PhoneArena awards 2011: Game-changing product
0. phoneArena 30 Nov 2011, 09:18 posted on
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to the PhoneArena awards of 2011! Today, we are here to honor the game-changing product of the year; the product that boldly broke the well-established standards...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
totally justified. if/when the fire continues to sell well, its going to change the tablet paradagm. Hopefully this will end the era of $600 tablet toys as people realize they are just lining the pockets of the company and not actually getting anything extra. go Fire go! :)
2. oddmanout (Posts: 436; Member since: 22 May 2009)
Couldn't have said it any better. The pricing of tablets before / even now is ridiculous. The kindle fire sets the tone for what should be expected at bare minimum for $200. I hate living in an economy where we pay hundreds of dollars for a product of no greater significance between what you'd expect from a low end product. Sure screen size and processor speed can play a role in the price but there is still hundreds of dollars on the price tag just lingering unexplained for some devices.
40. tomast (Posts: 50; Member since: 16 Oct 2011)
You do know that amazon is actually losing money on the kindle fire because it coasts more to make it than what there selling it for.
42. JGuinan007 (Posts: 647; Member since: 19 May 2011)
thats the whole idea they lose 15$ up front but recoup that amount in the app store when you use amazon app store
45. oddmanout (Posts: 436; Member since: 22 May 2009)
Yes I'm aware that the price of the device costs more to manufacture but don't be fooled. They aren't stupid and they're making plenty of profit from it. Its only about a $20 loss per unit but its made back easily through downloads and there's no telling what kind of discount they can be receiving. Most manufacturers offer some sort of discount for bulk orders and it doesn't hurt to have the amazon name backing them up. For all we know, amazon could be actually gaining profit for each kindle. Just because it costs more for the parts doesn't necessarily mean that they're paying top dollar for its construction.
7. Zayuh24 (Posts: 148; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)
I completely agree. Companies are making a HUGE profit on each device. The iPads cost roughly $350 each to make, so why not put the price tag somewhere along those lines? Same with Android tablets with comparable hardware. Companies will make a profit from downloadable content from the marketplace, purchased accessories, etc. anyway so why not lower the prices a little to open the door for more buyers?
That's my only bit of logic for it.
3. HTCiscool (Posts: 449; Member since: 16 Jul 2011)
Finally! I would have said this or the SGSll easy. This should definitely jumpstart an era of cheap, quality tablets.
4. Packer29 (Posts: 56; Member since: 10 Sep 2011)
I will agree this one is definitly more reasonable and better than most the overpriced android junk!
5. Packer29 (Posts: 56; Member since: 10 Sep 2011)
And yes i realize it runs an android system
8. gallitoking (Posts: 4693; Member since: 17 May 2011)
well for a 7" inch tablet.. is ok.. not enough to win an award... but.. i guess i was the only one who did the research on this tablet and is an average tablet that in way will challengethe ipad2 as time has shown.. people like quality over quantity.. except fandroids that get their free Android w/Froyo out of the box...yeahhh
9. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
I'm with the crowd on the Fire. No single phone this year was a true market-busting game-changer, but in the tablet space offering anything for $200 is a pretty big deal. B&N came close last year with the Nook Color, but Amazon actually has the marketing clout to really shake up the market. This opens the door for more $200-400 tablets, and then watch the iPad's market share gradually decline.
10. iamcc (Posts: 1319; Member since: 07 Oct 2011)
People like quality without paying for iQuality.
12. gallitoking (Posts: 4693; Member since: 17 May 2011)
are you sure about that... look at the iphone sales.. ok..
13. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
Well, he didn't say how MANY people, eh?
People keep buying iPhones on their merits, but they also buy Androids on theirs, and for the sheer variety out there. Until now there's only been one major player in tablets, but the Fire changes that. As people see there are other options, Android tablets like the Galaxy can sieze the opening too. They just need to be priced to sell, which they haven't been to date.
18. gallitoking (Posts: 4693; Member since: 17 May 2011)
thats because Android wants to follow Apple.. Apple can price the the ipad2 or the iphoen at any price.. and people will still buy it.. (649.99 for a 16GB iphone4S) Android tried to priced their Zoom higher (more specs) and it didnt sold... you got to have brand recognition to do that... android is popular.. but so is Acne
25. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
The general public won't buy Android on name recognition. The name by definition is pure geek. Android is the Windows PC of today. We buy them because they're customizable, available at every price level and from many manufacturers.
Apple will continue to do what it has for decades now with the Mac, and that's sell limited product lines at high prices. They'll continue to sell well, even against competing products with more functionality, but they can't maintain majority market share. I foresee the same happening to them with tablets, starting with this Kindle.
46. speckledapple (Posts: 879; Member since: 29 Sep 2011)
That's that first piece of common sense I have read on here. It just makes sense that this will happen. Look at the PC market. Apple still sells macs, macbooks, and the like and they make great profit on each one because they control everything and price it higher. However, the market itself is not led by them. They may make some inroads, most recently because they can weather the recession better, but they will not be the market leader in the industry.
14. iamcc (Posts: 1319; Member since: 07 Oct 2011)
I didn\'t say people DON\'T pay for what I called \"iQuality\" i\'m just saying people would prefer if it was less...
11. Zayuh24 (Posts: 148; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)
You don't do research at all before you comment, huh? The iPad cost $260 to make and was originally being sold for $700. The iPad 2 cost $326.60 to make, yet both are now sold for $400, $500, and $600 respectively. The point is to make a profit, yes, but we as consumers are being overpriced yet again because of Apple's greedy tactics. The Android tablets came in the game later and have to catch up in sales, so they're going to place their prices around the same tag as the guy ahead, if not a little less.
Apple realized their first mistake of placing the original iPad at $700, and cut the cost of the iPad 2 to $500 and $600. They know they're going to make a profit regardless of where the price tag is as long as its reasonable because they will make a killing from downloadable content and Apple-manufactured accessories.
In the economy today, people are willing to pay LESS for a product that does what they WANT, and Amazon is a trusted brand for downloads just as Apple is a trusted brand for products, so they will take the lesser of two punches and go with the lower priced one.
15. gallitoking (Posts: 4693; Member since: 17 May 2011)
look I have the ipad 2.. if you have the Amazon tablet then we can debate.. but if you dont and only based on paper.. then buy the kindle or find someone that has it.. so we can compare both tablets.. the market today is saturated (thanks to Android) with mostly cheap tablets... and not one... has challenge the ipad2 in sales.. proving that people will spend more money to buy a quality product over an Amazon product... geeks here will drool to have the latest gadget for braging purposes.. because i dont think we need Quadcores phones... for anything..
43. JGuinan007 (Posts: 647; Member since: 19 May 2011)
I had the 1st Ipad I played with it for 3 months then never really used it threw away 700$ that kinda hurt my pocket but a tablet at 200$ I picked it up and I use it alot and since its smaller I actually take with me more and I think its better than the 1st Ipad although I liked the bigger screen
16. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
you obviously dont understand the reasoning for the tablet. its not for its features, its cloud abilities, android or anything.. its because its the first dual core mass produced tablet that is going to be a huge hit (more than likely sell more than all other android tablets combined within a few months).
The reason is that its popularity will put a huge downard pressure on the tablet market. if your looking at a $200 ipad and a $600 ipad and the only difference is on is 3 inches larger.. would u really buy the $600 ipad?? Are you telling me you wouldnt love if an ipad was 200-400 instead of 600+? especially if there was no real difference other than price?
you should be rooting the Fire on, not questioning it.
17. darth8balI (banned) (Posts: 18; Member since: 30 Sep 2011)
Do you really think there's no difference between the fire and iPad other than price?
21. Zayuh24 (Posts: 148; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)
There are three main differences:
3. Consumer Expectancies.
1: Price is a key factor for the middle/low class society that do not want to pay an arm and a leg for any device.
2: The product's BRAND name stands out to a consumer just as much as the price. You look at a familiar name such as Apple, Sony, or Microsoft and hold it up to a less-popular name like Asus, Acer, etc. (in the US). Which do you honestly think will get more attention to the less tech-savvy buyer? People look at Amazon as an eBook/media-downloading company and expect it to perform quite well at that. The list goes on and on.
3: Word of mouth is a huge resource and ties together with what the consumer expects from a product. His friends tell him all about how the latest iPad has FaceTime with your iPhone and he wants to try something similar so that's what he looks for in the product. His friends also tell him that it's super fast and he wants to try it for himself; also another thing he expects from the device. What the consumer wants the product to do is only known by how its advertised, which Apple bests anybody at.
Other things like memory, apps, OS, etc. come into consideration, but after considering the three main things I mentioned.
23. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
darth, you missed the point of my responce.
i didnt compare the fire to the ipad, i compared a 200 ipad with the EXACT same features other than 3 inches of screen space... ie a 7 inch $200 ipad vs a 10 inch $600 ipad.
market 101 peeps... market 101..
30. darth8balI (banned) (Posts: 18; Member since: 30 Sep 2011)
But the features are not the same. I'm not following.
44. JGuinan007 (Posts: 647; Member since: 19 May 2011)
the masses dont care about the features right now they care do I need a tablet for $600 most will say no ask them if they need a tablet for $200 bucks alot will say yes then they get hooked on tablets like crack rock and the tablet market gets bigger and diversifies and more companys make tablets bigger better lighter octo- core and there the size of a legal pad and just as light all because people got hooked on the kindle fire crack rock
20. gallitoking (Posts: 4693; Member since: 17 May 2011)
I am questioning that the EepadTransformer was a better option as it change the tablet game... nothing against the kindle.. is a nice tablet.. just not enough for the award.. just my opinion thats all..
22. Zayuh24 (Posts: 148; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)
I like the Transformer, but it isn't really competing with anybody with its sales in the US. People compare the Fire with the iPad because of its high demand in only the short period it was released. Of course it's not a FAIR comparison, but analysts, media reporters, and consumers tend to think only about how well a product sales compared to how it performs.
24. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
obviously no matter how we try to explain WHY the kindle was chosen, some people just dont feel like comprehending the decision.
kool-aid for everyone!!!
27. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
I'd rephrase the comment... if not the Kindle Fire, what's the most significant phone/tablet of the year?
28. gallitoking (Posts: 4693; Member since: 17 May 2011)
i dont recall you agreeing whe cloud services were awarded for Technology Breakthrough...
29. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
Perhaps that's because he disagrees with the merit of cloud services. I'm also wary of storing anything of vital importance (including my music collection!) virtually. And then there's the always-connected argument...
32. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
i was fine with cloud services, i was against specifically naming iCloud like it was the first, when it was actually the last, least featured, and you have to pay for some features.
silly chickenhead. :)
33. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
Thing is, first with iPad and then iCloud, Apple introduced exactly the products the industry was expecting it to. Is it really a breakthrough product if it's exactly what we thought? The iPad was a game-changer less for what it was and more for how it was received by customers. Apple once again told the public what it needed in a tablet, and it listened.
That's why the Transformer is not a game-changer - no matter how innovative, without marketing clout and demand, nobody's paying attention.
34. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
i think the tablet is the best price-performance tablet out right now. if i were to buy a full tablet, that would be the one.. and its the one i reccommend people get. But its not a game changer.. neither is the ipad2 nor the Tab. big sales dont always change the game. in the example of the fire, it is a game changer BECAUSE of big sales, since it will pull the over all price of tablets down with big sales.
Again, if you were looking at a 7 inch ipad for 200 and a 10 inch ipad for 600, with all the exact same features otherwise, would u spend 400 more for 3 extra inches? Its going to force the $600 tablet down to a more reasonable price, lest it stays priced out of competition.
35. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
Exactly, and I actually hope it affects Honeycomb/ICS tablet pricing more than the iPad. The iPad will be affected to be sure, but the existence of the Fire doesn\'t change the iPad\'s strengths: iTunes integration and It\'s An Apple. Meanwhile Samsung and Moto keep trying to sell their tablets - even the smaller sizes - for ~$500 because they think they\'re competing with the iPad. If Samsung could price a great-looking tablet like the Tab 7.7 closer to $300, I\'d be all over it.
36. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
i agree. I think its wrong for them to be focusing so much on the ipad as a competitor. Not because it cant be beat, but because most of their sales are lost to other android tablets. apple fans and people that dont know any better, choose ipad because its the brand name for tablets right now. android fans and people that research choose honeycomb (and soon ICS) because they want a certain feature, or more features in general. Having 15 android tablets to choose from is more damaging to your sales than 1 ipad choice, as many of those people arent even concidering the ipad to begin with.
If your selling a dual core 10.1 inch tablet for 500-600, you have to be hating life that your closest android competitor is selling what is nearly identical but with more features, for almost 200 less.
Samsung and moto need to quit trying to go after apple and instead realize that they are in a tech savy market more than a non-tech market like the ipad. most informed consumers arent willing to pay the 30% premium charge for the name when they can get the exact same device at the same quality, for less with another brand.
Asus, FTW :)
37. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
You had me until the last line. >:) Asus made a great motherboard back in the day, but they\'re relatively unproven as a phone/tablet maker. Moto and Sammy could both be big players, but Moto still hasn\'t gotten the hint about pricing it seems. I see Samsung becoming as much a force in the tablet space as they have in phones, but it will take more aggressive pricing and clear differentiation from both the Fire and iPad (read: give us a cheap 8 inch SAMOLED Tab!).
38. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
Samsung isnt going for cheap. They are taking the apple route and going for brand recognition. Thats why everything is "Galaxy". Its the most well known android brand in the world.
I dont mind that samsung is trying that though, as their flagship products come with top of the line samsung hardware that no one else has. At least you know you are getting something for that premium. other than a little smug and a shiney logo.
That whole blurb i just wrote was about Asus. Asus has always made top end computer hardware. Their tablets are the highest rated there are. Same build quality as the samsung/ipad but with more features and less cost. They are playing the undercutting game because they dont have a premium phone/tablet name to back them up. And i am ooh so happy about that :) (the cheaper part.. lol)
39. roldefol (Posts: 3220; Member since: 28 Jan 2011)
But it\'ll take years of consistently solid, well-reviewed products for Asus to be a strong player, and maybe not even then. Asus gets very little press. Anyone can make a good product, but it\'s all a PR game... just ask Apple.
Samsung is right to keep pushing the Galaxy name, but don\'t kid yourself - kids don\'t envy the Galaxy lineup. They still want iPhones and iPads. We get Galaxy devices because we\'ve done our homework and we know they\'re a better value for us. The best marketing campaigns appeal to your id, not your superego.
41. remixfa (Posts: 14223; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
you are totally right. Samsung though is on the very edge of breaking through that barrier to total recognition. I get a lot of people asking for galaxy devices. Still not as many that say "android" or "iphone", but as far as android recognition its up there with "Droid" in the US, and top dog everywhere else. If they have another smash hit with the SGS3 (and from prelim leaks i dont see how they couldnt), I think they will finally break that barrier and become a "brand name" that people know.. even those that dont do homework.
They are kicking up their advertising and they have the #1 and #2 selling android sets in the world.. it shouldnt be too much longer before they get that status.
And honestly, as far as Asus, i dont want them to have that kind of brand recognition. For my own selfish reasons, i like asus being that magical unicorn of best features, superb build quality, and bargain pricing. Completely selfish, i know, but hey im worried about my pocket, not theirs. :) Let apple fans pave the way to apple HQ in gold with all the extra money they are willing to spend. Id rather keep that money in the bank. :)
26. hepresearch (unregistered)
It is worthy...
31. Johnny_Mnemonic (Posts: 240; Member since: 05 Oct 2011)
Sorry gallito no award for Apple to bad. : (
47. RamyRamz69 (Posts: 390; Member since: 12 Dec 2011)
No Sony Tablet S? No PS Vita? No Xperia Play? Ha?