here.
They will also be available for direct import - you can't buy most stuff online here without paying heavy taxes, but sub-U$ 200 after taxes and shipping can be imported directly for personal use.
I will personally buy several, if this is the case (one for me, one for my gf, and some for my family members).
A quality $99 name-brand tablet would impact the eInk device market the most. Why would someone buy a $139 Nook or $179 Kindle when they could get a tablet for less? (Yes, I know how eInk is "better for the eyes" -- but we are talking the general population here, who have not embraced eInk in droves and who probably don't want to read books, either.)
This is already happening. I don't have a citation handy, but about a year ago, I believe Barnes & Noble was saying that its Nook Tablet was outselling the e-ink Kindles (this was before the Kindle Fire was introduced).
A quick google search (http://bit.ly/RkNKpF) shows that there are plenty of tablets under $99. I think sub $100 tablet by Google will be good for the market but not any huge game changer like the article makes it out to be.
Yes, pretty much all of those are junk though. The Nexus line is very much NOT junk and coming from Google means they have to stake a bit of their reputation on it. Personally I'm excited if only because it'll be a good way to get a tablet sized device to test apps on.
[deleted]
You can already get a 7" android 4.0 tablet off aliexpress.com for $53, shipping included.
I haven't bought from that website specifically, but some coworkers and acquaintances have bought from dealextreme, alibaba, etc. They are incredibly bad.
Several have resistive touchscreens, most have modified Androids that don't have Play store and don't install what you want, most have quality issues (for example my coworkers' has wifi connectivity problems), bad battery life, and overall terrible experience.
I'll gladly pay double to ensure good quality and a good experience.
Edit: aliexpress is part of alibaba (which is part-owned by Yahoo IIRC), so it's very likely what you get is similar to what I'm describing.
Edit2: browsing, it seems most do come with capacitive touchscreens now. I don't see any with free shipping, but I'm not in the U.S.
Several have resistive touchscreens, most have modified Androids that don't have Play store and don't install what you want, most have quality issues (for example my coworkers' has wifi connectivity problems), bad battery life, and overall terrible experience.
I'll gladly pay double to ensure good quality and a good experience.
Edit: aliexpress is part of alibaba (which is part-owned by Yahoo IIRC), so it's very likely what you get is similar to what I'm describing.
Edit2: browsing, it seems most do come with capacitive touchscreens now. I don't see any with free shipping, but I'm not in the U.S.
Lol, bgr.
It will be interesting to see what kind of tradeoffs are required to go that low on the price - 2GB RAM, weaker GPU?
You can get a decent amount of hardware for that price, as long as they aren't going to want to make a profit. Apples vs oranges I know, but look at the (made in UK) Raspberry Pi for $35.
The screen is by far the biggest component of the BOM in the Nexus 7. Compromising that is the only way to substantially reduce the price. To hit $99 everything will be on the table, but RAM is cheap, and so are capable ARM SOC's. It won't be Tegra 3, but it will be good enough.
Probably shitty battery which is the thing that kills viability of a device.
My guess is that Google will subsidize each one, to grown the Android market/install base. Many video game consoles are/were sold at a loss.
my wild guess is the $199 will get 4g, while the $99 will be wifi only like the current nexus7. and obviously less storage.
BYO memory card storage perhaps.
I may be not far from the truth http://www.bgr.com/2012/09/03/nexus-7-3g-release-date-rumor/
Hell, I wish I had that on my Nexy.
[deleted]
The most recent figures I've seen have the iPad at around 70% market share. There's no chance that will survive after this kind of device appears, but I would guess Apple would be very happy to own, say, the top 40% of the market while the Android OEMs bleed each other dry at tiny margins.
Witness Apple's killer execution in the laptop market - and there they've fought there way upwards from virtually nothing, whereas with tablets they're starting with the dominant ecosystem.