

Motorola XOOM priced at $800 - srik1234
http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/06/best-buy-ad-prices-motorola-xoom-at-800-affirms-february-24th/
It is surprising that motorola priced xoom at $800 when iPads are starting at $499. 3G iPad version starts at $630. What do you think?
======
natnat
I really don't understand this at all. According to iSuppli[1], Apple pays
$229.35 in parts and labor to make the low-end iPad. They develop their own
operating system, buy incredible amounts of ads, and yet they still have
massive profit margins selling iPads for $500.

Meanwhile, Motorola and Samsung and other manufacturers get a free operating
system and get cellphone carriers to give them a bunch of money to sell the
device with a data plan. Yet their devices are $600-$1000, they often have
smaller screens, and are (probably) loaded up with crapware. I fail to see why
anyone would ever buy something like this, and I fail to see why anyone thinks
someone will buy one.

Even if no company has a supply chain as good as Apple's (which I have trouble
believing, considering how many components are manufactured by Toshiba and
Samsung, for instance) and they need to pay an additional 20% for parts, they
could still make the same device, sell it for slightly less and still make
plenty of money.

[1] [http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Mid-
RangeiPadtoG...](http://www.isuppli.com/Teardowns/News/Pages/Mid-
RangeiPadtoGenerateMaximumProfitsforApple,iSuppliEstimates.aspx)

~~~
cpeterso
However, the Xoom has beefier (i.e. costlier) hardware than the iPad:

    
    
      * 1 GB vs 256 MB RAM
      * 1 GHz dual-core vs 1 GHz single-core processor
      * 10.1" 1280×800 vs 9.7" 1024x768 display
      * 2 cameras vs 0
      * and a freakin' barometer?!
    

But how much will these hardware improvements affect Joe Consumer's purchasing
decision when he wants read Facebook and play Angry Birds?

~~~
forgottenpaswrd
"*and a freakin' barometer?!"

Wow, that makes it really interesting. The huge problem with GPS is height
information. My GPS devices have commonly 10-15 m practical error in height on
cities (urban canyon effect).

This could be very interesting for tunnel inertial navigation as makes the
inertial problem a 2d issue from 3d.

~~~
flyosity
"Warning, there's a storm coming. You should probably put your $800 tablet in
a bag so it doesn't get wet."

------
netcan
I think the products that compete with iphones and ipads point to a
fundamental shift in how Apple do things these days: Apple now compete on
price.

I'm not saying they've given up on their high margins on everything policy.
Like other commenters have said, they probably use purchasing power to make up
the difference, but they are using price nonetheless.

We're so used to Apple being the premium option that we keep on being
surprised that they aren't being beaten on price and then assume it's
temporary. Well, it's several years into iphone and they aren't the macbooks
off mobile phones yet. You actually need to pay for a non Apple alternative.

They still feel like the premium option though so it seems just silly to pay a
$100 premium for the non-apple alternative, like paying a premium for an ipod
knock-off.

It's quite a strategy. Build a company around products need to command a
premium. Then remove the constraint. It's like having a runner run with stones
in his pocket all his life then suddenly remove them.

~~~
dkarl
I think what we're seeing is that Apple always _did_ compete on price. We just
didn't know it until we saw competitors trying and failing to match their
prices.

~~~
netcan
I'm not a hardware expert, but I don't think so. There are two ways to think
about this:

a- What would it cost to build a more or less exact hardware replica?

b- What would it cost to build a decent substitute?

I don't even think they were competing on price in the 'a' sense.

But either way, 'b,' is, I think, the important one and Apple certainly
weren't competing on price in that sense pre-iphone. You could always get a
decent mp3 player or laptop roughly as good as but different to an Apple for a
big discount. Still can. If you want to run Windows or Linux, you can do it
without hassle on 1/2 - 3/4 of the budget. If you want a music player for
jogging, an ipod nano knockoff will do the trick just fine.

If you want an android tablet or phone, you seem to need to pay more for
(arguably) less.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
You can get Tegra2 tablets running Android for half the price of the cheapest
iPad for roughly the same techie mucking around effort as putting Linux on a
netbook right now.

I personally wouldn't buy one till it was confirmed you'd be able to get
Honeycomb on it, but they've been out there for a few months now, mostly held
back by Google's lack of approval for shipping with the Android Market unless
you're selling a phone. I believe that policy's about to change though.

------
thought_alarm
... and you have to purchase a data plan before you can use WiFi.

The iPad is still the only tablet in the history of personal computing that
makes any sense.

~~~
zdw
At the low end $20/month plan, assuming a two year contract, that's $1280
total. Yikes.

The pricing psychology of the iPad starting at $500, then relatively small
incremental updates that increase the size and give it 3G makes for a much
easier sell.

The Xoom does look like nice hardware - I just wonder if they'll sell enough
of them to reach economies of scale and drive the price down.

~~~
zdw
After further reading, it appears that you only need to buy one month of
Verizon service (no 2-year contract), so the total is $819.

(Would have fixed the parent post but can't edit for some reason...)

~~~
orangecat
That's better, although still a bit confusing. It's supposed to be a "Google
experience" device meaning no manufacturer/carrier crapware or deliberate
crippling, so it's not clear how they'd prevent you from using wifi if you
never sign up for data.

------
jsz0
This is the practical downside of being too cozy with carriers. A cheaper
wifi-only model would be great for consumers but cuts the carriers out of the
loop entirely. Probably the same reason there's no 'iPod Touch killer' out
there yet. All these companies are in the business of selling equipment to
carriers. What the consumer wants is a secondary consideration at best.

~~~
michaelbuckbee
This is a huge frustration to me as a developer, I wish I could buy an iPod
touch style android device.

~~~
jrockway
Archos has an entire line, from 2" screens to 10" screens.

~~~
michaelbuckbee
Thanks for the suggestion. The Archos 32
[http://www.archos.com/products/ta/archos_32it/index.html?cou...](http://www.archos.com/products/ta/archos_32it/index.html?country=us&lang=en)
seems like the closest to an android phone in terms of size.

------
necubi
This seems pretty crazy, as the comparable iPad (16GB WiFi+3G) retails for
$630. It will also be difficult to build up a large install base without a
cheaper, wifi-only model. And while at the moment the Xoom has some features
the iPad does not (cameras, for example) the inevitable release of a new iPad
in a couple months will no doubt erase that advantage, at the same (or lower,
per GB) price.

I can't imagine what Motorola/Verizon were thinking. They're not going to sell
more than a few of these without lowering the price drastically.

Edit: Oops, I misread the ad as saying it had 16GB storage. The more
reasonable price comparison is then the 32GB iPad, which is $730. More
reasonable, but still too much (especially given that you must sign up for a
very expensive data plan to even use WiFi).

~~~
kvdr
Everybody is getting hung up on the price of this device, which I admit is
high, but a comparison to the iPad's price is not fair. As stated below, the
closest iPad is $730. Also the hardware is a generation and a half ahead of
the iPad. The iPad doesn't even have a camera, very basic need for any kind of
video conferencing (Xoom comes with 2). Please see the comparison chart [1]
for more details.

But yeah, having to buy the Xoom from a carrier and paying atleast one month
of data plan rate before cancelling it is kinda ridiculous.

[1] [http://static.skattertech.com/media/2011/02/infographic-
play...](http://static.skattertech.com/media/2011/02/infographic-playbook-vs-
streak-vs-ipad-vs-xoom-large.png)

~~~
ugh
You can’t buy a $500 Xoom. It’s just not possible. I think that matters a lot,
I doubt many people will check specs.

Edit: To expand a little on this point, Apple sold 7.33 million iPads in the
holiday quarter and made $4.4 billion in revenue which means that consumers
paid about $600 (±$8) on average for an iPad. Considering that, I don’t think
it is a wise idea to not at least have a base model that is priced at $600 or
less.

------
jrockway
Times have really changed when the knock-offs cost more than the real thing...

Someone just needs to figure out how to install Android or Chrome OS on an
iPad, and it will be the tablet without any compromises.

------
blocke
I'm a huge Android fan and while I would buy a laptop from Apple I wouldn't
touch an iOS device due to disagreement over how the Market is handled.

However it doesn't take an Apple fanboi to know this pricing is horrid.

This isn't a laptop. People are not going to shop around on specs. $800 vs
$500 for similar functionality is fscking retarded, especially when the $500
device is from the BMW of computers.

------
dstein
This will bomb really badly. I am simply in awe at how far ahead of the
competition Apple remains after all these years. I would have thought
eventually the smartphone and especially the mp3 player market would've
normalized by now but Apple is now telescoping their lead. By the time the
iPad 2 ships every Android tablet not even on the market yet will be obsolete
by an entire generation.

------
cgranade
I am especially bothered by the Verizon details here. First off, how can they
prohibit WiFi use? Second, it seems like the Xoom is unavailable in Canada, if
it really is Verizon-locked. Ouch and ouch.

------
ashbrahma
Not sure how they can compete with the iPad at that price range.

------
EwanG
I suppose now would be a bad time to mention Viewsonic's G-Tablet which has a
Tegra 2 chip (just like the XOOM), a 10" display (not quite as nice as the
XOOM's), and 16 gigs of RAM for a bit under $400? :-)

~~~
rje
Have they announced honeycomb support for it yet? I haven't seen any news on
it.

~~~
georgemcbay
No, and they probably never will...officially The official software story on
the G-Tablet is a total disaster that Viewsonic will likely never fix.

However the hardware is great and 3rd party developers are supporting the
device with proper software. You can currently run CyanogenMod7 (which is
based on Gingerbread/2.3) on the G-Tablet, though it is fully a community
project that Viewsonic has nothing to do with. I'm sure the same will be true
of Honeycomb soon after it hits full ASOP status.

If you're willing to hack around with the device and not rely on the official
software, the G-Tablet is great at <$400. My only complaint is the viewing
angles on the LCD aren't that great (the panel is not IPS), if not for that it
would be a pretty ideal Android tablet platform for people willing to install
community roms.

------
eftpotrm
Would someone care to explain why these things still cost double what an
equivalent netbook with additional parts does?

~~~
forgottenpaswrd
Netbooks use way cheaper hard disks, instead of ssd. Netbooks don't have
touchscreens. Netbooks don't have GPS, accelerometers, and gyros. Netbook
don't have a battery that last 9 hours.

If there is a netbook with this specs,witch they are, it is going to be as
expensive as tablets.

So, there is no "equivalent netbook" with half the price. Putting a pixel qi
screen to my netbook cost me $275, a touchscreen $100 plus shipping cost, plus
my time, plus the risk I break my netbook(I nearly broke it when bending one
of the screen connection pins).

~~~
eftpotrm
You certainly can get netbooks with 9h battery life.
[http://www.compuplus.com/ASUS-Eee-PC-1015PED-
MU17-1166505.ht...](http://www.compuplus.com/ASUS-Eee-PC-1015PED-
MU17-1166505.html) for example.

GPS - when I can get a standalone satnav unit for $70 with its own processor,
screen battery et al, that's hardly adding up to a huge extra cost. The
accelerometer and gyro can be handled by a single relatively cheap chip from
what I remember.

Netbooks also have keyboards, touchpads and extra interface parts such as USB
and SVGA that tablets don't tend to have - not expensive components in
themselves but extra parts to integrate into the design that aren't supplied
with tablets. And, in a large number of cases, they come with a Windows
license.

So, we're left with an SSD rather than HDD (retail, marginal cost about $70
for bigger drives than tablets use) and a touchscreen rather than a non-
touchscreen (don't know the component suppliers for them to research it).

I still don't see why they're so much more expensive, beyond 'because we can'
novelty value. The numbers simply don't stack up for me.

------
scrrr
The way Motorola has handled updates for the Droid and the high price will
make the Xoom flop.

------
nazgulnarsil
i think a big question is how much is B&N losing on each nook color sale? 7
inch IPS panel with a decent processor.

10 inch tabets over $300 don't make any sense to me. archos 70 and 101 seem
like the only sane products for the casual computing market that doesnt
already have an ipad.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
Engadget's impression of the Archos 70 and 101:

 _"incredibly chintzy feel [...] the 70 and 101 look and feel very cheap. Both
are primarily made of black plastic [...] We just don't have much confidence
in the longevity of the device [...] In hand, the materials feel far from
solid, and even after wrapping it in a scarf, we worried about keeping it safe
from bumps and bruises in our bag. [...] As you'd expect, the cheap make isn't
limited to the surrounding parts of the tablet -- the plastic displays on the
70 and 101 suffer from the same issues. We weren't expecting Gorilla Glass
quality here, but both of them are flimsy and when pressed firmly, they start
to cave in quite a bit. [...] vertical viewing angles are incredibly bad.
Tilting the screens slightly off axis to about 30-degrees caused a ton of
color distortion, and if you happen to be standing above the displays while
they are propped up on the kickstands, it's nearly impossible to see what is
on screen. [...] The VGA cameras on both tablets are incredibly sluggish, and
when we finally were able to snap some stills, they came out blurry and
grainy. Similarly, when we shot some video, the footage was very choppy and
the audio wasn't in sync with the video at all."_

[http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-interne...](http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/archos-70-and-101-internet-
tablet-review/)

------
chamakits
And with this, all interests I had on the XOOM are gone.

------
bane
No thank you, drop the price $500, then we're talking.

------
OoTheNigerian
I am sorry Moto, this would not fly. Too expensive. I am just pissed to think
I have told everyone around to wait for it. The next iPad will have all this
features at a far better price. I have to give it to Steve Jobs. They
certainly had a better iPad but decided to release something slightly basic
first at an awesome price point, make loads of profit then have the ability to
match the specs of the new comers who will think they can better the iPad1
specswise

------
earl
$800?

And if you read the subtext of the picture carefully, it says, "To activate
WiFi functionality on this device, a minimum of 1 month data subscription is
required."

My god, is it rude to just point and laugh?

~~~
zmmmmm
> "To activate WiFi functionality on this device, a minimum of 1 month data
> subscription is required."

I'm gobsmacked by that - is there any precedent for it? Anywhere? I've
literally never heard of any manufacturer locking Wifi support. I'm almost not
believing it yet until I see some kind of other confirmation - I can only
think that it was meant to say "Wireless" or "3G" or something else, because
locking Wifi is just ridiculous.

