Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

$99 Nexus Tablet May Arrive This Quarter

Tags:
  • Nexus
  • iPad
  • Tablets
Last response: in News comments
Share
October 18, 2012 1:41:02 PM

If it can do Kindle, Angry Birds, and Words with Friends, it will sell very well.
Score
12
October 18, 2012 2:05:23 PM

ainol already have good dual-core 7" tablet around $160 today... if this launch by the end of year, hopefully it will utilize quad-core processor (and microsd slot)
Score
-4
October 18, 2012 2:39:32 PM

"According to DigiTimes' sources, the device will feature a single-core processor, but won't have input from Asus, who collaborated with Google for its Nexus 7 tablet."

Single core? Since Asus won't be part of the new $99 N7, how is the build quality? What about the screen?
I hope google doesn't try to ruin the good name of N7.
But on the other hand, if it runs decently at $99. I will definitely get it as Christmas gift for my parents and other close relatives.
Score
0
October 18, 2012 2:45:54 PM

I know a lot of people will down rank this comment, but I am really looking forward to the iPad mini. I am going to get one for each of my kids for gifts this year.
Score
-11
October 18, 2012 2:56:39 PM

Apple made a tablet and made a pile of money.

Google made a tablet and changed an industry.

That's innovation, not endless lawsuits.
Score
13
October 18, 2012 2:57:31 PM

gsacksI know a lot of people will down rank this comment, but I am really looking forward to the iPad mini. I am going to get one for each of my kids for gifts this year.


I downvoted you for being a obvious troll.
Score
11
Anonymous
October 18, 2012 3:30:43 PM

The Tablet Wars of 2012 -- Another Company, Ainol Electronics -- also just launched some new tablets, including the Novo 7 Flame - priced at $189 at a U.S. site called TabletSprint - a 7" 16GB tablet with more quality features than Nexus 7 including a 1280x800 high resolution screen, Micro-SD, HDMI, 2 quality cameras and more... Next month they launch the "World's 1st" $99 Dual Core "Performance" tablet -- If you're not familar with Ainol Electronics - they won runner-up in CES / CNET's 2012 "Best Tablet of the Year" Award -- And will also have two new Hi-Res 10 Inch tablets coming out soon, one is a Dual Core for $209 and a Quad Core with a 1920x1200 Liquid Crystal display (like Apple's Retina screen) for around $275 --WOW- the only site that seems to offer them right now in the US is TabletSprint --
Score
1
October 18, 2012 3:38:55 PM

I guess the idea is for everybody on the planet to have a tablet. That can't be bad.
Score
1
October 18, 2012 3:40:36 PM

ddpruittApple made a tablet and made a pile of money.Google made a tablet and changed an industry.That's innovation, not endless lawsuits.


Ok, but why didn't they do that in 2009 or at least sometime before April 2010? Hmmmm?
Score
-7
Anonymous
October 18, 2012 4:22:19 PM

@killerclick
Actually Microsoft had a tablet way back in 2001, it just didn't catch on. Apple didn't invent it lol!
Score
5
October 18, 2012 4:33:03 PM

killerclickOk, but why didn't they do that in 2009 or at least sometime before April 2010? Hmmmm?

TBH MS, has been tring to get tablets into mainstream for years. But between the government oversight that was imposed for the IE/W98 thingy, and the mischaracterization as touchscreen focusing on business instead of for consumers, and in large part due to tech just not being ready in the early 2000's, it never took off...

ddpruitt, How did Google change an industry? Are you referring to Amazon and the Kindle Fire?
Score
1
October 18, 2012 5:04:53 PM

jacobdrjddpruitt, How did Google change an industry? Are you referring to Amazon and the Kindle Fire?


Prior to Google's entry into the field good tablets where expensive ($400+) and cheap tablets ran ancient software on slow hardware. With Google's we have some very good tablets at really good price points ($200-$250), just look at all the competition in this segment now Kindle, Nook, Nexus 7, etc.. When the Ipad came out it was a status symbol like a Porsche or BMW, very few had them. the Google tablets are almost commodities now, lot's of people have them and love them, like Civic's.
Score
2
October 18, 2012 5:13:27 PM

ddpruittPrior to Google's entry into the field good tablets where expensive ($400+) and cheap tablets ran ancient software on slow hardware. With Google's we have some very good tablets at really good price points ($200-$250), just look at all the competition in this segment now Kindle, Nook, Nexus 7, etc.. When the Ipad came out it was a status symbol like a Porsche or BMW, very few had them. the Google tablets are almost commodities now, lot's of people have them and love them, like Civic's.

I understand that they allowed for lower priced Tablets, but ultimately, while it did lower the prices, it lowered the margins, and ultimately, Android Tablets are neither particularly popular or anywhere near as ubiquitous in the consumer market as iPads... If anything, google created confusion in the marketplace, and with the exception of Amazon, maybe, there is no truly successful (at least compared with Apple) as a forerunner of the Android Platform.

I think this is where Windows 8 (non RT) has a chance... Maybe... As people call them Microsoft Computers, no matter who makes the tablet, where Android computers are known by their manufacturer, and have few unifying aspects from a marketing standpoint.
Score
-4
October 18, 2012 5:54:55 PM

ddpruittApple made a tablet and made a pile of money.Google made a tablet and changed an industry.That's innovation, not endless lawsuits.


That's the complete opposite.

The iPad created the consumer market for touch tablets. You can try revisionist history all you want. Apple has been the one driving the innovation and creating the market, Android is just providing a different product after that market has been created.

- Who created the finger touchscreen smartphone market? Apple (iPhone)
- Who created the finger touchscreen handheld gaming/multimedia device? Apple (iPod)
- Who created the finger touchscreen table market? Apple (iPad)

Not saying their products are the best, but the actual market we see now, the ones competitors are trying to produce products for, Apple created the consumer level market for it.

Sure, have devices existed before that may have done the same, that does not mean its creates a billion dollar market for it. First to market does not mean creating the market. Simple economics.

Going from a Palm stylus or Blackberry to an iPhone was a leap.
Going from an iPhone to a Galaxy is not a leap.

Going from the tablets that existed before like Acronis device to an iPad was a leap.
Going from iPad to a Nexus is not a leap.

Score
-5
October 18, 2012 6:14:08 PM

Not want to understatement google's effort but there is already such devices - HYUNDAI 7 featuring an 1ghz cortex a8 processor. While not so flashy as more expensive(more than four times) tablets, it manages to do 90 percent of what other tablets do. So my point is Google just need to remake it with better build quality , and a lot better screen .
And more important -market it ;) 
Score
0
October 18, 2012 6:26:10 PM

ivyanevNot want to understatement google's effort but there is already such devices - HYUNDAI 7 featuring an 1ghz cortex a8 processor. While not so flashy as more expensive(more than four times) tablets, it manages to do 90 percent of what other tablets do. So my point is Google just need to remake it with better build quality , and a lot better screen .And more important -market it


You are forgetting the "Nexus" Brandname and with it the rights to get the latest Android updates first! Not many cheaper android tablets in the $100 can do that since Google holds the reins in this matter and can tailor the forthcoming updates and optimize it for the nexus devices. I personally would choose this tablet over any cheaper unbranded android tablet even if it were $30 cheaper or even slightly weaker in performance, just for the assured quality,regular updates,assured XDA community support and peace of mind. :) )
Score
1
October 18, 2012 6:26:30 PM

wemakeourfuture said:
That's the complete opposite.

The iPad created the consumer market for touch tablets. You can try revisionist history all you want. Apple has been the one driving the innovation and creating the market, Android is just providing a different product after that market has been created.

- Who created the finger touchscreen smartphone market? Apple (iPhone)
- Who created the finger touchscreen handheld gaming/multimedia device? Apple (iPod)
- Who created the finger touchscreen table market? Apple (iPad)

Not saying their products are the best, but the actual market we see now, the ones competitors are trying to produce products for, Apple created the consumer level market for it.

Sure, have devices existed before that may have done the same, that does not mean its creates a billion dollar market for it. First to market does not mean creating the market. Simple economics.

Going from a Palm stylus or Blackberry to an iPhone was a leap.
Going from an iPhone to a Galaxy is not a leap.

Going from the tablets that existed before like Acronis device to an iPad was a leap.
Going from iPad to a Nexus is not a leap.


Quote:

I understand that they allowed for lower priced Tablets, but ultimately, while it did lower the prices, it lowered the margins, and ultimately, Android Tablets are neither particularly popular or anywhere near as ubiquitous in the consumer market as iPads... If anything, google created confusion in the marketplace, and with the exception of Amazon, maybe, there is no truly successful (at least compared with Apple) as a forerunner of the Android Platform.

I think this is where Windows 8 (non RT) has a chance... Maybe... As people call them Microsoft Computers, no matter who makes the tablet, where Android computers are known by their manufacturer, and have few unifying aspects from a marketing standpoint.


Here's what I'm talking about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_770

Touchscreen,
BlueTooth,
WiFi,
etc

For some reason when Apple does well in an specific market they created it, nothing could be further from the truth. Unfortunately we don't have Ipad vs Android tablet sales, all we see is Ipad vs one company not vs all of the other Android tablets it has to compete with. You call it confusion I call it healthy competition.

Sure we're going to have quite a bit of junk until the market sorts itself out, it always happens in every industry. Apple created a niche market, few considered on because of the cost. Google opened the market to everyone, from the rumors (which I won't believe till I see) even Apple is considering releasing a low cost Ipad.

Microsoft is only entering the market now that the boundaries have been cleaned up a bit. They tried and failed (XP Tablet Edition anyone?).

edit: Didn't correctly quote something
Score
-1
October 18, 2012 7:26:52 PM

ddpruittHere's what I'm talking abouthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_770Touchscreen,BlueT... some reason when Apple does well in an specific market they created it, nothing could be further from the truth. Unfortunately we don't have Ipad vs Android tablet sales, all we see is Ipad vs one company not vs all of the other Android tablets it has to compete with. You call it confusion I call it healthy competition.Sure we're going to have quite a bit of junk until the market sorts itself out, it always happens in every industry. Apple created a niche market, few considered on because of the cost. Google opened the market to everyone, from the rumors (which I won't believe till I see) even Apple is considering releasing a low cost Ipad. Microsoft is only entering the market now that the boundaries have been cleaned up a bit. They tried and failed (XP Tablet Edition anyone?).edit: Didn't correctly quote something



Yes, yes, the millions of tablets now being sold are due to Nokia and the 770 back in 2005.
Give me a break.

There was no billion dollar tablet market until the iPad. Do you honestly dispute this?

You can find all sorts of tablet like devices that made no inroads, didn't make a profit or much, and had ZERO traction with consumers.
Score
-4
October 18, 2012 8:23:39 PM

amdwilliam1985Single core? How is the build quality? What about the screen?


I think that low resolution screen is confirmed (have to be bacause the GPU part is allso weak). So you get what you pay for. 99$ is very cheap, but so are the parts. But if you just want to read web pages and are not so keen on a little washed out coulours and poor viewing angles, this can be good pad. It has to be compared to reletively closely priced pads and there are not so many of them. If this is better than near competion, this is just ok. You just can not expect it to be as good as those 199$ devices.

Score
0
October 18, 2012 8:47:34 PM

I hope this isn't just a rumor I want a good quality but cheap tablet that is cheap enough for me to use and abuse by taking it everywhere. And one that gets updates and can use the google store out of the box.

Granted I want HDMI connection and microSD card slot but if a Nexus tablet came out at a $100 price point I say screw it and pick one up at that price point.
Score
0
October 18, 2012 10:40:29 PM

wemakeourfutureYes, yes, the millions of tablets now being sold are due to Nokia and the 770 back in 2005.Give me a break. There was no billion dollar tablet market until the iPad. Do you honestly dispute this? You can find all sorts of tablet like devices that made no inroads, didn't make a profit or much, and had ZERO traction with consumers.


Still doesn't change the fact they were the first to make the device. Creative made the first successful MP3 player. Are Mp3 players refered to nomads? No! They're referred to as iPoods. The only innovative thing that has come from apple since the G3 power mac is iTunes and we all know it. Apple has otherwise, taken an idea, painted it white and put a chrome apple logo on it, then had Steve jobs basically rub his dick on it in front of people while screaming "this device pleases me!"

That's it! Apple's only strength is to advertise!

Also how in the hell is it not a leap to make something affordable for the masses? Are you telling me that the model T is not a leap? Are you telling me that the commadore 64 was not a leap? Seriously, what is a leap then if it doesn't have a apple logo on it?
Score
1
October 19, 2012 12:52:05 AM

BulkZerkerStill doesn't change the fact they were the first to make the device. Creative made the first successful MP3 player. Are Mp3 players refered to nomads? No! They're referred to as iPoods. The only innovative thing that has come from apple since the G3 power mac is iTunes and we all know it. Apple has otherwise, taken an idea, painted it white and put a chrome apple logo on it, then had Steve jobs basically rub his dick on it in front of people while screaming "this device pleases me!" That's it! Apple's only strength is to advertise!Also how in the hell is it not a leap to make something affordable for the masses? Are you telling me that the model T is not a leap? Are you telling me that the commadore 64 was not a leap? Seriously, what is a leap then if it doesn't have a apple logo on it?


1. Being first to market doesn't really make you the reason why the market for that product is successful. This should really obvious, lots of examples, but I will give you one example. Videos on Discs existed before DVD, they had no traction in the consumer market. It was the DVD format combined with the hardware companies that made the players that helped this be extremely successful and in all living rooms. Do you dispute this? Do you think VCD or the other formats before "created" the consumer market?

2. Regarding Apple. Lets take the tablet space. The total sales for Tablets before the iPad were nearly non-existent as was the profit generated. Do you disagree with this? After the iPad was released millions were sold, billions were generated and competitors came out with their products (very similar products, no leap). Do you disagree with this?


3. Your Model T and the Nexus. Lets take this further. You said the Nexus 7 that sells for $199-$249 (North American pricing) was a leap because "make something affordable for the masses"
Well if this is the case why does the iPad still hold over a 50% market share? Why isn't the number one selling table the Nexus 7 since it's "affordable for the masses"? Well, because consumer marginal utility is higher for the iPad currently. So if the "masses" couldn't afford an iPad why is it the number one selling device? Why has the Nexus 7 not out sold it?

Also, the Model T was a leap because of the way the product was assembled, the new assembly method helped it change the game. The Model T's and its price had such a high marginal utility it had almost a 50% market share. This is not the case for the Nexus 7, doesn't even mention it with the Model T.

Again, where's the leap?
Score
-2
October 19, 2012 2:49:29 AM

wemakeourfuture said:
1. Being first to market doesn't really make you the reason why the market for that product is successful. This should really obvious, lots of examples, but I will give you one example. Videos on Discs existed before DVD, they had no traction in the consumer market. It was the DVD format combined with the hardware companies that made the players that helped this be extremely successful and in all living rooms. Do you dispute this? Do you think VCD or the other formats before "created" the consumer market?

2. Regarding Apple. Lets take the tablet space. The total sales for Tablets before the iPad were nearly non-existent as was the profit generated. Do you disagree with this? After the iPad was released millions were sold, billions were generated and competitors came out with their products (very similar products, no leap). Do you disagree with this?


3. Your Model T and the Nexus. Lets take this further. You said the Nexus 7 that sells for $199-$249 (North American pricing) was a leap because "make something affordable for the masses"
Well if this is the case why does the iPad still hold over a 50% market share? Why isn't the number one selling table the Nexus 7 since it's "affordable for the masses"? Well, because consumer marginal utility is higher for the iPad currently. So if the "masses" couldn't afford an iPad why is it the number one selling device? Why has the Nexus 7 not out sold it?

Also, the Model T was a leap because of the way the product was assembled, the new assembly method helped it change the game. The Model T's and its price had such a high marginal utility it had almost a 50% market share. This is not the case for the Nexus 7, doesn't even mention it with the Model T.

Again, where's the leap?


There are so many problems with your example I don't know where to start.

A. We don't know what the Ipads actual market share is, anyone who claims to have the answer is at worst outright lying or at best misleading. A lot of Android tablet makers haven't released sales figures and activations tell you zip, so we don't have any numbers. But very unscientifically I know 1 person who owns an Ipad, about a dozen who have Android equivalents.

B. The Model T was successful because of its price. Ford dropped the price so much that he cornered the market and grabbed market share from all the "innovators" that came before. Ironically the same situation is happing with Iphone and Android (Thanks for the example ;) )

C. Of course millions were sold, just like millions of similar devices (albeit an evolutionary step behind). Blu-Ray could not exist without DVD which could not exist without LaserDisc.... All of the previous technologies where popular. For some strange reason (that I can't fathom) once Apple creates a device they're the original originators of the idea. Tablets where used before Apple, in the same spaces, I knew of quite a few people that had pre-Ipad tablets.
Score
-1
October 20, 2012 1:03:48 PM

ddpruittThere are so many problems with your example I don't know where to start.A. We don't know what the Ipads actual market share is, anyone who claims to have the answer is at worst outright lying or at best misleading. A lot of Android tablet makers haven't released sales figures and activations tell you zip, so we don't have any numbers. But very unscientifically I know 1 person who owns an Ipad, about a dozen who have Android equivalents.B. The Model T was successful because of its price. Ford dropped the price so much that he cornered the market and grabbed market share from all the "innovators" that came before. Ironically the same situation is happing with Iphone and Android (Thanks for the example )C. Of course millions were sold, just like millions of similar devices (albeit an evolutionary step behind). Blu-Ray could not exist without DVD which could not exist without LaserDisc.... All of the previous technologies where popular. For some strange reason (that I can't fathom) once Apple creates a device they're the original originators of the idea. Tablets where used before Apple, in the same spaces, I knew of quite a few people that had pre-Ipad tablets.


I don't think you really understand any of my comments nor economics. Your rebuttal about the Model T clearly illustrates this. Do you even understand what I meant by, "The Model T's and its price had such a high marginal utility it had almost a 50% market share." ?

If you did, why would you write:
"There are so many problems with your example I don't know where to start."
...
"B. The Model T was successful because of its price."

Sorry but why skim over my response then attack me for saying the exact same thing?

Just because you have anecdotal evidence of some people you know with tablets does not mean we don't have reasonable figures about market share about tablets.

I guess we don't know market share of phones, consoles, laptops, cars, etc. too right?


Also, since you cannot address who created the consumer market for said products, who provided the "leap" in terms of the differentiation features in the products that created the space, tells me a lot.
Score
0
!