Apple Continues to go down the Tube!

My nieces both have Macs and told me they were better. But one got a newer one and found out they are not always better. I do think Macs are good for graphic design work but any technology will have faults especially when they are always trying to push new innovations on the market too quickly.

I do think Macs are good for graphic design work

This kind of statement always puzzles me. If they are good for design work, why wouldn't they be good for other kinds of work?

Office exists for Mac and, in ways, is better than its PC counterpart. If you want to edit video or music, they have some of the best solutions for consumers, pro-sumers and professionals.

Want to develop for the lucrative iOS market? That would be done on a Mac.

Want to run Mac OS, Linux and Windows all on the same machine without rebooting? That would be done on a Mac.

So, they have an edge in a few areas other than graphic design.

No, it must means that Apple doesn't particularly give a @!$%# if people root their phones. Why should they? It's a losing battle and they don't really lose anything if people do it. The iPhone has been easily root-able since day one. They're not "starting" to display anything.

I'm with Brian on this one. Your article is all over the place. Mostly an anti-Apple rant - meh.

Doesn't matter if it's your phone or everyone's phone. The fact that it happened quickly is significant. Apple is starting to display weaknesses in their software.

You do realize that is happened just as quickly with other versions don't you? Oh wait a minute - you don't. This stuff is pre-released to developer and within hours the mods are being done. If you have the technical chops you could get access o this and do the same thing.

You have provided zero evidence that Apple is going down the tube fast with this article.

Let's look at some actual data:

Apple Financials for last quarter

Oops - kick MS's ass!

When it comes to tablets, Apple, which netted $5.99 billion in revenue last quarter to Microsoft's $5.23 billion, is the indisputable king. Sales of the iPad, which competitors and critics initially derided as a novelty item, have led Apple to hold onto 75 percent of tablet market share. iPad sales were lower than expected last quarter, but the company noted that it had sold every single iPad it produced, suggesting that demand for the device is still exceptionally high. Experts forecast Apple will ship 45 million iPads in 2011, tripling the 15 million tablets it sold in its nine months out in 2010.

Why should Microsoft care? More iPad sales mean fewer PC sales.

or this one ...

Apple tops Microsoft's quarterly sales, profits

Apple, which reported its second fiscal quarter earnings last week, posted revenues of $24.67 billion with a net income of $5.99 billion. By comparison, Microsoft's just announced results put it at $16.43 billion with a net income of $5.23 billion.

Apple's most recently completed fiscal quarter ended March 26, 2011. Microsoft's ended March 31, 2011.

Apple made waves back in May, passing Microsoft in market capitalization. In October, Apple went on to pass Microsoft in revenues as well.

So just how is this "going down the tubes"???

As for the premise about the viruses - utter nonsense. Somehow the notion that few virii have been found to be available for the OS X system equates to the literally hundreds of virii that are release each month into the Windows world is an indication of "going down the tubes" is laughable.

You need to do a better job at this.

So, how about a dream technology?

Isn't that what Android was supposed to be?

Look the notion that any computer OS is hacker proof is pollyanish. Anything can be hacked - anything. You just need time and resources. The more of those you have, the higher the liklihood it will be hacked. Pretty simple.

Doesn't matter if it's your phone or everyone's phone. The fact that it happened quickly is significant. Apple is starting to display weaknesses in their software.

Hackers did the same with Microsoft's Kinect device. At first they were up in arms about it. Then they realized it was better to let the hacker community innovate with it. Apple may be turning somewhat of a blind eye to jail breaking to serve their own ends and that may be reflected in the ease of jailbreaking iOS 5. Don't forget, they still make money off the jailbroken phone and carrier contract. It's not like you are taking your jailbroken iPhone over to Sprint. And I'm not sure, but I don't even think you can take your jailbroken iPhone FROM AT&T over to Verizon, even though Verizon is now an iPhone carrier.

So, how about a dream technology?

One that helps me ignore deeply flawed arguments.

Apple's market share on that is already declining rapidly and I don' t know how they'll be able to compete with low cost market alternatives.

The iPad has razor thin margins, and it has since day one. A lot of people don't seem to realize this (memory is short, I guess), but the iPad shocked everyone in the tech industry when it came out because it was so much cheaper than they thought it would be. They were expecting price points hundreds of dollars higher, and several companies delayed their competitive products because their products either cost more or cost around the same without being as nice. They didn't know how to compete.

Even today the only way to compete with the iPad on price is to use much cheaper (and therefore lower quality) hardware. Apple has basically cornered the market on nice touch displays and even flash memory (they're the single largest buyer of flash memory in the world, which pushes prices up for everyone else). Companies are starting to try the low-cost route, but that's not going to kill the iPad. What's going to happen is a bunch of people are going t buy the cheaper Android tablets and hate them because they're crap. That won't be Android's fault, but it will make Android look bad.

If anything I think that trend is going to help Microsoft, which is likely to have some pretty nice Windows 8 tablets next year. They're taking a much more Apple-like approach by trying to work more closely with hardware vendors, and even trying to get chip makers to pair up with just one tablet manufacturer each in order to encourage better integration. It's not making the hardware companies happy, but it's better for the platform, and it may pay off by greatly increasing the quality of the initial Windows 8 tablets on the market.

Hi Adam - yeah I think Apple got the ergonomics right enough all the big companies are going to just emulate the Ipad and get market share.

I was surprised recently that Acer's entry into the market was lame compared to expectations. They were supposed to have a tablet for around 300 that was a few less features than the Ipad but of course the price is right. Not even close.

But someone will get it right and come up with a reasonable quality product. I think my prediction that tablets will outsell laptops this time next year is more aggressive than most but I think that will happen.

It's funny you mention Microsoft as the most likely successful competitor and I agree. I'm used to the staid old-fashioned Microsoft interface and if more people are honest, they are too so something like the Windows 8 interface will be appealing. But we'll see if they get it right their first attempts at tablet computing were pretty abysmal even for the time.

They were supposed to have a tablet for around 300 that was a few less features than the Ipad but of course the price is right. Not even close.

This is hardly unexpected. Like I said, you can't compete with Apple on price and quality at the same time. Not with the tablet market. Despite the common perception of Apple products being overpriced, the iPad is not overpriced. It is ridiculously cheap for the hardware you are getting. Apple is hardly making a profit on each iPad. Their real profits are coming from the software sales and the halo effect that helps them sell more Macs.

If other companies try to compete on price they will almost certainly produce a product which is not nearly as good or end up selling them at a loss, which will not accomplish anything because no other company is going to make as much on the software or get any kind of meaningful halo effect. It's just a losing proposition.

The only way to compete with the iPad is by making a killer product with an awesome user experience and high quality hardware, and that is going to cost at least as much as the iPad (being optimistic; it's likely to cost more). There's plenty of room for cheap, low-quality tablets (just like any other market), but those aren't going to steal sales from Apple. People who buy cheap stuff and don't care about quality weren't in the market for an iPad to begin with. It's the high quality stuff that will take sales from Apple. I just don't see that happening in large numbers any time soon.

But we'll see if they get it right their first attempts at tablet computing were pretty abysmal even for the time.

They have tried to enter the tablet market at least two or three times so far, and you're right that they failed utterly every time. The reason, IMO, is that they clearly just didn't get the point. They tried to take a stock Windows build with a few poorly-considered touch elements and throw it on a tablet (usually stylus-based) thinking that would be enough. It wasn't. Those devices sucks, and using Windows on them sucked.

Unfortunately, Windows 8 doesn't look much different. They've added a few bells and whistles and at least made the start screen and some app switching easier, but they still want people to be able to run standard ("classic") Windows apps on these tablets. That's stupid. Using something like a desktop Excel on a tablet is going to be awful. People will hate it. Microsoft should have just said "if you want to run on a Windows tablet then you will write a tablet application with proper gesture support and a touch-based UI. No other apps allowed".

That's why Apple succeeded where Microsoft failed. They don't even try to run OS X apps on a tablet. Think back to when the iPad came out. A bunch of people in the tech industry thought the only way it would succeed is if it was a desktop/laptop replacement which could run all the desktop apps people already had. They wanted OS X in tablet form. Apple was smarter than that, though. They were heavily criticized at first because they didn't give us OS X in tablet form, but they were absolutely right. They figured out what Microsoft never did. The WIMP (Window Icon Menu Pointer) paradigms that we have been using for decades in UI design fails utterly on a touch screen. It just doesn't work. The only way to make a good tablet UI is to throw out your existing UI and write a new one from scratch using entirely new paradigms centered around touch. Anything that requires a cursor is out.

I was optimistic before the Windows 8 demo that Microsoft had learned this lesson, but after their demo I was disappointed. They still seem to want to run standard Windows apps on a tablet, and they are still wrong. That's a terrible idea, and it will fail. If they want their tablets to succeed they need to convince developers that having their standard desktop app run on a tablet is not acceptable. They need to make a new app that works well. Allowing all those crappy desktop apps to even run on the tablet makes the whole platform look bad.

Frankly, I think the blame goes to Ballmer. He's a wuss. He has no courage. Steve Jobs knows what needs to be done, and he has the guts to make it happen, take the attacks from hacks who don't know what they're talking about, and then laughs all the way to the bank. Ballmer, on the other hand, cares too much what people think, and doesn't even seem to really know what needs to be done, let alone have the guts to make it happen. Microsoft is in desperate need of real leadership, and for the sake of healthy tablet market competition I can only hope that their offerings are good enough to get by until Ballmer is given the boot.

Wow - a big comment!

I'd certainly agree Microsoft shouldn't worry about running Windows apps on the tablet, but I'd say they should keep their user interface Windows 7 like so anyone can easily transition to it off the Win7. That would be the appeal and why I might buy one. Like the Windows 7 interface on the smartphones - no one's expecting Windows apps to run on them but the interface is familiar and intuitive to PC users.

So really Apple's shown the way on tablet ergonomics that works. Why not just expropriate that and put a Win7 style interface on it? It wouldn't be a market beater but they'd get a piece of it - kind of like the XBox not an out of the park by any stretch but they have skin in the game.

Generally, Microsoft's on a slow road to fail. All their markets are saturated where do they go from here? I also think we're just starting to lose dependency on the Winx interface for personal computing. I kind of agree about Ballmer working at Microsoft from what I know from people that worked there is quite "corporate" - a dirty word in our parts. Google though a giant company has avoided that -- so far.

So really Apple's shown the way on tablet ergonomics that works. Why not just expropriate that and put a Win7 style interface on it?

That's a contradiction. A Windows 7 interface is based on the WIMP paradigm, and that doesn't work in a tablet form factor. You can't have a Windows 7 interface that works well with touch. I know, I've tried. I'm typing this now in Windows 7 on a touch screen monitor. The touch monitor is almost useless because Windows 7 just doesn't work well with touch. You have to choose: do you want a desktop interface or a tablet interface? You can't have it both ways. Unless you want a crappy experience either way.

Frankly, I think the blame goes to Ballmer. He's a wuss. He has no courage.

I don't think he's a wuss, or has no courage. Ballmer is a business guy, no passion for technology. He's all about forming partnerships and acquisitions. As a result, he has no clue what's a good risk on technology and what's not.

Ballmer, on the other hand, cares too much what people think, and doesn't even seem to really know what needs to be done, let alone have the guts to make it happen. Microsoft is in desperate need of real leadership, and for the sake of healthy tablet market competition I can only hope that their offerings are good enough to get by until Ballmer is given the boot.

I don't think you really need to worry about that too much. Ballmer is a technological boon to Microsoft, but, I would you ask you to compare the sizes of a couple conventions... Take a look at Microsoft's Tech Ed conference. It's enormous. Does Apple have anything similar? I don't even know. If they did, I sincerely doubt it's as large as Tech Ed. From a business perspective, Microsoft still has a significant edge, go to any job search engine and run a search for Objective C programmers vs .NET positions. Microsoft's database solutions are now targeting ORACLE for large scale data consumption and warehousing.

Google is the only one really giving Microsoft a run for their money on the business front (cloud), but, even then - they're still using Windows. Windows Azure is going to suck - so I don't even count it.

So what Ballmer lacks in technical knowledge, he sort of makes up for in business partnerships and acumen. They'll survive long enough to get him out of there and someone who actually has a stake in new technology will take the reigns...Will probably be right around the time Jobs needs to retire.

I'm not denying that Microsoft is successful, but I think it's a big stretch to imply that Ballmer has anything to do with it. What Microsoft has is huge inertia. They still have somewhere around 90% of the desktop OS market and easily the most popular office suite. They've also got a stronghold on developer mindshare (as you pointed out). Microsoft is entrenched, and they have been for over a decade. I don't think Ballmer is incompetent enough to screw that up anytime soon.

What he can do, though, is make some boneheaded moves that put them on the wrong course for the long term, which could eventually cause them to start losing that edge. I feel like that's what is happening. Microsoft has inertia, but Apple is starting to shift the momentum. Apple has outgrown the overall PC market for 5 straight quarters, and they're kicking ass in the tablet market, which is the fastest growing tech market at this time. If that trend continues then Microsoft might actually have to start worrying about it.

Keep waiting for that ipad knockoff. You get what you pay for. Windows 8 looks like crap and Microsoft still has not figured out that hybrid tablets just dont work. Microsoft needs to stick to desktop platforms as it's what they're good at. I really doubt that anyone other than Apple will produce a decent tablet in the next few years based off of what I have seen so far and read about. As far as crappy music quality the fact is 99% of people don't give a damn they just want to hear whatever crap the radio tells them to buy.

Like I said, you can't compete with Apple on price and quality at the same time.

?

This has been done many many many times over Apple's history. You have to remember Apple doesn't make (yet) most of the chips found in their products. There's no special sauce. From the CPU's in their laptops to the video cards in their desktops all of it can be had at a far lower cost than what Apple charges. The quality is only as good as the chips they use which are the same as everyone else.

Now their design is awesome. However, their ideology of form over functionality can sometimes bite them in the butt.

The quality is only as good as the chips they use which are the same as everyone else.

As I have explained over and over and over again, it's not just about the damn chips. You're right that Apple uses the same processors and the same RAM as everyone else. However, they don't use the same cheap displays, the same cheap and crappy casings, the same tiny worthless trackpads, etc., etc. If you look at the whole package the quality of an Apple product is far superior to 90% of the competition. They don't compete on price. They compete on quality, and despite the repeated predictions of naysayers it turns out a whole bunch of people care enough about quality to pay a higher price.

It's not because of fanboys, either. We've seen over and over in recent quarters than about 50% of Mac buyers are first-time Mac users. They're not just selling to people who love Apple. They're making converts. People are beginning to figure out that the logo on the side doesn't just represent being cool. It represents a better user experience. Apple users are on average happier with their purchases than other PC buyers, and they tell their friends that.

The point was (and still is) that you can compete with Apple on price, or you can compete with them on quality, but very few people can compete on both at the same time. Apple just has too much control over their whole pipeline (they have a corner on the supply of touch displays and flash memory that is pushing the price up for everyone else), and the fact that most of their sales (by far) go through their own online and retail stores means that they can keep far more of the profit than other companies. That's why competitors are having such a hard time competing in the tablet market. You just can't make a high quality tablet as cheap as the iPad without taking a serious bite into your profit margins. Not without a set up like Apple has.

However, they don't use the same cheap displays, the same cheap and crappy casings, the same tiny worthless trackpads, etc., etc.

Nope. Even their displays, trackpads, etc are made by the same people that make the products for other manufacturers. Again there is nothing special about the components. What you are speaking of is the design aspect of what they build (metal vs. plastic). Their products are no more reliable than anyone else (actually less so).

The point was (and still is) that you can compete with Apple on price, or you can compete with them on quality, but very few people can compete on both at the same time. Apple just has too much control over their whole pipeline (they have a corner on the supply of touch displays and flash memory that is pushing the price up for everyone else), and the fact that most of their sales (by far) go through their own online and retail stores means that they can keep far more of the profit than other companies. That's why competitors are having such a hard time competing in the tablet market. You just can't make a high quality tablet as cheap as the iPad without taking a serious bite into your profit margins. Not without a set up like Apple has.

Sheesh you really need to get out more. Lets take a look at one company (the one that actually makes most of the chips and displays for Apple products) they are called Samsung. Samsung makes the Galaxy Tab and Galaxy S phones. Both of those products cost the same or are cheaper and usually they far exceed the performance of what can be found in Apple products and are built with the same look to design. I actually have the latter and to say it blows the pants off of the iPhone is an understatement. It's thinner, the screen has a higher resolution, the back of the phone is metal, it's lighter, thinner, etc etc. And can be had at the same price or cheaper than the competing iPhone which means they compete on quality and price.

It makes this statement....

You just can't make a high quality tablet as cheap as the iPad without taking a serious bite into your profit margins. Not without a set up like Apple has.

...kind of laughable no? I try not to argue or debate with Apple heads because usually they don't come from a place of technical accuracy but "feeling" or some mythical belief in the Apple brand. Apple is a brand with very little outside of it's design to separate it from what everyone else does. Actually their design and OS are the only things that separate them from anyone else because it's surely NOT the hardware.

Even their displays, trackpads, etc are made by the same people that make the products for other manufacturers.

No. Wrong. First of all, the case is made by Apple. I have yet to see a better laptop case than the unibody aluminum cases Apple makes. Period. Hands down they're the best cases, and no one else has the same case. Second, I know of no other laptop that has a glass trackpad. If there are other companies that do that they are rare. Dell doesn't. HP doesn't. Lenovo doesn't. Their trackpads are not the same. As for displays, there are certainly other laptops with the same displays. Some. However, all Apple laptops have nice displays. There are no cheap options.

It's a complete package. You don't have to decide whether you want to buy a laptop form the company that has the better case of the company that uses the better displays. You don't have to make sacrifices. Apple makes sure that all of the parts are high quality, not just the ones they think you care about. Obviously Dell, HP, Lenovo, et al. think we don't care about the case, so they give you plastic. They're wrong. I care. They don't think you care about the trackpad. They're wrong.

I'm not trying to make this into a flameware. If you don't think they're worth the price then that's subjective. You have to decide whether you care about the quality of the case and the trackpad and the display and all of that or if you just want the processor and memory etc. to be good. That's up to you. However, I take exception to the claim that Apple sells you the same thing for a higher price. That's demonstrably false. They're not selling you the same thing.

Samsung makes the Galaxy Tab and Galaxy S phones. Both of those products cost the same or are cheaper and usually they far exceed the performance of what can be found in Apple products and are built with the same look to design.

The Galaxy Tab is a very nice tablet. It will probably do fine. However, the software isn't as good yet. Maybe it will get there.

You still missed the point, though. The Galaxy Tab costs the same as the iPad. It's not cheaper. It's about the same quality, but it's the same price. However, how much does it cost Samsung to make it and sell it? More than Apple! That's the problem. Apple buys displays and processors and flash memory in such ridiculously high volumes that they have gotten very good deals on them and forced the price up for everyone else in the industry. This is the third time I've pointed this out, and you still don't seem to get it: Apple can use the exact same hardware as everyone else but still build their product cheaper because they sell in much higher volumes. They've been doing this for years with the iPods and iPhones, and now they're doing it with iPads. That's one way they beat the competition.

The other way they beat them is by selling directly to consumers via their online and retail stores. If I buy an iPad from Apple they get 100% of the profit. If I buy a Galaxy Tab from Best Buy then Best Buy takes a cut, and Samsung loses some of their profit. So not only does Samsung have to pay more for the components than Apple, but they also lose a bit of the profit because they don't sell directly to the consumer. As a result, every iPad that Apple sells at the same price as the Galaxy Tab makes more money than the Galaxy Tab does for Samsung. Samsung will have to sell significantly more than Apple to make the same profit. Do you think they're going to do that? Of course not. They'll do ok, but they're not going to destroy Apple's profits. They just don't have the set up that Apple does.

That's why competing on price isn't going to work.

Apple is a brand with very little outside of it's design to separate it from what everyone else does

Design is not a dirty word. Microsoft tried selling tablets several times and failed utterly. Apple came in and created that industry because they designed a product that people actually wanted to use. When it first came out tech-heads laughed and said no one would buy that because it didn't do X, Y, and Z. Who's laughing now?

Actually their design and OS are the only things that separate them from anyone else because it's surely NOT the hardware.

Until the Galaxy Tab the iPad was still easily the best hardware in a tablet form factor. It's not just the hardware, but it's not just design either, and it's certainly not the damn logo. Face it: Apple products succeed because they figure out how to do products right. Call it "design" like it's a bad word if you want, but Apple makes billions of dollars in industries that barely existed before they came around despite people like you claiming that it's all a gimmick. That says something about the importance of "design", doesn't it?

No. Wrong. First of all, the case is made by Apple.

Good grief..... did I say anything about a case? Nope But I suspect you knew that.

You've already turned this into a flame war.. but this little snippet was worth responding to...

However, how much does it cost Samsung to make it and sell it? More than Apple!

Please provide a link for this please.

You've already turned this into a flame war.. but this little snippet was worth responding to...

Uhh - who did?

I try not to argue or debate with Apple heads because usually they don't come from a place of technical accuracy but "feeling" or some mythical belief in the Apple brand

So - you must be a PC head then?

Good grief..... did I say anything about a case? Nope But I suspect you knew that.

The comment to which you were responding to mentioned cases specifically. You claimed that I was wrong, and that because Apple buys components from other companies which end up in other products that therefore Apple is selling you the same quality. That's demonstrably false, and the case is one example proving it false.

However, how much does it cost Samsung to make it and sell it? More than Apple!

Please provide a link for this please.

Here's one about flash memory. Here's another about displays. Here's one about how their retail stores make their profit margins better than other companies.

I'm not making this stuff up. This is what market analysts have been saying about Apple for years. Their strategy is to use vertical integration to keep their costs lower than their competitors'. It's working.

The comment to which you were responding to mentioned cases specifically. You claimed that I was wrong, and that because Apple buys components from other companies which end up in other products that therefore Apple is selling you the same quality. That's demonstrably false, and the case is one example proving it false.

No I didn't. Otherwise you would have quoted it. You just decided to make it up. Go look at what you quoted from me and what you wrote.

Here's one about flash memory. Here's another about displays. Here's one about how their retail stores make their profit margins better than other companies.

I'm not making this stuff up. This is what market analysts have been saying about Apple for years. Their strategy is to use vertical integration to keep their costs lower than their competitors'. It's working.

Yeah you are. How you get it costs more for Samsung to make the Galaxy Tab than Apple from those links I'll never know.

So - you must be a PC head then?

What is a "PC" head?

Brilliant!

PC Head definition #2

Person who has been genetically modified to mindlessly stare at a blue screen waiting for something to happen.

I believe that the term refers to a human who has been genetically modified to have a welcome screen mounted on their neck.

PC Head definition #2

Person who has been genetically modified to mindlessly stare at a blue screen waiting for something to happen.

This would be a prime example of idiocy that Apple promotes and it's followers share. PC stands for personal computer. This applies to all devices more powerful than a calculator or mp3 player. Apple or Windows it doesn't matter those are OS's which run on a Personal Computer.

Second I don't use Windows as my OS. Like I said, "

I try not to argue or debate with Apple heads because usually they don't come from a place of technical accuracy but "feeling" or some mythical belief in the Apple brand."

Since Apple moved to x86 (with 10.4 I believe) it's been running more or less the same hardware as it's Windows brethren. Again what's in their products isn't unique in any way. There's no special sauce there, but you'll insist that it is against all technical evidence which disproves the Apple fanatic theories.

both comments deleted because they were unnecessary.

Then there are a couple more that better go as well or I will respond.

Then there are a couple more that better go as well or I will respond.

If you want to debate this topic that's fine but being hurt that a comment you believe should be deleted instead of another is kind of immature. Since I don't think I single comment from you that has been directed at me has been about the topic at all.

Here is what you said:

However, they don't use the same cheap displays, the same cheap and crappy casings, the same tiny worthless trackpads, etc., etc.

Nope. Even their displays, trackpads, etc are made by the same people that make the products for other manufacturers. Again there is nothing special about the components.

That's wrong. Period. They're not using the exact same displays and trackpads etc. that every other company is using. Some companies use some of the same components, but Apple consistently chooses high quality versions of all of those components, not just some of them. Their price is higher accordingly. Other companies which do use higher quality components also charge higher prices, just like Apple. You get what you pay for with Apple just like everyone else.

How you get it costs more for Samsung to make the Galaxy Tab than Apple from those links I'll never know.

How you can read those links and not understand that it costs more is beyond me. As you said, they're using many of the same inner components, but Samsung doesn't buy those components in huge quantities like Apple does (Apple is the #1 buyer of flash memory in the entire world, for instance), and Samsung can't sell them directly to consumers. Therefore, it not only costs them more to build, but they don't get as big a cut of the profit.

Again, I didn't invent this idea. You're acting like I'm making this up. This is what analysts have been saying for years about Apple's business model. That's a big reason why they've been doing so well. If you think Samsung can build the Galaxy Tab as cheaply as Apple can build the iPad despite the fact that they can't buy the components in nearly as large a quantity then you must know something that no other analyst knows, and I'd love to see you explain how that could work. At this point you're not disagreeing with me. You're disagreeing with the consensus among tech industry analysts.

Here is what you said:

However, they don't use the same cheap displays, the same cheap and crappy casings, the same tiny worthless trackpads, etc., etc.

Nope. Even their displays, trackpads, etc are made by the same people that make the products for other manufacturers. Again there is nothing special about the components.

And nothing about me saying anything about their cases.... thank you.

How you can read those links and not understand that it costs more is beyond me. As you said, they're using many of the same inner components, but Samsung doesn't buy those components in huge quantities like Apple does (Apple is the #1 buyer of flash memory in the entire world, for instance), and Samsung can't sell them directly to consumers. Therefore, it not only costs them more to build, but they don't get as big a cut of the profit.

I specifically used Samsung to make a point. Click that first link about the flash memory and take a look at the picture and then come back.

There's really no need to comment on the rest of what you said until you look at the flash memory link and then comment. You'll get what I've been saying.

Let me explain this for you slowly: I made a comment that said "they [Apple] don't use...the same crappy casings...", which you quoted (with the part about cases) and responded with "Nope." Sorry, that's about cases by virtue of you quoting me talking about cases, whether you specifically mention cases or not. The point I was making is that while they use many of the same components, they also add a lot of value with other higher quality components that other companies don't use. Therefore, the Apple products are overall higher quality and cost more accordingly. You want to ignore everything except the components that are the same, which of course leaves out all the things that are different. That's an invalid comparison.

There's really no need to comment on the rest of what you said until you look at the flash memory link and then comment. You'll get what I've been saying.

Did you actually read the text? Apple bought out Samsung's entire supply at the time, which meant if Samsung itself wanted to put out a new product using even its own flash memory then it would have to increase production beyond its current capacity just to meet its own demand and still comply with its contract with Apple. Yes, Apple buying flash memory from Samsung does influence the cost of flash memory even to Samsung. It's not a bad position for Samsung in terms of its flash memory business (which is obviously doing very well), but it's not a good situation for Samsung's tablet business. They're at odds.

You seem to have a very simplistic understanding of this market, and it's clear that you haven't really been keeping up with how the industry works. If all you can come up with is "Apple buys components from Samsung, therefore their component costs are the same" then you just don't understand how it works. It's just not that simple.

Also, iSuppli tore down the Galaxy Tab and guess what? It has SanDisk flash memory in it. Overall, they estimate that the Tab costs less to make than the iPad, but they think that is mostly due to the lower quality display:

The Galaxy Tab carries a Bill of Materials (BOM) of $205.22, significantly less than iSuppli’s $264.27 estimate for the 16Gbyte 3G version of the iPad, based on the preliminary results of a dissection conducted by iSuppli’s Teardown Analysis service. However, the reduced cost is largely the result of Galaxy’s smaller and lower resolution display compared to the iPad.

Summary: their flash memory doesn't come from Samsung, which means Apple's influence on the cost of flash memory does affect them, and the only reason the Tab is cheaper to make is because they sacrificed quality. All of this fits perfectly with the points I've been making.

Let me explain this for you slowly: I made a comment that said "they [Apple] don't use...the same crappy casings...", which you quoted (with the part about cases) and responded with "Nope." Sorry, that's about cases by virtue of you quoting me talking about cases, whether you specifically mention cases or not. The point I was making is that while they use many of the same components, they also add a lot of value with other higher quality components that other companies don't use. Therefore, the Apple products are overall higher quality and cost more accordingly. You want to ignore everything except the components that are the same, which of course leaves out all the things that are different. That's an invalid comparison.

No it's called jumping to conclusions. If I meant that I would have said it. You decided to add it in order to succeed in the debate. The problem is I didn't say it. You can say it slowly backwards and forwards won't change a thing. I didn't say it. That why we have quotes....moving on.

Did you actually read the text?

Yup.... and was hoping you would think about that before you went ahead with your Apple eyes.... but you didn't... so... I'll have to take the time to explain just how much you don't understand...

Apple bought out Samsung's entire supply at the time... and it's clear that you haven't really been keeping up with how the industry works. If all you can come up with is "Apple buys components from Samsung, therefore their component costs are the same" then you just don't understand how it works. It's just not that simple.

I understand better than you realize...so let's get technical shall we... Here are the technical specs between the iPad and the Galaxy Tab (we can move to phones but I'll stick with this for now)

Apple iPad 2

Asus Eee Pad Transformer

Motorola Xoom WiFi
Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1
Acer Iconia Tab A500

SoC
Apple A5 (Dual ARM Cortex A9 @ 1GHz)
NVIDIA Tegra 2 (Dual ARM Cortex A9 @ 1GHz)

GPU
PowerVR SGX 543MP2
NVIDIA GeForce
RAM
512MB
1GB
Display
1024 x 768 IPS
1280 x 800 IPS
NAND
16GB
Dimensions
241.2mm x 185.7mm x 8.8mm
256.6 x 172.9 x 8.6mm
Weight
601g
595g
Price
$499
$499

Now if you look at those specs. You should be able to tell that not only are they priced the same. But the hardware is better than what's in Apple's iPad. We'll skip the processor as I don't have performance charts for that. However, for the graphics and everything else. The Galaxy Tab has the higher resolution, same amount of memory, the graphics are faster than the PowerVR chip, it's slightly larger, and weighs less, and in terms of build quality they are pretty much neck and neck.

So they compete on price and performance and guess what.. the Galaxy Tab has more. I wanted you to take a look at the memory for a sec because Samsung makes more than just flash, they make displays, and SoC's and Apple uses their SoC's for the iPad and the iPhone. Samsung makes these chips for more than just Apple. Now if you really want to believe that the price that Apple gets from Samsung is cheaper than what Samsung would charge itself you really should have your head examined. It seems that's what you are trying to do but here... there's nothing that will back up your claim. Now let's take a look at this....

Also, iSuppli tore down the Galaxy Tab and guess what? It has SanDisk flash memory in it. Overall, they estimate that the Tab costs less to make than the iPad, but they think that is mostly due to the lower quality display:

The Galaxy Tab carries a Bill of Materials (BOM) of $205.22, significantly less than iSuppli’s $264.27 estimate for the 16Gbyte 3G version of the iPad, based on the preliminary results of a dissection conducted by iSuppli’s Teardown Analysis service. However, the reduced cost is largely the result of Galaxy’s smaller and lower resolution display compared to the iPad.

Summary: their flash memory doesn't come from Samsung, which means Apple's influence on the cost of flash memory does affect them, and the only reason the Tab is cheaper to make is because they sacrificed quality. All of this fits perfectly with the points I've been making.

See now this is why it's behooves one to be technical.... that article is for the THE SEVEN INCH ONE not the TEN INCH ONE...and that's the OLD GALAXY TAB model. Good job searching on Google and yet you left out this part...

On the plus side for the Galaxy Tab, the device includes some features not found in the iPad. For example, the Galaxy Tab includes a gyroscopic Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMS) sensor, likely for use in gaming. Furthermore, the Galaxy Tab comes with a primary 3 Megapixel (MP) autofocus camera along with a 1.3MP front-facing or video conferencing camera. Finally, the Galaxy Tab includes build-in support for Adobe’s Flash to provide more universal Web browsing—something notably lacking from the iPad.

This is why I wanted you to stop and think for a bit before responding. Samsung manufacturing capabilities are HUGE and Apple relies on them for quite a bit. This notion that companies can't compete on price and quality with Apple is absolutely crazy. So far we are just talking about tablets, do you really want to go to phones too? With all of the problems that Apple has had with the iPhone4 I don't think that's wise but we can go there.

Listen my Apple friend, you like Apple apparently and there's nothing wrong with that. But merely liking them isn't enough in terms of proving a technical point when it comes to manufacturing. I'll state this again, Apple has great design, but there's nothing special about what chips and displays they use because well.... they don't make them, other manufactures do. And those manufacturers often make products themselves (like Samsung). Apple is NOT going to get better prices than Samsung for most of their components. The quality of the chips are the same. The only area that's usually unique to Apple is the chassis and the OS. Everything else is nothing to squawk about.

The iPad has razor thin margins, and it has since day one.

Incorrect. At release Apple was making @ $205 for a $499 unit.

The margins have decreased a bit since then but the latest data shows a 25-35% margin. Not exactly what I would call thin.

Fanboi thinking.

The Galaxy Tab has the higher resolution, same amount of memory,...

Correction: The Galaxy Tab has more memory than the iPad2.

Incorrect. At release Apple was making @ $205 for a $499 unit.

Fanboi thinking.

That's what I'm talking about he linked the article showing the BoM and the cost, yet there he is talking about razor thin margins, and "no one can compete with Apple on quality and price". Sometimes some of Apple fans are their own worst enemy.

The iSuppli link I gave was a teardown of the original Galaxy Tab compared to the original iPad, and it showed that the Galaxy Tab was cheaper because the display was lower quality. I have yet to find a teardown of the new one, so we could only speculate about its pricing. I see you avoided even commenting on the fact that the previous Samsung tablet didn't even use Samsung memory, despite the fact that Samsung making flash memory was key to your argument that it must cost the same for them as it does for Apple. Nice dodge, there.

I'm not going to continue to argue this because, as I've said repeatedly, this isn't an argument I have made up myself. It's not my analysis we're debating here. It's the analysis of multiple market analysts. It's not me you're disagreeing with. It's them. If you think you know more about the market then them then good for you, but frankly I don't think you know what you're talking about.

One more thing I do want to point out, though, is how easily you jump to chalking my views up to just being a fanboy. I'm pretty @!$%#ing tired of that bull@!$%#. I've never seen an Apple fan quite as rabidly passionate about these debates as people like you, who seem to think that anyone who doesn't hate Apple is worthy of scorn. I don't know of a single person who would throw out "PC fanboy" as an insult, and yet if anyone dares to say something nice about Apple or defend them when people are just making @!$%# up about them then you can be sure someone is going to call them an "Apple fanboy". It's pathetic. Grow the @!$%# up.

...when people are just making @!$%# up about them then you can be sure someone is going to call them an "Apple fanboy". It's pathetic. Grow the @!$%# up.

Adam,

It is unfortunate you are offended by my fact based opinion in regards to your blind allegiance to Apple. It has nothing to do with maturity level.

Perhaps you remember the below link and your effort to argue in support of the BS that Apple and Jobs tries to get away with in regards to Apple customers. You actually made an effort to justify and excuse the 5 points...

5 Reasons You Should Be Scared of Apple

Any individual that does not see the threats and absurdities that these Apple policies present and then attempts to argue in support and make excuses is an Apple Fanboi.

Additionally, my above correction in regards to "margins" is not the first time I have corrected statements by you in regards to Apple business specifics.

Again, I apologize if the shoe fits.

The iSuppli link I gave was a teardown of the original Galaxy Tab compared to the original iPad, and it showed that the Galaxy Tab was cheaper because the display was lower quality. I have yet to find a teardown of the new one, so we could only speculate about its pricing. I see you avoided even commenting on the fact that the previous Samsung tablet didn't even use Samsung memory, despite the fact that Samsung making flash memory was key to your argument that it must cost the same for them as it does for Apple. Nice dodge, there.

You are comparing Apples and Oranges. The Galaxy Tab came in 2 sizes 7" and 10" of course the 7 will be smaller. I was trying to point out the absurdity in believing that Apple is going to get better price in materials than the actual company who makes it. That's just plain stupid no matter what angle you look at it. The 10 inch models of even the new one has better specs than what's even in the iPad2 I showed you that above and they are priced the same. The Galaxy Tab has more memory new or old. It's got a front and rear camera which the first iPad doesn't even have. That's quite a bit of functionality that's completely missing out of the iPad. The screen alone if it were bigger wouldn't be able to make up the difference in cost.

I'm not going to continue to argue this because,

You are not going to argue this because you can't. You can't look at numbers. You have no idea what the technical specs mean. You don't even know what's out there, yet you are making these baseless statements you can't even back up. I'm sorry Adam that's not my fault.

as I've said repeatedly, this isn't an argument I have made up myself. It's not my analysis we're debating here. It's the analysis of multiple market analysts. It's not me you're disagreeing with. It's them. If you think you know more about the market then them then good for you, but frankly I don't think you know what you're talking about.

You can believe that all you want. One us believes that Apple is going to get lower prices on BoM than the actual company who makes it and one of us doesn't. Your own link showed you that (even though you didn't compare similarly sized models).

One more thing I do want to point out, though, is how easily you jump to chalking my views up to just being a fanboy. I'm pretty @!$%#ing tired of that bull@!$%#.

Here's a suggestion... then take the Steve Jobs glasses off and actually learn something. If you are truly tired of it. Everyone has their favorite products. But it seems only Apple heads will make statement after statement that's not really backed up by anything other than feeling.

I've never seen an Apple fan quite as rabidly passionate about these debates as people like you, who seem to think that anyone who doesn't hate Apple is worthy of scorn. I don't know of a single person who would throw out "PC fanboy" as an insult,

Um it was said to me. It doesn't really affect me, but it was said. I think it's kind of funny actually.

and yet if anyone dares to say something nice about Apple or defend them when people are just making @!$%# up about them then you can be sure someone is going to call them an "Apple fanboy". It's pathetic. Grow the @!$%# up

You can say something nice. However, just make sure it's factually accurate. If it's not then someone like me will probably turn up and show you exactly where you are wrong and why.

Actually, bluearcher, I specifically remember refusing to argue about that link because you repeatedly insisted on posting it in discussions which had absolutely nothing to do with it. If you ever bothered to seed it as I suggested then I never saw it. I never once responded to the substance of that link because every time it came up in a discussion between us it was entirely off topic. As I said then and stick by here: posting that in every single discussion about Apple shows nothing more than your passionate hatred for Apple.

Kc, you're still just arguing against market analysts, not me. If it makes you feel better to think I'm just a fanboy making @!$%# up then so be it. I guess it makes you sleep better at night. Meanwhile, people who actually study the tech industry from a business perspective have consistently come to the conclusion that Apple has succeeded with the iPad because they have a much lower margin than other companies can sustain, and their huge volumes and retail stores are the keys to making that model work for them. If you think they are all just full of @!$%# and obsessed with Steve Jobs then that's your problem, not mine.

One last thing I want to mention, because this comes up over and over again (not just about Apple) is that profit margins can't be measured by simply subtracting the estimated bill of materials from the price. The most significant costs in developing a product like this are in research and development, not in manufacturing and component costs. If you ignore the up front cost of developing a product like this (including the salaries of all the hardware and software engineers who spent more than a year developing it) then you won't even come close to an accurate picture of the cost of the device. This is true of Apple and Samsung both. Their real margins are not even close to $200 for these tablets. All you have to do is look at their quarterly results to back this up. They have specifically mentioned the small margins on the iPads. Here is a quote from a NYTimes article mentioning this specifically:

Apple's profit margins are the envy of the consumer electronics industry. The problem was that the company's newest products ware (sic) not as profitable as its computers and iPod music players. Strong sales of lower-margin products — the iPad among them — caused the decline, according to Apple executives.

I have no doubt that Samsung is in the same boat, and, again, according to market research I've see they are even worse off than Apple. Believe what you want, though. After all, I'm just a fanboy, right?

Kc, you're still just arguing against market analysts, not me. If it makes you feel better to think I'm just a fanboy making @!$%# up then so be it. I guess it makes you sleep better at night. Meanwhile, people who actually study the tech industry from a business perspective have consistently come to the conclusion that Apple has succeeded with the iPad because they have a much lower margin than other companies can sustain, and their huge volumes and retail stores are the keys to making that model work for them. If you think they are all just full of @!$%# and obsessed with Steve Jobs then that's your problem, not mine.

Um you still haven't shown a single tech analyst that supports your claim. You can't just link some stuff and call it good when it doesn't support the words that are coming out of your mouth. So far you've compared two different products and then extrapolated out what you wanted to hear. While leaving out what you disagreed with. You haven't really provided anything but fanboy BS that reminds me of something you would see on Engadget.

One last thing I want to mention, because this comes up over and over again (not just about Apple) is that profit margins can't be measured by simply subtracting the estimated bill of materials from the price.

Didn't you do that when you thought it was something it wasn't? Now you are like "remember...." really this is laughable.

The most significant costs in developing a product like this are in research and development, not in manufacturing and component costs. If you ignore the up front cost of developing a product like this (including the salaries of all the hardware and software engineers who spent more than a year developing it) then you won't even come close to an accurate picture of the cost of the device. This is true of Apple and Samsung both. Their real margins are not even close to $200 for these tablets. All you have to do is look at their quarterly results to back this up. They have specifically mentioned the small margins on the iPads. Here is a quote from a NYTimes article mentioning this specifically:

I have no doubt that Samsung is in the same boat, and, again, according to market research I've see they are even worse off than Apple. Believe what you want, though. After all, I'm just a fanboy, right?

*Sigh* At $499 a pop how long do you really think it takes Apple or Samsung for that matter to recover R&D costs? Apple sold about 5 million iPads last year. If we multiply and subtract the cost of the BoM Apple should be walking away with 500 million in profit. R&D just isn't that high when you are using off the shelf parts. Now Samsung isn't selling the same amount but that's a completely different story than your argument earlier that no one can compete with Apple on quality and price which is what we are talking about here, not what their year end balance sheets look like. If BoM is comparable then what we are talking about would center around sales or market forces which is a whole other argument entirely.

BTW for someone who says he know's what he is talking about you've got some of the lamest examples. New York Times? Really? LOL They are your tech analysts?!?! LMAO.

The software running on the iPad is not off the shelf. Apple has its own OS for its tablets. That is not cheap to write. The processor it contains is also a custom Apple designed chip. Even for the parts which are not apple designed there is a whole lot of engineering that goes into designing a product like this. Even the decision about which components to use requires a lot of very careful decisions and tradeoffs, and then there's board layout and thermal issues and power consumption and battery design (Apple also designs its own batteries). If you think the research and development costs are anything short of huge then you just don't have a clue how the tech industry works, and especially how Apple works. I don't think Samsung is much different, either. No matter how you slice it, for a product like a tablet the research and development costs vastly outweigh the cost of materials, and that is all up front cost.

By your logic the profit margins on my product (a software product) would be huge. After all, the media is ridiculously cheap to make, and a lot of customers just download it. My company should be rich. It turns out staffing a huge team to write a piece of software costs a whole lot of money, though. That's where the real cost of the product is. Not in manufacturing or in parts. It's development costs that are the real costs.

If you reject the quarterly results and the NYTimes siding with me on the this then we just can't possibly resolve anything here. We are just not dealing with the same reality at this point. You are living in your own dream world where profit margin has some other meaning. I hope for your sake that you don't make investment decisions, because you clearly have a very distorted view of how this industry works.

The software running on the iPad is not off the shelf. Apple has its own OS for its tablets.

That is not cheap to write.

I believe I already stated that the OS was their own.

The processor it contains is also a custom Apple designed chip.

Those are joint developed and manufactured by Samsung, until very very recently. A4's that's a definite no. A5's not too sure.

Even for the parts which are not apple designed there is a whole lot of engineering that goes into designing a product like this.

I don't believe I said there wasn't.....just not 500 million worth. We can look at the numbers and definitely say that while it's probably substantial it's not as high as you think it is and it's definitely not incurred completely by Apple.

If you think the research and development costs are anything short of huge then you just don't have a clue how the tech industry works, and especially how Apple works. I don't think Samsung is much different, either. No matter how you slice it, for a product like a tablet the research and development costs vastly outweigh the cost of materials, and that is all up front cost.

Um would you look at the financials instead of just guessing please? Again this is a entirely different argument you are making here and putting Apple on equal footing with Samsung in terms of development and design is not only laughable but incredibly wrong. There's a very big difference between asking for a product of a given height, width, and electrical characteristics to be designed/manufactured and actually having the technology to build and manufacture them yourself. You are obviously confusing the two. Apple for the most part is fabless meaning they don't own the actual manufacturing plants that actually create their stuff. Thinking they take on all of the cost of design and development is WAY wrong.... big time. This is in stark contrast to Samsung which is not fabless.

By your logic the profit margins on my product (a software product) would be huge. After all, the media is ridiculously cheap to make, and a lot of customers just download it. My company should be rich. It turns out staffing a huge team to write a piece of software costs a whole lot of money, though. That's where the real cost of the product is. Not in manufacturing or in parts. It's development costs that are the real costs.

The cost of software development is amortized over the life span of many products. Do you actually believe that iOS is redeveloped for every product kernel and all?

If you reject the quarterly results and the NYTimes siding with me on the this then we just can't possibly resolve anything here. We are just not dealing with the same reality at this point. You are living in your own dream world where profit margin has some other meaning. I hope for your sake that you don't make investment decisions, because you clearly have a very distorted view of how this industry works.

Oh we are definitely living in different worlds. Having spent quite a bit of time at looking at how marketing works most if not all of the stuff you read in magazines or newspapers is drafted from press releases. Very little of it is from true journalistic work. Meaning is broiler plate stuff and as about as accurate as eyeing up a measurement using bubble gum. You keep saying you know this or know that but it really seems to me that it's not the case.

It's been fun Adam but I think that's about it over here. I see no point in continuing a discussion while battling the Apple Reality Distortion Field. I think that's why I said earlier I don't normally discuss events with Apple Fanboy's they have a reality all to their own.

What? No dinner first? How about chocolates?