Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fusion Garage Going After Lower-Price Tablet Market

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the wising-up dept.

Handhelds 196

nk497 writes "Fusion Garage has dropped the price of its follow-up to the JooJoo tablet, cutting the Grid10's price by $200 to $299 in the US and £259 in the UK. Outspoken CEO Chandrasekar Rathakrishnan has clearly been following the HP TouchPad fire sale, and noticed the importance of price when it comes to taking on Apple's iPad. He said there's no point in buying 'a poor carbon copy' of the Apple tablet for the same price. 'At $499, why would you buy — it's like going to China and buying a [fake] Louis Vuitton bag, at the same price as the real Louis Vuitton bags. It doesn't make sense, when you know it's a rip-off product,' he said."

cancel ×

196 comments

A new JooJoo (2)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379408)

Isn't this the same guy and company that ripped off the CrunchPad from Michael Arrington?
I think the court case is proceeding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JooJoo [wikipedia.org]

After that sold only a few hundred units, they ditched the name and came out with a new tablet. The UI seems interesting, but I don't think this is going to sell many units.

Re:A new JooJoo (1)

Flyerman (1728812) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379758)

They had to drop the name when they screwed Arrington.

I am not surprised that the thing failed to sell.

never (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379416)

I would have had first post if this weren't a tablet. I'm lying: it's a laptop.

Wait... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379444)

...Did he just say *his* product was a "poor carbon copy" and a "rip-off"?

Re:Wait... (1)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379480)

Hey! Truth in advertising! I like it.

Re:Wait... (1)

afabbro (33948) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379564)

I guess the idea of trying to make a BETTER product never occurred to him.

Re:Wait... (3, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379624)

I guess the idea of trying to make a BETTER product never occurred to him.

Cheaper is better.

Re:Wait... (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379640)

I guess the idea of trying to make a BETTER product never occurred to him.

Innovation costs resources and money.

Re:Wait... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379900)

You don't always have to be innovative to be better. For example, two near-identical tablets, but one with DRM and the other without. The simpler, non-encumbered one wins.

Re:Wait... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379982)

Right, so the one that can't play NetFlix is the one the users want. Got it. DRM is indeed bad. However most users want to be able to use their devices. Today, that means it has to at least support some sort of DRM ability in order to do what users want.

Re:Wait... (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379934)

No, not always. What almost always does, though, is implementation. The new idea may cost you nothing but calories, but ramping up a specialized factory to make widgets will definitely cost you. Just ask Charles Babbage! His revolutionary ideas were free, but the implementation cost him dearly.

Re:Wait... (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379800)

Unless there are as many definitions of "better" as there are iPad owners.

Re:Wait... (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379822)

This chain of commentary is exactly what I was looking for.

Re:Wait... (1)

scottbomb (1290580) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380698)

All they'd have to do is add a USB port, Android, and flash support. Voila! A better product.

Re:Wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379742)

...Did he just say *his* product was a "poor carbon copy" and a "rip-off"?

Yeah, he did. He's kind of a moron, I guess. (Not that I'm shocked by that.)

There were probably 10,000 better ways to say what he said, and he didn't choose any of them.

Goatseblet (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379460)

Admit you bought a tablet so you can pinch to zoom in on goatses "hole". And you kissed the screen too. Also you can use your "flash" plugin to see this [meatspin.com]

Captcha: Keyboard, which you need to buy for your tablet.

What is he saying about his own product? (0)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379464)

"Pricing is also a very important factor. At $499, why would you buy - it's like going to China and buying a [fake] Louis Vuitton bag, at the same price as the real Louis Vuitton bags. It doesn't make sense, when you know it's a rip-off product," he said.

Wait, what did he just say about his product? That's it's a fake iPad and/or a rip-off?

Shouldn't you say more neutral or positive things about your own products? Maybe something like "Due to lower than expected manufacturing costs, we're lowering the price on the Grid10 to $299."

Re:What is he saying about his own product? (1)

milkywayer (1729406) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379514)

Yeah, amazing how a CEO can even give the impression that his product might be a copy of another product. Not sure if this guy can keep afloat his company for long with such remarks.

Re:What is he saying about his own product? (1)

swan5566 (1771176) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379594)

There's a big difference between being a copy of something and being poor quality. His point about the China analogy is that people dole out the extra cash for the name, so you shouldn't price things assuming you have a name like Apple when you don't. However, that doesn't imply that people wouldn't be willing to pay a smaller amount for a no-name that works just as well. Personally, "best-bang-for-my-buck" is always my favorite brand.

No, he is implying what others will think (1)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379668)

he is simply saying it.

Far too many pick up an iPad competitor and immediately start thinking, if it costs the same why not just buy the iPad. I agree his choice of words isn't the greatest.

Re:What is he saying about his own product? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379730)

He is saying that ALL Android tablets are fake iPad ripoffs. and he is correct.

At $499.00 a android based tablet fails to sell. Why? because honestly people will buy an iPad instead at that price point. Android is a utter fail at competing with the iPad on the same price point.

Why?

Simple. the Apps. you have a bajillion apps to choose from on the iPad.

So in order for anyone to compete they must do one of two things. be a lot cheaper, even $100.00 less will still lose. or be better.

and even Samsung cant be better when they try. simply because they cant manufacture a bajillion apps overnight for their product or make it any better than the ipad.

$499 for a 2.0ghz quad core with 256gb of storage and a redone 4K videocamera that has 22 hours of battery life and weighs 0.12 ounces is a start, but to cinch the deal, throw in software that does something you cant do on the iPad with that hardware or it's just a dry hump.

Re:What is he saying about his own product? (1)

Stewie241 (1035724) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380486)

Nobody has the brand recognition in the tablet market that the iPad has. That is fact. If you told somebody you bought a transformer or a zoom, they wouldn't know what you were talking about. More and more people know Android, but still a much smaller set than iPad.

For the uneducated masses, the iPad is the real thing and the others and knockoffs. Your product might be just as good, or even better, but this doesn't matter because the perception is the iPad is better. If you can convince people that your product might not be the best, but might be good enough, then you might be able to convince somebody to buy it if it is 1/3 or so less in price.

Best case, people are pleasantly surprised that the 'knockoff' is actually pretty good. Maybe they don't miss the app store because they find all they want in the market. Maybe they discover their phone can do things the iPad can't. Then you can get established in the market.

But for the same price, people aren't as willing to take a chance on the off brand.

Wait, what? (2)

idontgno (624372) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379488)

Did he just claim that every tablet in the world, his own included, is "a rip-off product", to quote the quote?

Has Apple so completely won the mind-share fight that every tablet product, no matter how technically distinctive, is an iPad clone?

The RDF is strong with this one.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379722)

Try bringing an Android tablet somewhere, and see how many people ask you where you got your iPad. People have come to associate tablet computers with Apple, so I think it is fair to say that as far as the public is concerned, the mindshare battle is over.

Re:Wait, what? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379912)

I fear you may be right, but I find it nauseating. It's as if the entire world has gone blind and addle-brained.

I have a tablet coputer. It says "CRAIG" right on the front, is a 7" tablet, is shaped nothing like the iPad and bears no fruit logo. And people still ask me how i like my iPad. It's as if the entire world were collectively kicked in the head by a horse.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380124)

Do you ask for a "facial tissue" or a Kleenex?

Same principle applies here.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380138)

I bought an Asus Transformer which has the detachable keyboard dock. When it's connected to the dock, it just looks like a small netbook with the Asus name on it. Once I touch the screen and people realize it's a tablet they then proceed to ask where to buy "the ipad keyboard".

Re:Wait, what? (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380344)

Humans have a grand tradition of ignoring trademarks in colloquial speech.

iPad is a concise way to say "non-stylus based tablet computer". Just like saying Xerox was a nice concise way to differentiate a "new" photo copier.

In Atlanta you buy a "Coke", no matter what kind of soda it is. One of the other posters already mentioned Kleenex. People "photoshop" a picture. You "google" someone. We went "rollerblading".

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380604)

I fear you may be right, but I find it nauseating. It's as if the entire world has gone blind and addle-brained.

It's just as nauseating when I show my macbook to somebody and he asks "Where did you get THAT windows? My PC doesn't look so cool". Just accept it, each market has a defacto reference.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380366)

People used to ask me what iPhone I had about 3 years ago or so. Now everyone asks me what kind of phone it is and when I mention Android they understand. So, no, the battle is never over.

Regardless, the retail world of tablets is bigger than what the ill-informed lowest common denominator think. I mean, these are the people who call our Canon "the xerox machine" and when they want to know your email address ask for your "aol." They're not the cutting edge trendsetters you think they are.

Re:Wait, what? (2)

Wovel (964431) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380658)

Then they putty you ;)

phones and other stuff too! (1)

cultiv8 (1660093) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379836)

OSS is more than a product sold on the shelf.

Re:Wait, what? (2)

hellfire (86129) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379930)

Did he just claim that every tablet in the world, his own included, is "a rip-off product", to quote the quote?

Yes he did. In the same way a fake Luis Vuitton is trying to copy on the success of a Luis Vuitton design, which is currently perfectly legal as long as it doesn't have Luis' name on it, the rest of the tablet market is trying to copy the success of the iPad by building something similar, which is itself also totally legal.

Has Apple so completely won the mind-share fight that every tablet product, no matter how technically distinctive, is an iPad clone?

At the moment, yes it has. I'm not saying the iPad is a superior product, merely that tech writers continue to use the word "tablet" but the average person thinks "iPad" because that's what overwhelmingly dominates the "tablet" market.

The RDF is strong with this one.

It's only strong with you, my fellow /.er, if you continue to deny the reality of the situation.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380310)

"The RDF is strong with this one."
"It's only strong with you, my fellow /.er, if you continue to deny the reality of the situation."

The reality of the situation is that the Ipad looks a lot like its predecessor, the Crunchpad (the "pre-JooJoo"). Here is a page showing a prototype of the Crunchpad six months before the Ipad was first announced: http://techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/ [techcrunch.com]

If anybody is ripping-off anything, it's Apple ripping-off the Crunchpad.

Sorry fanboys.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380738)

Yeah of course Apple didn't have any designs in the pipeline or even in the conceptual phase prior to the Crunchpad prototype being.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Confusador (1783468) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380340)

In the same way a fake Luis Vuitton is trying to copy on the success of a Luis Vuitton design, which is currently perfectly legal as long as it doesn't have Luis' name on it, the rest of the tablet market is trying to copy the success of the iPad by building something similar, which is itself also totally legal.

Except in Germany.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

The Great Pretender (975978) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379968)

Actually the German patent office said that first

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380200)

No, I think they are all rip-offs. Including the iPad.

Rip-offs of the crappiest idea since the 4-wheeled tricycle and the water-tight sundial. ;)

It's too big for a phone. It's to cumbersome to type anything since it hasn't got a keyboard. It's more expensive than a medium full PC and mobile phone combined. And since it's not programmable by the end user, it's not even a computer at all, but a mere gadget. All in all: It's utterly pointless and only bought "Because Shelly has one too!" and "Oooohhh, shiny!! I want to brag!".

Wait... I got it! It's the SUV of electronic gadgets!! ^^

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380328)

Wait... I got it! It's the SUV of electronic gadgets!! ^^

I'd say it's the Smart Car of electronic gadgets.

No way! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379490)

...and noticed the importance of price when it comes to taking on Apple's iPad.

I would rephrase that to "... and noticed the importance of price when it comes to taking on ANYTHING"

he's got a point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379496)

He's got a point. If you're buying a rip-off product, you should only pay half the real price.

real vs fake (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379510)

"going to China and buying a [fake] Louis Vuitton bag, at the same price as the real Louis Vuitton bags"

No surprise: this is what people have been saying for years. Apple didn't create the tablet, but they created the tablet _market_, and anyone who can afford it is going to buy the real thing. The only people buying non-iPad tablets are those who can't afford the iPad. This gives Apple tremendous market clout: it gets to sit at the top and make a profit, while everybody else scrambles for table scraps and attempts to sell knock off products for lower cost - which means invariably having less capable hardware.

The tablet war is just as over as the desktop PC war was in about 1986 - sure there were other "alternatives" (Atari STs, Amigas, whatever) but they were dead platforms still twitching. The market had spoken, it's just that the people buying those other platforms didn't realize it yet. It's just that way now with iPads: the market has spoken, and it wants the iPad. Anybody else is going to have a rough ride: all you can do is attempt to sell a much lower end product without the compelling advantages that draw people to buy iPads.

Re:real vs fake (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379648)

So what you're saying is that it's time to break Apple up as it now has a monopoly on a product type. I mean, if Android has no chance at penetration, clearly we must make sure the market performs properly, and forcing Apple to spin off a chunk of its tablet division is the only solution.

Unless, of course, you're just another fucking useless fanboy.

Re:real vs fake (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380000)

NOWHERE NEAR MONOPOLY LEVEL, let alone ILLEGAL monopoly level. Microsoft had almost ALL of computing in toto, its not the same fucking thing. So sick of this shit. There is no way you can say in good conscience Apple has an actionable monopoly in the legal sense of ANY kind.

Re:real vs fake (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380054)

But you just finished saying they have an unbreakable hold on the tablet market. Clearly this is unhealthy and Apple needs to be smashed to pieces to prevent it from permanently cornering said market, right?

Re:real vs fake (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380368)

Maybe he thinks they will have a monopoly, but since no one can predict the future, he wouldn't advocate breaking up Apple before they actually violate the law in some way.

Re:real vs fake (1)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380238)

This has to be one of the most brain-dead comments I've ever seen.

Just because another product fails to penetrate the market does NOT make it an illegal and anti-competitive monopoly that the DoJ would ever get involved in (re: "forcing Apple to spin off a chunk of its tablet division").

If my product is better than your product - perception or reality - so that nobody buys your shit...then YOU suck. YOU are still welcome to try and compete and bring a product to market that can bring my product down, just like I'll keep trying to keep my product as the king of the hill. YOUR failure to penetrate my market doesn't make me an illegal monopoly...only if I use my position at the top of the heap to prevent you from coming to market.

Now, granted, Apple is being rather uncompetative with their patent lawyers at the moment, but even THAT doesn't make someone an (illegal) monopoly - if I have patents that prevent you from coming to market, either license them, come up with something unique, or tough shit. That's the theoretical purpose of a patent...that I can make money on my idea before every other asshole can make money on my idea. Now we all know that the patent process is a festering pile of shit right now, but again, that's not Apple's fault either, and if I had patents I'd sure as hell use whatever means I could within the system as it exists to see as much profit as I could.

But then, I don't know if you'll care about this comment...you seem to be one of those fucking useless Apple haters.

Re:real vs fake (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380304)

You were just bragging a couple of posts up that Apple had this impenetrable hold on the market. Now suddenly you seem to be saying it doesn't. Was your first post just fanboyish bravado, or do you actually think Apple has an unbreakable hold on the tablet market? And if it is unbreakable, do you presume that to be a healthy position for consumers?

Re:real vs fake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380568)

You were just bragging a couple of posts up that Apple had this impenetrable hold on the market. Now suddenly you seem to be saying it doesn't. Was your first post just fanboyish bravado, or do you actually think Apple has an unbreakable hold on the tablet market? And if it is unbreakable, do you presume that to be a healthy position for consumers?

I'm guessing you don't really understand antitrust law. There is nothing illegal about having a monopoly (or stranglehold) on a given market. It only becomes illegal when you use that monopoly power in anti-competitive ways to force businesses/consumers/whoever into capitulating with your demands.

Re:real vs fake (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380576)

You mean like trying to use dubious patents to maintain a perpetual cycle of litigation?

Re:real vs fake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380818)

So what you're saying is that it's time to break Apple up as it now has a monopoly on a product type. I mean, if Android has no chance at penetration, clearly we must make sure the market performs properly, and forcing Apple to spin off a chunk of its tablet division is the only solution.

So what you're saying is that you're a useless troll?

Re:real vs fake (1)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379802)

anyone who can afford it is going to buy the real thing

This is verifiable false. Even suggesting it is absurd.

We are also not in the AtariST/Amiga/PC phase of the tablet war. We are in the Ti99-4a/Vic20 phase. You can tell this by the fact that most people don't have a tablet, and most people don't even see a real need for a tablet. There reason most people don't have any tablet at all is that the current crop of tablets doesn't meet the needs of most of the public. Just as the Vic-20 didn't meet the computing needs of most people. When even 50% of the homes have tablets, THEN we can start talking about a clear winner.

Re:real vs fake (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379966)

> You can tell this by the fact that most people don't have a tablet,

Not yet, but Apple is selling every single iPad it can produce, and is scrambling to add more production capacity. It may be different among older people more used to laptop PCs, but among the younger crowd, the iPad is THE thing to have, and you only get a laptop if you can't afford the iPad. And you don't get a desktop at all: there is no reason.

Times change. Most people don't have tablets NOW, but give it 10 years. You sound just like the C64 people in the early 80's claiming the IBM PC would never succeed. The C64 outsells it by a huge margin! How could anyone believe that business computer will ever catch on!

We've barely *started* to feel the impact of the iPad. It stands to change the way people compute, and free them from all the headaches that come with a WIndows PC.

Re:real vs fake (3, Interesting)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379812)

The only people buying non-iPad tablets are those who can't afford the iPad.

I was just in my boss' office about an hour an ago and he had an iPad box on his desk that we bought for research for a new project. He took the box off his desk and called it a "piece of crap" or something, and went on to wonder why anyone would buy an iPad when you can buy a Galaxy and have things like USB connectivity and the freedom to use it how you want to. This is from a guy in his 50s who runs a company creating online training courses. There are plenty of people who see the iPad for what it actually is who don't buy into Apple's marketing BS. Meanwhile, the lady who works here who actually does own an iPad primarily uses it to play Angry Birds, so there's your shrewd Apple consumer.

all you can do is attempt to sell a much lower end product without the compelling advantages that draw people to buy iPads.

What exactly are those compelling advantages? I don't own an iPad and I don't see anything compelling about it, so maybe you can fill me in.

Re:real vs fake (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379922)

"What exactly are those compelling advantages?"

The App Store, which android does not support.

Relative lack of malware. And no, just because you can name ONE iPad malware doesn't mean the situation is the same as Android's wild-west free for all.

Apple's polish and ease of use. I've never seen someone yet say that they think Android works better than IOS.

Dude, just admit it: the iPad has 90%+ of the tablet market, and there is a reason for this. Just because YOU don't see the reasons, don't mean they aren't there. SLashdotters never understand this: they are not representative of the majority of the computer using public, and what THEY want doesn't reflect what the vast majority want.

The iPad owns the tablet market, and what you claim could only be true if that was not the case. But it demonstrably is the case, so I don't know why you bother to argue that the iPad doesn't provide compelling advantages.

Re:real vs fake (2)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380302)

"have things like USB connectivity"

The first thing I do with any tablet is plug as many usb cords as I can into it and never move it from that spot since it'd take too much work to plug all those wires back in and it's a pain to move with that jungle of cords attached.

Re:real vs fake (1)

jkcity (577735) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380700)

I can afford an ipad but I bought an android 3.1 tablet on purpose because its better, most people I know now prefer android over ios. you can;t even download thinsg and save them to the ipad using the native browser its a piece of junk.

Not really a valid analogy (1)

Tweezak (871255) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379526)

The analogy he uses assumes you are buying a bag that looks and operates exactly like the legitimate bag thereby fooling your friends into thinking you have the real deal. It's still a "prestige" purchase because it's designed to boost your image.

A non-Apple branded pad is never going to get the same perceived envy from onlookers which is why a lot of the people are willing to part with the additional cash...people need the self-esteem boost.

Buying a fake Rolex impersonates a real Rolex while buying a Seiko does not. It's not important that you know it's fake...it's that others think it's real.

The off-brand pad will never have the allure to the masses of the iPad. In fact...it will probably have less allure than an Apple branded fake.

Common Sense FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379546)

So i guess this is why he/she gets paid the big bucks...

the use of common sense is quite fitting .. . if only it were harnessed more often

No sale (3, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379582)

A no-name company with a skeevy CEO, a custom OS instead of Android or something more well-supported? Maybe at $100, or possibly even $200. But once you get into the $300 range, you've moved beyond the impulse buy and well into the realm where I want a name-brand reputable company backing it--and an OS that I know is and will be supported.

Re:No sale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379704)

It's actually built on an android core and runs android apps: http://www.fusiongarage.com/grid-10/gridos

Re:No sale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379868)

/me waits for the name-brand reputable company's name...or the name of OS that is and will be supported

Don't hold back now, elrous0

Re:No sale (1)

Frag-A-Muffin (5490) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379880)

... where I want a name-brand reputable company backing it--and an OS that I know is and will be supported.

What, like HP?

Re:No sale (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380254)

What, like HP?

When I said "reputable," perhaps I should have specified a good reputation.

Re:No sale (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380456)

Actually, "GridOS" is Android, and will in fact run Android Apps of Amazon Marketplace. As for whether it will be supported, who knows. But, then, most Android branded phones don't get supported well either, so for $299, if it has got decent specs, it might be alright.

$300 isn't low enough (1)

wall0645 (1665631) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379588)

Give me a $100 tablet and I'll buy one. Just have it run GNU/Linux (no OS fee) and require an SD card rather than an internal hard drive. Maybe have it be relatively cheap/slow compared to competitors, using older technology that is presumably cheaper to use. I'm not going to pay $300 for something which not only has a most-likely-shitty proprietary OS, a small (but internal) hard drive, and "iPad ripoff" quality.

Re:$300 isn't low enough (1)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379636)

I agree that $300 is not low enough. However, I think that getting the price under $200 would be good enough. I'm not sure I would buy a tablet at that price, but I would look at it. At $300, I'm not interested.

Re:$300 isn't low enough (2)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379846)

While your specs are not met, $100 Android tablets are certainly available now. I can walk 5 blocks down to the CVS Pharmacy and by a $100 Android tablet today.

Magic Price Point = $199 (1)

killmenow (184444) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379906)

When an android tablet maker can get comparable specs to an iPad for $199 they'll sell like mad. Anything higher and they have a minimal seller, period.

Why is that bad (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379596)

Isn't that the point of capitalism? If I need a car I do not have to have a BMW or Porsche. A Hyundai is fine and much better on my wallet. This is the same principle.

Why should we condemn Fusion Garage if they they do it cheaper? Less press = more supply and marketshare. Economics 101

Fuck You (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379620)

"There's really been no innovation since iOS. Everything has been a carbon copy of the Apple devices, and Android has largely been that," he claimed.

Re:Fuck You (0)

Altus (1034) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379798)

Aww.. Does somebody disagree with your vision of the world?

Fanboy.

LV bags (2)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379638)

For what it's worth, it's now easier in China to buy real Louis Vuitton bags than fakes. Several years ago, the fake markets were wide open and real LV stores were nonexistent. However, since the Great Cleanup of 2008 (Olympic year), the fake markets have been largely shut down. Real LV stores have opened legitimate operations. There's one within two miles of my house, and believe me, it's real. After being in factory business for a while, you can tell a real from a fake by the quality of materials, the stitching, etc. Sort of like how geeks can tell a phishing email right away by how it sounds, simply by virtue of receiving so many phishing emails, as opposed to the Great Unwashed Morons of Middle America who actually think there is a Nigerian prince on the other end of the connection. What morons! Can you believe the Constitution permits these people to vote! "Yeah, I sent my life savings to a person who contacted me by email, but I still maintain my political enfranchisement"...puh-LEEZ! We need an intelligence test before allowing voting...but I digress.

The fact is that legitimate LV shops have opened up, and the fake shops have been shut down the the power of the government. That's the nice thing about living in China, you really do have a one-to-one relationship with the government you live under, rather than the "laissez-faire" non-relationship that Americans have with their federal government. I imagine that it must be the same in other civilized countries like Europe, even though I've never been there.

Funny thing is, the elimination of the fakes is driving innovation in the local market. Now that everyone can't get an LV bag for $50, local brands are appearing to fill the gap between "crap no-name bag" and "luxury genuine foreign brand". Mr. Chandrasekar Rathakrishnan is operating on a three-year-old dead meme. I'm not saying that LV fakes aren't available, I'm saying that they're not readily available in fake markets like they were a few years ago. This opens everything for the local innovators (those expressly given permits by the government to innovate, of course). Chinese brands are not well-known because local merchants always default to making fakes - a dumb idea intended to maximize corporate profits on the backs of the workers. With the wise move by the government (which, in China, is staffed by scientists, engineers, and other no-bullshit-style atheists) to permanently close the fake markets, the intended consequences are to make independent innovation a reality. With any luck, we can only hope that American corporate CEOs will find themselves regulated in the same way. Imagine how better America would be if the government were run by scientists and engineers, and nutso religion-mongers were not allowed to hold office, much less vote?

Re:LV bags (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379804)

Wow, that was a high quality (and strange) Pro-China/Anti-America troll job. You kinda gave it away with the whole "China is staffed by scientists etc." line.

Still that's some high quality trolling right there. I'm almost prepared to give up my freedoms to live under a ruthless totalitarian government now.

Re:LV bags (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379826)

Looking forward to that intelligence test before voting. Because the key point will be who actually adminsters the test.

Q1: How old is the planet Earth?
A: Sever billion years.
Sorry, the answer is "about 6 thousand years." You've failed the intelligence test. Under US law, you are not allowed to vote.

Yeah, that'll work really well.....

Re:LV bags (1)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379862)

1) WTF does atheism have to do with cracking down on knockoff handbags?

2) The problem with China's governing "no-bullshit-style atheists" is that if you disagree with them, you disappear off the face of the earth. [nytimes.com] You may not have a problem with that, since you agree with what they're doing today. But it'll probably seem a lot less appealing if you find yourself disagreeing with them tomorrow.

Re:LV bags (1)

Wovel (964431) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380686)

God likes originals. God is very brand-oriented.

Re:LV bags (1)

Beyond_GoodandEvil (769135) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379874)

Imagine how better America would be if the government were run by scientists and engineers, and nutso religion-mongers were not allowed to hold office, much less vote?
You know, I much rather prefer this sentiment expressed in the original German.

Re:LV bags (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380466)

Godwin? Is that you?

Literacy tests (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379980)

We need an intelligence test before allowing voting

The United States tried that once [wikipedia.org] . It was outlawed after it was discovered that southern states were giving out more difficult tests to black people than to white people [crmvet.org] .

Re:Literacy tests (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380182)

So....what? If this time, we give more difficult tests to religionists than atheists, we can block out the morons and have a better government. Heck, we don't even need to bias the tests - we just need to include a question like: How old is the Earth (1) 6000 years old (2) 6 billion years old. Anyone who answers (1) is a freaking moron and can't vote. What's wrong with that? Just imagine how much better our society would be if religionists were disenfranchised. The Tea Party would disappear overnight, and who among the following would disagree with that: Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, Dan Savage, Paul Krugman, Julian Assange, Hugo Chavez, Janeane Garofalo, Al Franken, Barack Obama, Micheal Moore, Evo Morales, Hillary Clinton. Can you seriously say you are on the opposite end of the agreement of these intellectual heavyweights? The problem was not that the intelligence test was being abused. The problem was the Blacks were being disenfranchised due to their race.

Re:Literacy tests (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380582)

If this time, we give more difficult tests to religionists than atheists

Then you'd have people of faith filing lawsuits on grounds that the state is interfering with their First Amendment right to freedom of religion.

How old is the Earth (1) 6000 years old (2) 6 billion years old. Anyone who answers (1) is a freaking moron and can't vote. What's wrong with that?

Anyone who answers (1) ignores that Biblical "days" are metaphorical, per 2 Peter 3:8 [watchtower.org] .

Re:Literacy tests (1)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380788)

So you want people with whom you disagree to not be able to vote? How do you feel when someone on the other end of the political spectrum doesn't want you to be able to vote? Most people believe that voting is a fundamental right, not something we remove simply because someone has beliefs we think are crazy.

Just imagine how much better our society would be if religionists were disenfranchised. The Tea Party would disappear overnight, and who among the following would disagree with that: Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, Dan Savage, Paul Krugman, Julian Assange, Hugo Chavez, Janeane Garofalo, Al Franken, Barack Obama, Micheal Moore, Evo Morales, Hillary Clinton.Can you seriously say you are on the opposite end of the agreement of these intellectual heavyweights?

First of all, I'm pretty sure that most of the people on that list aren't in favor of removal of peoples right to vote even if it would mean that the Tea Party would disappear. Second of all, most of that list is not by any means "intellectual heavyweights." Being a famous person who agrees with your positions doesn't make someone an intellectual heavyweight. For example, Dan Savage is a sex advice columnist and occasional pundit about GLBTQE issues. That's it. Frankly, putting most of those people on the same list as Krugman is essentially insulting Krugman. Please keep in mind that agreeing with you doesn't make people smart, just as disagreeing with you doesn't make them necessarily dumb.

I bought my Galaxy Tab because it can do more... (3, Insightful)

rafial (4671) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379674)

...I feel bad these suckers who are lining up to buy "a cheap carbon copy".

Makes no sense (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379688)

'At $499, why would you buy — it's like going to China and buying a [fake] Louis Vuitton bag, at the same price as the real Louis Vuitton bags. It doesn't make sense, when you know it's a rip-off product,' he said."

This statement makes no sense.

The ONLY reason to buy a louis vuitton bag for $500 is to show off to other people (especially possible dating partners) that you have the money to buy one, or you're romantically involved with someone who can afford it. On the scale of trashiness, its a bit above simply waving cash around, but not much above it. Humorously, it used to mean you had the money, but for a couple decades now it merely means you're willing to go into debt, which is not quite the same level of sex appeal as having the cash.

Anyway, as long as its well known that options A B or C all cost $500, all adequately serve the purpose of advertising that you spent the money. They could increase sales dramatically by engraving $500 on the "fake" bags or "fake" tablet case.

In a way, spending an ipad's worth of money on a bad copy, is even better, because it proves you can afford to buy something useless. Its one thing to have the dough to make a capital purchase for something that improves your life like an ipad. But you must really be loaded with money (or debt) if you are willing to buy something useless for about the same price.

Re:Makes no sense (1)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380338)

Whoa, you appear to have missed the point somewhere...

He wasn't talking about the "status" of the purchaser of a LV bag. He is comparing it to spending the same amount for a fake knockoff vs paying for the "real thing", regardless of what the "real thing" actually is.

To compare it to cars:

You go into a Ford dealership, and see a Pinto on sale for $10,000. You go the Frod dealership (yes, I meant the misspelling) behind the iHop next to the dumpster, and the guy there is selling the Frod Pinte for $10,000.

Why in the name of Zeus' asshole would you drop the same price on the knockoff, when you could buy the real thing for the same price?

Re:Makes no sense (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380396)

The ONLY reason to buy a louis vuitton bag for $500 is to show off to other people (especially possible dating partners) that you have the money to buy one, or you're romantically involved with someone who can afford it.

So, the exact same reason people buy iPads, then?

Sorry but no. (1)

guabah (968691) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379720)

I like to buy my iPad knock offs from local dealers [electronicospr.com] .

£259 in the UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37379768)

Why the hell are we (Brits) being charged so much for this overpriced pile of egoism? I agree with "wall0645": "Give me a £63.29 ($100) tablet and I'll buy one".

Re:£259 in the UK (1)

RotateLeftByte (797477) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380672)

Remember the price quoted in GBP includes VAT and all import Taxes.
The US price is without any sales Tax.

Still, even taking those factors into consideration, the price is still rather high. I guess the $1 == £1 rule still applies. rather than £1.60 == £1.00approx

In other news... (2)

sirwired (27582) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379834)

In other news, I'm going to sell my entire stock of pink unicorns for fifty cents each.

And I have as many pink unicorns as FusionGarage has $200 tablets that don't 100% suck.

There's really been no innovation since iOS? (1)

ThinkWeak (958195) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379884)

Sorry, I caught the headline of this story across my RSS feeder widget on my Android phone. I have similar widgets on my Android tablet. Knock on them all you want, but it's the one thing that the iPhone users I know would like to have (instead of a screen full of program icons).

I can appreciate what Apple has created, but there have been a couple things created outside of Cupertino.

Also of note, I was wondering how a CEO can get away with talking down his products and then I saw that Fusion Garage is privately funded and note publicly owned.

Speaking as an iPad owner. (2)

BlueKitties (1541613) | more than 2 years ago | (#37379942)

I swore to never buy an Apple product, lo and behold I ended up with an iPad 2. Ultimately, the aspect ratio of the Android horde was the deal breaker, the only one to successfully tempt me has been the Tab 10. The iPad 2 is smooth, sleek, works great, and most importantly works in portrait and landscape mode (I find myself using it in portrait more than landscape, since most web pages are vertical.) But the iPad 2 is not "magically better" than the other tablets. Having fiddled around with the Tab 10, I can say it's just as solid of an experience as an iPad 2. The problem is mentality. People have this strange idea in their head that Apple products are "the best" simply because of a logo. And honestly, the iPad 2 is top notch, and will stay top notch, until other designers are willing to go balls-to-the-wall and compete on equal grounds. That means getting over the "Apple is better by default" mentality. And this CEO literally just said "The iPad 2 is better than our product!" Which is even stupider than Motorola overpricing the Xoom.

Re:Speaking as an iPad owner. (1)

Oliver Wendell Jones (158103) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380664)

I didn't fully appreciate Apple's lawsuit against Samsung over the Tab 10.1 - that is until I read the owner's manual trying to figure out how big of a SD or microSD card it would support and found this gem: "Note: This device does not support external memory cards" -- Congratulations, Samsung, you have successfully duplicated all the great features including the second most incredibly annoying "feature" (the first being inability to install whatever software you want) that Apple ever invented - the inability to increase your storage space.

Re:Speaking as an iPad owner. (1)

Wovel (964431) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380704)

It really was a bizarre comment. It is honest but stupid. He may have been able to say something that did not compromise his integrity and not be really, really stupid.

Bad analogy (3, Insightful)

ubergeek65536 (862868) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380018)

Why would the rip off Louis Vuitton bag be any worse that the real thing? There are good knock offs and bad ones. Some of those rip off items come off the same assembly line as the real ones.

Re:Bad analogy (1)

smellsofbikes (890263) | more than 2 years ago | (#37380786)

Why would the rip off Louis Vuitton bag be any worse that the real thing? There are good knock offs and bad ones. Some of those rip off items come off the same assembly line as the real ones.

In short, because of the decrease in cost of production of consumer goods, most all consumer goods have roughly similar quality, so what differentiates high-end goods from cheap stuff is the name because it can be copyrighted and protected. This is most obvious in t-shirts, where they all cost between about $3-$7USD in reasonably large quantities, but you can find people willing to pay $50 for a $7 t-shirt that says DKNY on it. So when you buy a Vuitton bag what you're buying is the name, so you can show off to your friends that you can afford to pay several hundred dollars for some leather. That, in short, is why the ripoff is worse than the real thing: it's not the function that matters, but the form. Now, if the ripoff says Vuitton on it, then you're set: you've just managed to advertise wealth you don't have. Think of these as fashion accessories, not computers, and his point becomes clearer.

wtf prices (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380022)

4" smartphone unlock costs $600
10.1" tablet costs $300

wtf? size doesn't matter or what?

why don't these idiot Android manufacturers make 4" PMP (like iPod Touch) for $200 so that android developer, like myself, do not have to buy that ridiculuous 4" smartphone unlock for $600. I know Sony will be releasing PMP, Samsung Galaxy Player too. But that is SOON. NOT NOW. everybody is concentrating on build tablet for a marginal profit where they should be concentrating building an android PMP for a bigger profit. a bunch of idiots.

exchange rate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380458)

since when is $299 = £259?!!

fucking ripoff.

Price cut (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37380622)

He realizes that there's no competition with a name brand product at the same retail price? If he [they] would get off their yuppie lifestyles then maybe they could pull more profits in understanding what a fair price to average consumers are considered to be.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...