Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

This thread is hilarious. If someone is seriously saying that Java is outdated, please tell me what has taken over? If someone is seriously saying that why aren't mobile platforms more based on Java, please explain why Java has almost no role on computer desktops? Who uses applets anymore? Java is not that slow, even though desktop apps startup slow because of JVM initialization. Being a memory hog is bigger sin considering mobile platforms.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

So OB, what's Theory 2?

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

Indeed, this thread is hilarious in so many ways.

Anyone who knows even a little bit about true mobile technology knows that you can't just MAKE it. Developing it takes considerable time, several VERY costly prebuilds are required to make sure that a device that will surely be dropped at some point will likely survive it. Writing software, even if you only need to squeeze the UI candy on takes considerable time as it is absolutely necessary to make sure that a file access at a wrong time will not brick your device and the software platforms are not as portable as they are on the PC side where resources are almost infinite - these days you can assume at least 3000 bogomips, 2 GB RAM, a decent graphics accelerator and 500 GB of slower storage with no practical limits for power consumption even in laptops as the very same OS is used in both wall-powered workstations and battery-powered laptops.

The N900 will not surely cost much more than $200 to build, but can you sell it for $250 if you have a few million dollars of development costs to kill? No one with high enough education to design mobile devices will do so for charity, you know.

Laptops are an entirely different breed. They use cheap, large components, their plastic covers are rather simple with easily five times thicker features even at their narrowest when comparing to any true mobile devices. All the components are made compatible to start with, and drivers and their stability is the component maker's problem in the x86 world. Windows is very well-known, anyone can pick a set of computer parts, assemble them, install Windows and drivers and BAM: you have a working product that requires little to none software testing. Laptops have the advantage of bulkiness too: if you drop it even once or hit it with something, it simply breaks and you've voided your warranty. Laptops are so much cheaper because the price competition with parts that anyone can make is fierce, all components can easily be recycled to new designs and most of the stuff has already been done before.

Mobile phones and MIDs with their highly custom-built HW and very bad design recyclabilty are expensive simply because it takes so much more than just the parts to make them; you are welcome to try making anything close to N900, Motodroid, iPhone, Pre, Touch HD or even the now aged Hero that costs $150 for the consumer and you would cover all your expenses with less than 50 M devices sold. I'm going to enjoy watching as I've already been there and came back bruised but much wiser. Not everything is simple and just black and white; the world is full of shades of grey.

As for Java being obsolete: why is Google generating so much buzz with the Java monster that is Android if the whole concept is dead? The platform is clunky on the PC e.g. for reasons mentioned before: it's used for so few things that the VM is not kept in memory and as it is rather large with little interest in making it more efficient becuase any computer these days has the horsepower anyway, starting it a few times a day can be seen as slow response and frustrating behaviour. On a mobile device that uses a lot of Java the VM is naturally optimized for the architecture and kept in memory at all times. Lo and behold, it almost lives up to the expectations that Sun placed on it all those years ago. World of technology is simple AND complex and most essentially it does not work like your average daily life.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

ZOMG, $150 is WAAAY TO MUCH@!

THIS THING OS ONLY PLASTIC AND SAND AND METAL!

I BET IF WE BROKE IT DOWN INTO THE BASE MATERIALS IT ONLY COSTS NOKIA $1-2 PER PHONE! WHAT A RIP!!!!1!1!!!

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

If you break a human being down to component parts you get about a pound of chemicals and a lot of water. Worthless really, when you consider how much value we put on them.

(Mind, a few of them might not be worth all that good h2o... )

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

Alright, then so from what I understand about this posts original concept the OP has argued that the price of the N900 is too high. He later amended the statement by adding that the price was economically and logically defensible but still a rip-off.

Then followed some discussion about fixed costs needed to be added to his calculations etc. (something consulting companies have relatively little of) which was disputed on the grounds that other companies have fixed costs too?

I'm a bit confused but to me this is like when I was six and discovered that the price to make a CD was a few cents, after that I was outraged by the price of a music-CD I was about to buy. My mother explained to me that there were other costs involved than just the ones I was looking at. I understood her argument but still couldn't bring myself to buy the CD (sound familiar?)

PS: it is also a proven fact that a price that seems to be too low when compared to other equivalent products on the market, consumers tend not to trust it. I know it sounds weird but you simply cannot price your product too low or people will get suspicious and not buy it.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

It's true that is one way of measuring company size, it's not the only way though. Market cap is also a measurement of appreciation. Meaning how much people are willing to pay for a share.

Is Apple bigger than GM? Is Google bigger than Indian railway?

Also if mr. Jobs kicked the bucket tomorrow, what would happen to Apple's share? Let's say the share would loose 1/3 of it's value, would it make Apple automatically 1/3 smaller? I don't think so. Maybe in Nasdaq but not in the real world.

Java is not performance oriented language, there's _always_ extra VM layer which makes it slower and take more cpu cycles compared to native application. CPU cycles are especially important in mobile world. But it's true that most of the applications don't need the last percents of performance. But for those apps there's always Python... Which can use QT also. So you can probably tell I'm not a huge java fan :)

This thread should be split, the original question has been answered many times and this current debate is about something completely different.

And Orangebox, it would really help others if you learned to use the "quote & reply" link as manual inline quoting is rather annoying to read. Let's keep the UI consistent shall we, please.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

Yes, people think the cheapest DVD player is total crap, but the one that costs 10$ more has something extra and quality is better. So it's stupid to build quality DVD player and sell it the lowest price possible even if you still made good money out of it.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

i dont know, but android development so tied around java? Not a gud idea, i cannot touch android development bcuz of this (alergic to java :p && dont_flame_me_plz ). Maemo simply rocks beyong anything mobile currently available for software development imho..... no limits ! .... no limits !

@arpa, yup this discussion is becoming kind of a off topic for this post..

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

And for popular demand here is my Theory 2:

The iPhone 3gs pricewise is a total ripoff because it is merely more than an iPod touch with some additional gsm chip yet it costs 3 times as much.