A Samsung executive has admitted that the Korean giant hasn't put quite as many Android tablets in the hands of punters as its recent claim that it has shipped 2m of the things suggests. Speaking at its earnings conference late last week, Samsung executive Lee Young-hee implied that sales of Galaxy Tab tablets to consumers were …
I for one am waiting the inevitable cheap sell off. It's what, at least twice as expensive as the Archos 70 isn't it?
Make it cheaper then
I think the Galaxy Tab is a nice device, but damn is it expensive and it's hard to see why.
I wonder why people might not be buying as many Android Tablets when Android 3.0 hasn't been released yet......
It's supposed to be officially launched tomorrow
I don't know if that means it will go into the wild but it will launch in some fashion. I assume that means proper feature showcases, video previews etc.
How much have Samsung lost on this?
All credit to Samsung for getting a vaguely viable iPad competitor into shops before Christmas (nobody else did in significant numbers) but I do wonder how many of these have gone unsold. Every mobile phone shop had them, every electronics store had them, and general retailers like Tesco had them. I went travelling in the Balkans before Christmas, and they were very easy to buy in places like Bulgaria and Serbia too. There was some interest and a fair number of people demonstrating with them and playing with them, but the general feeling seemed to be that they cost too much. Apple has only sold the iPad through channels where people expect high prices. For these gadgets to sell in Tesco, they need to be a lot cheaper.
But how do those mobile operators count?
I've seen this story in a few places, and all of them seem to be a bit vague (as a result of the executive's inexact comment, no doubt) as to whether a tablet delivered to and subsidised (possibly up to 100%) by a mobile operator but put into the hands of a consumer counts as a sale to a consumer for the purposes of this story.
I would expect devices that can be supplied cheaply through operators to gain significant traction, even if they weren't available at all for direct consumer sales, just like the overwhelming majority of mobile phones.
DSG has dropped the price to £350ish...
... at least online, which suggests they're having trouble getting rid of their Christmas stock.
Even at that price it's not really an attractive purchase - too big to put in your pocket, (just) too functionally-constrained to be a netbook/home media player replacement.
I think Archos have the right idea and ditching 3G for their tablets - they're not a phone substitute and tethering to your phone on the move seems like the right idea given you'd be carrying a phone anyway.
Begs the question
Why would anyone buy either when a perfectly good Advent Vega can be had for under £250?
Samsung in can't sell overpriced tablet furore.
Why am I not surprised.
simple market forces
When sales are low, your price is too high for the value that your product provides
I would wait until tablet's are on the market with the following (vendors: take note this is free marketing research):
- Around the £150 mark (to keep the pain levels in my wallet at acceptable levels)
- Android 3 as a minimum
- Camera (front and back)
- GPS receiver
- movement sensor
- Multi touch screen
- 3G optional for on the move web access
- Sufficient battery life (fill in you favourite number of hours)
- Proper keyboard, with mouse connectivity
- Docking station (so I can use it on a desk while recharging the batteries)
- Fashionable leather carry pouch (I don't always wear clothes that are 7"/8"/10" wide)
- Not interested in a tablet/phone
You know, I keep saying, if Ferrari made a model that did 200mph, 0-60 in 4 seconds, 4 seats, 4 doors, did 80mpg, and sold it for £500 - they would sell loads.
What could possibly go wrong??
Waaaayy too expensive. There's your problem right there.
I think I saw that Apple's iPad numbers did include 'sell-in' and 'sell-out'. Of the 9 or so million in the one quarter around 2 million were still in the channel.
I think that part of the issue here is that the pad market is still a young one and the total customer base contains a relatively high proportion of people with a bit more tech familiarity than is typical in other markets. To take an extreme example the average punter on the lookout for a pad probably is a bit more tech-aware than the average punter looking for a new telly. Thus the proportion of punters who are aware that there is some very good kit on the immediate horizon PLUS are aware that Android 3 is the os to have if you are in the market for a pad is probably quite high. The Sammy is quite an attractive piece but it will soon be superceded hardware wise, it does not have Android 3 (and if I know Samsung it either can't run or they wouldn't upgrade you anyway) and it is overpriced. There is likely to be a lot of good stuff this year and next but (IMO) the tab is not it - not at that money.
As part of their promotion Samsung offered £200 worth of free movie downloads. Except that the movie download service didn't work. You went to the check-out, pressed "download", and got nothing but server errors. For ALL of January. I only just downloaded my first free movie in February.
Why Samsung never become a major player ..
Samsung has a god hardware platform, and makes interesting products.
But when you brought a product from Samsung they forget you after you taken it out of the shop.
Don't even think about support after ½ or 1 year . it still works but upgrades NO..
Samsung is a One time only experience , a little more effort on upgrading the software, and you have a winner , instead your have a Samsung ind the attic.
- Comment Renewable energy 'simply WON'T WORK': Top Google engineers
- Game Theory Dragon Age Inquisition: Our chief weapons are...
- 'How a censorious and moralistic blogger ruined my evening'
- Leaked screenshots show next Windows kernel to be a perfect 10
- Amazon warming up 'cheapo web video' cannon to SINK Netflix