Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Tech Talk
Reload this Page >

What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Tech Talk Discuss PC Hardware, Software, Internet and Other Technology

What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Old 06-27-12, 02:38 PM
  #26  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Deftones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 75,194
Received 30 Likes on 18 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
Has it been confirmed that the next Nexus will be on Verizon? Although having the latest software is nice, I passed on the Galaxy nexus because of it's subpar radio. The gnex runs an OMAP 45nm chip and separate radios. The S3 uses the snapdragon s4 krait SoC which is a 28nm chip with the radios integrated into the chip. If the verizon S3 has a solid radio, then I would prefer the solid radio overver latest updates and subpar radio. Of course, if there is a new Verizon bound Nexus, then I would consider that as well.
I meant the Galaxy Nexus, btw. It's cheaper and out now. But you are right, the specs are not nearly as good as SG3, which is why it's even a debate. I'll probably just keep the SG3 preorder. the one thing to me, above all else, it battery life. i don't care if i don't get the best signal, because i used about 100 minutes a month on the phone. mine is almost solely used for texting and moderate internet surfing.
Old 06-27-12, 02:42 PM
  #27  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Deftones View Post
I meant the Galaxy Nexus, btw. It's cheaper and out now. But you are right, the specs are not nearly as good as SG3, which is why it's even a debate. I'll probably just keep the SG3 preorder. the one thing to me, above all else, it battery life. i don't care if i don't get the best signal, because i used about 100 minutes a month on the phone. mine is almost solely used for texting and moderate internet surfing.
Nothing drives me crazy more than constantly dropping data. It also drains batteries. Anyway, for the best battery life, get the maxx.
Old 06-27-12, 02:48 PM
  #28  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Deftones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 75,194
Received 30 Likes on 18 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

i only need a day's worth of juice. anything more to me is not worth the trade off.
Old 06-27-12, 03:51 PM
  #29  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25,062
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Deftones View Post
Yeah, I posted about that about year ago. I wondered why we could get tablets with similar specs as a phone, yet a phone was insanely more expensive. It's b/c phone makers are in cahoots with carriers. Why Google should be getting into the hardware business more a better variety of phones for all carriers.
Well, maybe, but miniaturization also adds cost.
Old 06-27-12, 04:14 PM
  #30  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Raul3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Picture a cup in the middle of the sea
Posts: 10,705
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Google is going Minority Report on us. And I can't wait!!!!
Old 06-27-12, 04:16 PM
  #31  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Deftones View Post
Yeah, I posted about that about year ago. I wondered why we could get tablets with similar specs as a phone, yet a phone was insanely more expensive. It's b/c phone makers are in cahoots with carriers. Why Google should be getting into the hardware business more a better variety of phones for all carriers.
The iphone 4 retails for $550,the Ipod touch 8gb is essentially the same thing without the cell radio and runs for around $200. Androids are similar, you can buy a samsung galaxy player 5 with a 5" display for around $270, but a similar phone would be around $600.

The cell radios could not cost that much, the lte radio on the tbolt was $45ish bom, and the tbolt bom was around $260. IPhone 4 bom was around $180.

The cell radios don't really take up much more room, for example, the S3 uses the s4 krait SoC msm8960 chip which includes could, gpu, cell radios, bt, and wifi.

Last edited by D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB); 06-27-12 at 04:27 PM.
Old 06-27-12, 04:17 PM
  #32  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: St Louis, MO
Posts: 6,781
Received 24 Likes on 16 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by shadowhawk2020 View Post
BUT a 7" tablet with GPS, NFC, Front Facing Camera, Bluetooth and Jellybean for $199? Yes please.
Agreed. I think Google got everything right with this tablet. If I didn't already have a Galaxy Tab 8.9 and I thought I could deal with a 7" screen, this would be my tablet of choice.
Old 06-27-12, 05:15 PM
  #33  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Deftones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 75,194
Received 30 Likes on 18 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet View Post
Well, maybe, but miniaturization also adds cost.
yeah, not that much. read what DPham posted. good breakdown. there's no way it costs $300+ for the extra radio chips in a phone to make it a phone.
Old 06-27-12, 05:39 PM
  #34  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: DVDTalk's Surgeon General
Posts: 5,524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
The iphone 4 retails for $550,the Ipod touch 8gb is essentially the same thing without the cell radio and runs for around $200. Androids are similar, you can buy a samsung galaxy player 5 with a 5" display for around $270, but a similar phone would be around $600.

The cell radios could not cost that much, the lte radio on the tbolt was $45ish bom, and the tbolt bom was around $260. IPhone 4 bom was around $180.

The cell radios don't really take up much more room, for example, the S3 uses the s4 krait SoC msm8960 chip which includes could, gpu, cell radios, bt, and wifi.
Don't companies have to pay licensing fees for the technology that allows them to connect to 3g/4g etc?
Old 06-27-12, 06:45 PM
  #35  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Any word on if/when that tablet will be available in stores? I have $50 reward zone points at best buy that expires in mid July that I would love to use for this.
Old 06-27-12, 07:45 PM
  #36  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by shadowhawk2020 View Post
Don't companies have to pay licensing fees for the technology that allows them to connect to 3g/4g etc?
Yes, but not that much. Take a look at prepaid phones, these phones are not subsidized, yet I have bought quad band Gsm 3g capable smartphone for just $20 (no contract). Obviously on sale, but there are plenty of phones well under $100 no contract all the time on prepaid. Not high end smartphones of course, but my point was about the licensing fee.

Since this is a Google thread, take a look at the gnex, it is still a high end smartphone today and sells for $350 unlocked pentaband. Verizon sells it for $650 no contract. Sure, the verizon gnex has CDMA and lte, but I have,a hard time believing that swapping out Gsm + hspa+ for CDMA and lte costs anywhere near $300 or even $100 for that matter.

Now, let's look at the Rezound, Verizon's first HD smartphone, with an original msrp of $300 on contract. It sold for $50 on upgrade less than 2 weeks from release. Basically, if you canceled service and paid etf, you would be out $400. That $400 is enough for Costco wireless, Verizon, and HTC to make a profit. Yet, retail is $650. It also sold for a penny around the same time, but for new customers.

Last edited by D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB); 06-27-12 at 08:30 PM.
Old 06-27-12, 09:31 PM
  #37  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 18,089
Received 37 Likes on 30 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
The iphone 4 retails for $550,the Ipod touch 8gb is essentially the same thing without the cell radio...
Apple keeps the iPhone prices artificially inflated. Every other cell phone drops in price much faster; you won't see them selling for their launch price 6 months later, let alone a year or two later.

However, the 4th gen iPod Touch also doesn't have GPS, doesn't have the same battery life for video, and doesn't have the 5 megapixel rear camera.
http://ipod.about.com/od/ipadcompari...ipod-touch.htm

Not to mention that Apple left the iPod Touch the same instead of upgrading it when they released the iPhone 4S. So it's now also generation behind the iPhone in terms of hardware. So its price is not reflective of what it costs to develop and release a new phone.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
The cell radios could not cost that much, the lte radio on the tbolt was $45ish bom, and the tbolt bom was around $260. IPhone 4 bom was around $180.
I don't trust the "Bill of Materials" that are made for various cell phones and other products. They are, at best, estimates at what someone thinks the price of a certain part cost, maybe based partially on a price of a similar part, with a guess at what type of discount the manufacturer gets for the part. It also doesn't factor in the costs of designing all those parts to fit in such a small space, and testing all those parts assembled for the optimal configuration.

You have to factor in the R&D that went into creating the phone instead of just looking at the cost of materials. After all, software, music, movies, and TV shows take little or no cost to replicate, so their BOM is really, really small. However, the "inflated" initial prices for these are due to the costs involved in creating the original, and the price of subsequent copies can drop over time. The same is true of electronics design vs manufacture.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
The cell radios don't really take up much more room, for example, the S3 uses the s4 krait SoC msm8960 chip which includes could, gpu, cell radios, bt, and wifi.
Of course they don't take up much more room, because they're designed that way. They're much more expensive though, because they have to cram so much in such a small space. A chip that does less in the same amount of space takes less effort to design and manufacture, and thus is cheaper.

Making electronics small is a very expensive proposition:


http://www.engineerguy.com/videos/video-tantalum.htm


Originally Posted by shadowhawk2020 View Post
Don't companies have to pay licensing fees for the technology that allows them to connect to 3g/4g etc?
There's probably that as well. There's also the fact that some phones have to connect to multiple 3g/4g frequencies and technologies.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
Yes, but not that much. Take a look at prepaid phones, these phones are not subsidized...
This isn't strictly true. They are subsidized, just not as much as contract phones are. They are typically carrier locked though, and to the pre-paid carrier.

Also, pre-paid phones tend to be lower-end. You can say it's a "3G Smartphone," but almost everyone who bought an LG Optimus One has run into its limitations (low RAM, low internal memory for apps, slower CPU, etc). Older phone drop in price as well.

Since this is a Google thread, take a look at the gnex, it is still a high end smartphone today and sells for $350 unlocked pentaband. Verizon sells it for $650 no contract. Sure, the verizon gnex has CDMA and lte, but I have,a hard time believing that swapping out Gsm + hspa+ for CDMA and lte costs anywhere near $300 or even $100 for that matter.
Verizon's keeping the "no contract" price artifically high. Meanwhile, they've dropped the contract price several times. It started out at $300, then dropped to $200, and now it's $0.01. So obviously Verizon's purchase cost has dropped for it, since they're not likely to be increasing the subsidy.
http://pocketnow.com/android/google-...ugh-play-store
http://www.technobloom.com/is-the-ga...twork/2210142/

This article suggests it may be the carriers that are keeping "no contract" prices high:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/technolog...e-phone-costs/

As you point out though, the no-contract price has dropped as the product has been out longer. If smartphone stayed static in terms of features, I'm sure that newly released phones would have ever lower initial prices. The "problem" is that manufacturers poor ever more features into the devices, keeping the initial cost high. Seriously, the idea of getting something like a screen with 4x the resolution for approximately the same price as last year's model would be crazy in any other field except electronics.

In terms of at least initial cost, I don't think it's that inflated. Cramming so much into such a tiny space is a huge design cost, and I imagine that adding more features and going even just a few inches smaller can be a exponentially larger cost, instead of just incremental.


Another thing to factor in with the Nexus 7 is that it's a very Google service focused product, just like the Kindle Fire is very Amazon focused. Both companies could be subsidizing the price of the tablets (even if it is just writing off some of the R&D that went into the devices instead of manufacturing costs) due to the promise of additional revenue from these services. It's similar to how the Xbox and Playstation were initially sold subsidized "out of contract" due to the promise of additional revenue from game sales.

Finally, while the Kindle Fire started off cheap, it hasn't dropped in price since. Amazon is likely making ever increasing profit margins on the product, but it continue to sell well because it's on the low end of the tablet market, and no serious contender in terms of hardware has beaten its price. Amazon is likely to keep it at that price until the next generation of the tablet, at which point the profit margin will once again shrink (or possibly even vanish or go negative), until time once again decreases cost while the price stays the same. In this scenario, those buying the tablet later are basically subsidizing the tablets that sold earlier.
Old 06-28-12, 12:16 AM
  #38  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Jay G. View Post
Apple keeps the iPhone prices artificially inflated. Every other cell phone drops in price much faster; you won't see them selling for their launch price 6 months later, let alone a year or two later.

However, the 4th gen iPod Touch also doesn't have GPS, doesn't have the same battery life for video, and doesn't have the 5 megapixel rear camera.
http://ipod.about.com/od/ipadcompari...ipod-touch.htm

Not to mention that Apple left the iPod Touch the same instead of upgrading it when they released the iPhone 4S. So it's now also generation behind the iPhone in terms of hardware. So its price is not reflective of what it costs to develop and release a new phone.
I realize that the ipod touch is a gen old, hence compared it to the 4 at $550, not the 4S at $650. i realize that the ipod touch isn't exactly the same, but really, adding cell radios and GPS (both of which can be on same chip as cpu), a better camera, and battery, to me, doesn't justify it costing 275% as much as the iPhone 4, imo.




I don't trust the "Bill of Materials" that are made for various cell phones and other products. They are, at best, estimates at what someone thinks the price of a certain part cost, maybe based partially on a price of a similar part, with a guess at what type of discount the manufacturer gets for the part. It also doesn't factor in the costs of designing all those parts to fit in such a small space, and testing all those parts assembled for the optimal configuration.

You have to factor in the R&D that went into creating the phone instead of just looking at the cost of materials. After all, software, music, movies, and TV shows take little or no cost to replicate, so their BOM is really, really small. However, the "inflated" initial prices for these are due to the costs involved in creating the original, and the price of subsequent copies can drop over time. The same is true of electronics design vs manufacture.
is the software for the iPhone really that different than the iPod? i mean, sure it has a phone app, gps, maybe a few differences, but, from my limited use of ipod and iphone, it looks relatively similar.

obviously BOM gives only a possible cost of the phone based on it's parts, but i think that it gives a decent estimate at that.


Of course they don't take up much more room, because they're designed that way. They're much more expensive though, because they have to cram so much in such a small space. A chip that does less in the same amount of space takes less effort to design and manufacture, and thus is cheaper.

Making electronics small is a very expensive proposition:


http://www.engineerguy.com/videos/video-tantalum.htm
interesting read, but again, i realize it is more costly, but, i don't think that much more so.


This isn't strictly true. They are subsidized, just not as much as contract phones are. They are typically carrier locked though, and to the pre-paid carrier.

Also, pre-paid phones tend to be lower-end. You can say it's a "3G Smartphone," but almost everyone who bought an LG Optimus One has run into its limitations (low RAM, low internal memory for apps, slower CPU, etc). Older phone drop in price as well.
take a look at the exhibit ii 4g, it sells for around $200 no contract. a similar post paid phone, sold at full retail, would cost a lot more. and it is a fairly capable phone, for the price.


Verizon's keeping the "no contract" price artifically high. Meanwhile, they've dropped the contract price several times. It started out at $300, then dropped to $200, and now it's $0.01. So obviously Verizon's purchase cost has dropped for it, since they're not likely to be increasing the subsidy.
http://pocketnow.com/android/google-...ugh-play-store
http://www.technobloom.com/is-the-ga...twork/2210142/

This article suggests it may be the carriers that are keeping "no contract" prices high:
http://www.foxbusiness.com/technolog...e-phone-costs/

As you point out though, the no-contract price has dropped as the product has been out longer. If smartphone stayed static in terms of features, I'm sure that newly released phones would have ever lower initial prices. The "problem" is that manufacturers poor ever more features into the devices, keeping the initial cost high. Seriously, the idea of getting something like a screen with 4x the resolution for approximately the same price as last year's model would be crazy in any other field except electronics.

In terms of at least initial cost, I don't think it's that inflated. Cramming so much into such a tiny space is a huge design cost, and I imagine that adding more features and going even just a few inches smaller can be a exponentially larger cost, instead of just incremental.


Another thing to factor in with the Nexus 7 is that it's a very Google service focused product, just like the Kindle Fire is very Amazon focused. Both companies could be subsidizing the price of the tablets (even if it is just writing off some of the R&D that went into the devices instead of manufacturing costs) due to the promise of additional revenue from these services. It's similar to how the Xbox and Playstation were initially sold subsidized "out of contract" due to the promise of additional revenue from game sales.

Finally, while the Kindle Fire started off cheap, it hasn't dropped in price since. Amazon is likely making ever increasing profit margins on the product, but it continue to sell well because it's on the low end of the tablet market, and no serious contender in terms of hardware has beaten its price. Amazon is likely to keep it at that price until the next generation of the tablet, at which point the profit margin will once again shrink (or possibly even vanish or go negative), until time once again decreases cost while the price stays the same. In this scenario, those buying the tablet later are basically subsidizing the tablets that sold earlier.
the gnex sells currently on Verizon for $150. 3rd party may be less. i'd agree with you on the initial cost, just like, if Toyota made 1 Camry, it would cost a heck of a lot more than 20k. But they have to figure out how many they are going to sell and divide the cost out to even out teh r&d.
Old 06-28-12, 12:29 AM
  #39  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

My complaint is more about the off contact price. I think that it is artificially high. Also, Verizon was selling the gnex for $300 on contract, then next day, Google sells the gnex for $400 no contract. Something is up.
Old 06-28-12, 12:34 AM
  #40  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Also, Verizon has been pushing phones at $300, att with similar phones at $200 . does CDMA cost that much more?
Old 06-28-12, 05:23 AM
  #41  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Home again, Big D
Posts: 29,600
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by kefrank View Post
Agreed. I think Google got everything right with this tablet. If I didn't already have a Galaxy Tab 8.9 and I thought I could deal with a 7" screen, this would be my tablet of choice.
No SD or other expandable memory. Or does only Apple get slammed for doing that?
Old 06-28-12, 08:21 AM
  #42  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 18,089
Received 37 Likes on 30 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
I realize that the ipod touch is a gen old, hence compared it to the 4 at $550, not the 4S at $650. i realize that the ipod touch isn't exactly the same, but really, adding cell radios and GPS (both of which can be on same chip as cpu), a better camera, and battery, to me, doesn't justify it costing 275% as much as the iPhone 4, imo.
Again, I stated that I think the iPhones have their price artificially stabilized. The iPhone 4 is selling for far more than any other 2 year old phone is. It's not too dissimilar from Apple's Mac pricing, where the price stays the same until the updated model comes out, whether that's 1 year or more.

Also, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that putting more and more features on a single chip would make it cheaper, when actually the reverse is true. And cell radios and GPS are not on the CPU chip in an iPhone.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
is the software for the iPhone really that different than the iPod...
I didn't say anything about the software on the iPhone being different than the iPod Touch. I think you should re-read what I wrote.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
obviously BOM gives only a possible cost of the phone based on it's parts, but i think that it gives a decent estimate at that.
Well, you and I differ on that, I guess. However, even if a BOM estimate is close to the actual BOM for a phone, there's more to the cost of a phone than just the sum of its parts. There's extensive R&D that goes into designing a new phone, and the smaller and more feature-packed it is, the more expensive that's going to be.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
take a look at the exhibit ii 4g, it sells for around $200 no contract. a similar post paid phone, sold at full retail, would cost a lot more. and it is a fairly capable phone, for the price.
I did take a look at it. It has a smaller sized screen, a small amount of RAM, a really small amount of internal memory, an only 3MP camera, a single-core CPU, and it's thicker than many other phones. My 2-year-old Samsung Vibrant is better than it in almost every way. Plus, this review states that the screen is terrible at angles:
http://www.phonearena.com/reviews/Sa...-Review_id2877

If the Samsung Exhibit II was a serious contender, then your assertion that "smartphone prices are too high" would fall apart, as everyone would be picking that phone up instead of waiting for the next Galaxy phone. The newer, more expensive phones have far more features, and packing them into such a small footprint makes the increased costs potentially exponential, not just incremental.

Finally, even though the phone is sold "off-contract," it's still carrier-locked, so it may still be partially subsidized. You just can't see the actual "unsubsidized price" like you can with a contract phone.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
the gnex sells currently on Verizon for $150. 3rd party may be less. i'd agree with you on the initial cost, just like, if Toyota made 1 Camry, it would cost a heck of a lot more than 20k. But they have to figure out how many they are going to sell and divide the cost out to even out teh r&d.
Amazon has the Galaxy Nexus for $0.01:
http://wireless.amazon.com/Samsung-G...dp/B0061R2A1S/

You're right that directly from Verizon it'd be $150. But even on Verizon, the price has continuously and consistently gone down over time.

As for cars, I'm not sure a product that costs 100x more is an apt comparison. However, cars do follow, roughly, a similar pricing model. When they're first released, they have a high MSRP. Then over the course of the year that drops, until the next year's model is released, at which point the older model is heavily discounted and discontinued.

I don't know why you don't think the cell phone developers are not dividing out the costs of the R&D. The release cycles for phones are so fast that they have to recoup the R&D costs upfront, so that they can start working on the next model.

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
My complaint is more about the off contact price. I think that it is artificially high. Also, Verizon was selling the gnex for $300 on contract, then next day, Google sells the gnex for $400 no contract. Something is up.
That's not true. Verizon has dropped the price of the Galaxy Nexus to $200 on contract before Google announced their off-contract version:
http://pocketnow.com/android/google-...ugh-play-store

Originally Posted by D.Pham00 View Post
Also, Verizon has been pushing phones at $300, att with similar phones at $200 . does CDMA cost that much more?
AT&T uses the same technology (GSM) and frequencies as the majority of international carriers do, so a manufacturer can use basically the same model for both AT&T and worldwide (partially why the iPhone was AT&T exclusive for so long), meaning that the overall costs (including R&D) can be split over that larger market. For Verzion, the manufacturer may be making the CMDA version specifically just for Verizon, which means that the overall costs are split over a smaller market. So it may actually cost a significant amount more per device to make the CDMA version. There's a reason why Apple went with a "world phone" radio, so that it could split the higher costs of the radio across the wider marketplace and save R&D costs by designing and updating only one phone model.
Old 06-28-12, 08:57 AM
  #43  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Deftones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 75,194
Received 30 Likes on 18 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

looks like Google is making $0 profit on these: http://www.bgr.com/2012/06/28/nexus-...oogle-android/

we don't even need a BOM to confirm.
Old 06-28-12, 09:13 AM
  #44  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25,062
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Jay G. View Post
Apple keeps the iPhone prices artificially inflated. Every other cell phone drops in price much faster; you won't see them selling for their launch price 6 months later, let alone a year or two later.
Apple does not keep iPhone prices "artificially inflated"--it's just what people will pay.
Old 06-28-12, 09:18 AM
  #45  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MN
Posts: 23,936
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

I had been looking at a Kindle Fire, but now I don't know if I want to do that. I should probably just save up for an ipad.
Old 06-28-12, 09:26 AM
  #46  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 18,089
Received 37 Likes on 30 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet View Post
Apple does not keep iPhone prices "artificially inflated"--it's just what people will pay.
True. I meant more that they don't drop prices as costs drop for the phones, or to compete with other devices. They keep the prices consistent, only dropping the price when a new model comes out.

Take the comparison of the Verizon Galaxy Nexus vs the Verizon iPhone 4S. The Nexus came out after the 4S, and had a higher price-point ($300 on contract). Now, over 6 months later, the Nexus price has been at least halved, and is selling for less than the 4S, while the 4S has stayed at the same price.

Assuming the initial profit margin was the same between phones and that costs per phone have dropped at approximately the same rate, the 4S price is kept at a higher price than it probably could be sold at. But Apple is the only provider of iPhones, while there's a half dozen major Android manufacturers.
Old 06-28-12, 09:31 AM
  #47  
DVD Talk God
Thread Starter
 
Deftones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 75,194
Received 30 Likes on 18 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet View Post
Apple does not keep iPhone prices "artificially inflated"--it's just what people will pay.
it's a combination of both. they could easily lower the price on a phone, but they don't. no reason to since they sell like crazy no matter the price.
Old 06-28-12, 09:46 AM
  #48  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Jay G. View Post
Again, I stated that I think the iPhones have their price artificially stabilized. The iPhone 4 is selling for far more than any other 2 year old phone is. It's not too dissimilar from Apple's Mac pricing, where the price stays the same until the updated model comes out, whether that's 1 year or more.

Also, you seem to be under the mistaken impression that putting more and more features on a single chip would make it cheaper, when actually the reverse is true. And cell radios and GPS are not on the CPU chip in an iPhone.
I didn't say anything about the software on the iPhone being different than the iPod Touch. I think you should re-read what I wrote.
Well, you and I differ on that, I guess. However, even if a BOM estimate is close to the actual BOM for a phone, there's more to the cost of a phone than just the sum of its parts. There's extensive R&D that goes into designing a new phone, and the smaller and more feature-packed it is, the more expensive that's going to be.
I never said that cell radios and GPS are on the CPU chip, just that, if Apple wanted to, by today’s standards, they certainly could have if they chose to. Obviously they chose the cheapest route.
Sorry about that, I did misread what you wrote. But that being said, I don’t think that the miniaturization really justifies the extra cost of the ipod touch vs. the iphone. The iPhone 4S has a BOM of $188, really, I have to wonder, how much cheaper the iPod touch would cost to make. Obviously it is based loosely on the 4, but, I’d have to imagine that the iPod Touch would cost around $100ish to produce, being that it is sold for $200. Compared to the 4S, $188 BOM vs $650 retail. Yes, it costs a lot more to cram stuff into small spaces, but, imo, we are not increasing the BOM costs by say 3 or 4 fold to add some radios, a camera, better battery, and the “miniaturization” required to have it fit in the same housing.
Yes, obviously there is r&d involved, but that is more the upfront cost. They are making way more than whatever r&d cost is over the lifetime of the phone. Otherwise, Apple would not be posting such huge profits.


I did take a look at it. It has a smaller sized screen, a small amount of RAM, a really small amount of internal memory, an only 3MP camera, a single-core CPU, and it's thicker than many other phones. My 2-year-old Samsung Vibrant is better than it in almost every way. Plus, this review states that the screen is terrible at angles:
http://www.phonearena.com/reviews/Sa...-Review_id2877

If the Samsung Exhibit II was a serious contender, then your assertion that "smartphone prices are too high" would fall apart, as everyone would be picking that phone up instead of waiting for the next Galaxy phone. The newer, more expensive phones have far more features, and packing them into such a small footprint makes the increased costs potentially exponential, not just incremental.

Finally, even though the phone is sold "off-contract," it's still carrier-locked, so it may still be partially subsidized. You just can't see the actual "unsubsidized price" like you can with a contract phone.
Amazon has the Galaxy Nexus for $0.01:
http://wireless.amazon.com/Samsung-G...dp/B0061R2A1S/

You're right that directly from Verizon it'd be $150. But even on Verizon, the price has continuously and consistently gone down over time.
Absolutely, I never said that the exhibit ii is a high end phone, I said that it is usable, and that for a $200 no contract price, it is a good deal, compared to other post paid phones retail pricing. Obviously the Thunderbolt which also had a single core processor had a $260 BOM, so you can’t possibly be expecting a Thunderbolt-esque phone for the $200 price. But you do have a point, carriers may be subsidizing part of the cost, that I don’t know.
The point I was trying to make is that the “unsubsidized” price of the gnex at $650 on Verizon vs. $350 straight from Google, so Verizon is artificially inflating the price.




As for cars, I'm not sure a product that costs 100x more is an apt comparison. However, cars do follow, roughly, a similar pricing model. When they're first released, they have a high MSRP. Then over the course of the year that drops, until the next year's model is released, at which point the older model is heavily discounted and discontinued.
Yes, but I think that car manuf. Are dividing the cost more evenly than android cell phones which drop like a brick for on contract, but at least for Verizon, no contract pricing remains high for quite a while.

I don't know why you don't think the cell phone developers are not dividing out the costs of the R&D. The release cycles for phones are so fast that they have to recoup the R&D costs upfront, so that they can start working on the next model.


That's not true. Verizon has dropped the price of the Galaxy Nexus to $200 on contract before Google announced their off-contract version:
http://pocketnow.com/android/google-...ugh-play-store
Sure they are dividing the costs, but again, my point being was that particularly on Verizon, the unsubsidized price is high, and remains higher than at least what I think it should be.

I might have been facetious in saying the next day, but I am almost certain that a few days or a week or two at most before Google announced the unlocked GNex, that Verizon was still selling the Gnex for $300 on contract.
What I meant to write was not so much that I don’t think that the unsubsidized price wasn’t justified when these phones are released, but that they maintain the same high msrp for a long time, as I said before, the gnex Verizon msrp is still $650 unsubsidized.

AT&T uses the same technology (GSM) and frequencies as the majority of international carriers do, so a manufacturer can use basically the same model for both AT&T and worldwide (partially why the iPhone was AT&T exclusive for so long), meaning that the overall costs (including R&D) can be split over that larger market. For Verzion, the manufacturer may be making the CMDA version specifically just for Verizon, which means that the overall costs are split over a smaller market. So it may actually cost a significant amount more per device to make the CDMA version. There's a reason why Apple went with a "world phone" radio, so that it could split the higher costs of the radio across the wider marketplace and save R&D costs by designing and updating only one phone model.
I thought that the Verizon iphone 4 was a CDMA specific phone, without GSM bands?
Old 06-28-12, 09:52 AM
  #49  
DVD Talk Hero
 
D.Pham4GLTE (>60GB)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stick out your tongue!
Posts: 39,374
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by Deftones View Post
looks like Google is making $0 profit on these: http://www.bgr.com/2012/06/28/nexus-...oogle-android/

we don't even need a BOM to confirm.
I wouldn't doubt that at all. The specs on the nexus 7 is very impressive for $200.
Old 06-28-12, 09:54 AM
  #50  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
fumanstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 55,344
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 1 Post
Re: What's Google going to announce at I/O?

Originally Posted by starman9000 View Post
I had been looking at a Kindle Fire, but now I don't know if I want to do that. I should probably just save up for an ipad.
I still really love my Kindle Fire, but at this point I can't imagine buying one unless there's a crazy deal for it. I'd be interested in what the next product Amazon comes out with.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.