From CNET: Nexus 10 incoming!

[frahse]

Originally Posted by afv011

And you're not alone...

What? Who could be so devious and cunning as to have multiple monickers?

I saw a movie once where this "spirit" could hop from person to person While it was in a person, it had total control and they never even remembered what happened when it left again.

[Alexander Turcic]

Moderator Notice
Guys, please let's keep this discussion friendly and constructive. Everybody is entitled to his own opinion. If you disagree, disagree with the opinion, not the person.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Alex

[Kumabjorn]

Yesterday two ladies with Watchtower in their hands knocked on my door and asked; "Do you struggle with life's BIG questions?"

"I do, I do, I can't commit to either Apple nor Android."

She smiled vainly, shook her head and admitted that not even The Book had any answers to provide.

[SeaKing]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Yesterday two ladies with Watchtower in their hands knocked on my door and asked; "Do you struggle with life's BIG questions?"

"I do, I do, I can't commit to either Apple nor Android."

She smiled vainly, shook her head and admitted that not even The Book had any answers to provide.

Surely you didn't claim allegiance to the Great Satan: Microsoft?

[Kumabjorn]

I don't commit, Period.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I don't commit, Period.

Prevarication is a sin, too.

[hrosvit]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I don't commit, Period.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Prevarication is a sin, too.

Ohh, I'm sin alright, all sin

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Ohh, I'm sin alright, all sin

I'm gonna leave this one alone.

[holymadness]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

To an extent.

To judge by all the eye-rolling and tut-tutting that went on when I noticed this, you'd think people don't know how to read.

Apple provides pricing cover for Google, just as the BPH's high ebook prices provide cover for their competitors. As long as consumers pay the higher prices willingly there is no incentive for either of them to change.

Google is not targeting the demographic that has already accepted Apple's pricing, 90% of whom are planning to continue buying Apple products. Just the opposite: they're going after people at the top of the demand curve who think that tablets and their upgrades are too expensive. Apple doesn't provide cover for those customers because they've already rejected Apple's pricing scheme.

Otherwise stated, Apple provides a massive price umbrella that its competitors are free to exploit. The extent to which they choose to do so, or not, is ultimately their responsibility.

Consumers, even more. Hence the quote. What people accept meekly becomes the definition of what is acceptable.
As long as people are willing to overpay for storage, whether for Apple or Google, *everybody* will feel able to do the same.

Google is free to undermine and redefine market expectations as part of their business strategy. It's what Amazon did to the book industry, which they now utterly dominate. That they choose not to is no one's fault but their own.

Originally Posted by darksaber35

Be very careful what you say around this fellow as he's very touchy about anything remotely Apple.He already made a personnel attack against me as i mentioned Apple products in my NEXUS 4 thread.

Please believe me when I say I would never make a personnel attack against you.

[hwlester]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Yesterday two ladies with Watchtower in their hands knocked on my door and asked; "Do you struggle with life's BIG questions?"

"I do, I do, I can't commit to either Apple nor Android."

She smiled vainly, shook her head and admitted that not even The Book had any answers to provide.

ROFLMAO... Tech heathen!

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by holymadness

Google is not targeting the demographic that has already accepted Apple's pricing, 90% of whom are planning to continue buying Apple products. Just the opposite: they're going after people at the top of the demand curve who think that tablets and their upgrades are too expensive. Apple doesn't provide cover for those customers because they've already rejected Apple's pricing scheme.

Can't they have their cake and eat it too? They're picking and choosing what elements to play, and here they have undercut the competition by a large margin but they still take a page from that same competitor's playbook to gain profit. Outside of the hardcore, they seem to have few complaints. Apple already conditioned people, and Google now can go "but the even the market leading iPad doesn't offer that!"

[pl001]

Originally Posted by holymadness

To judge by all the eye-rolling and tut-tutting that went on when I noticed this, you'd think people don't know how to read.


Google is not targeting the demographic that has already accepted Apple's pricing, 90% of whom are planning to continue buying Apple products. Just the opposite: they're going after people at the top of the demand curve who think that tablets and their upgrades are too expensive. Apple doesn't provide cover for those customers because they've already rejected Apple's pricing scheme.

Otherwise stated, Apple provides a massive price umbrella that its competitors are free to exploit. The extent to which they choose to do so, or not, is ultimately their responsibility.

Google is free to undermine and redefine market expectations as part of their business strategy. It's what Amazon did to the book industry, which they now utterly dominate. That they choose not to is no one's fault but their own.

This is mostly true. Google is ultimately responsible for their pricing. They aren't some white knight of goodness by any means. The point I was making is that if Apple had not made that memory pricing strategy acceptable to the masses, Google would probably not be doing it.

The correction I would make is that the Nexus devices are not targeting the population that rejected Apple's strategy. Samsung's Galaxy and HTCs EVOs do that. The Nexus models have always been positioned as Google's most direct competitors to Apple, which is probably a main reason why they are not the best selling Android devices. Or at least, the phones have not been in the past.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by holymadness

Google is free to undermine and redefine market expectations as part of their business strategy.

Or not. They freely chose to go high-margin and pocket the difference.
They made that intention clear when they let the word out that they were doing a "premium" 10incher.

Similarly, consumers freely choose to submit to that kind of strategy. Or not.
It's *their* money and neither Apple nor Google has kneecappers running around to enforce their pricing schemes. (Unlike certain BPHs who shall remain nameless until found guilty in federal court for exactly that, among other things.)

It's all about appealing to different customers.
The problems only appear when people delude themselves into thinking everybody is like them.
(Recent DNA studies indicate we're pretty much *all* of us mutants. Nobody is really like anybody else.)
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene...arities_abound

Every person’s genetic instruction book is a trove of never-before-seen genetic variants, according to an ongoing effort to map human genetic diversity.

In recent years, scientists have discovered that humans carry far more rare genetic variants than anyone ever thought. Now, a major effort to map the diversity of humans’ genetic makeup — called the 1000 Genomes Project — has turned up even more variety than researchers had expected.
...
Among the anonymous people sampled, researchers found 38 million single DNA unit changes, known as SNPs. Of those, about two-thirds are newly discovered and many are rare, found in less than 0.5 percent of people.

Kinda explains the monkey, doesn't it?

Originally Posted by holymadness

Please believe me when I say I would never make a personnel attack against you.

Which I'm glad of, since I have no way of defending from all the personnel you can command.

"No authopsy, no foul."
I wouldn't have put the smiley in the reply if I'd taken it as a personal attack. In fact, I wouldn't have even replied directly. So we're cool there.

For the record (and newcomers), I was merely answering the question of why Google would choose to do limited-storage devices. The answer is to me clear that they do it because there is more money to be made that way. (And that *is* the name of the game. Android is no corporate hobby.) With Apple setting the example, as long as they find enough people willing to go along, they'll be golden.

The rest of us will have to "make do" with NookHD, Surface, the Win8Tabs and the assorted expandable android devices.

"It's not personal; it's just business."

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by pl001

The point I was making is that if Apple had not made that memory pricing strategy acceptable to the masses, Google would probably not be doing it.

And *my* tangential point is that Apple only gets away with it because the consumers let them. Google saw Apple making a billion a month off closed, limited devices and quite reasonably decided they wanted some of that.

It all comes down to what (some? most?) consumers are willing to put up with.
If consumers didn't go along, *nobody* would be doing it.