Back to Article

  • codedivine - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Didn't Asus already announce the cheaper 300 series, which starts at $399? But I guess that is not up for pre-order yet. Reply
  • JasonInofuentes - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Not sure when the 300 series will launch, but that will be Tegra 2 based and essentially supplant the original TF. Similarly, Acer has their 200, which is basically the same internals as the A500 (Tegra 2) in a better chassis. Oh, and the Galaxy Tab 2 (10.1) from Samsung is also likely a rehash of the original. So basically, everyone has a lot of Tegra 2 SoC's saved up and need someway of moving them. Reply
  • LiveBow - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    There's already a arriving date to local resellers, and it's a Tegra 3.

    TF300T 32GB Tegra3 10.1 WF
    TF300T-1K108A --> Around 1st week April

    TF700T 64GB Tegra3 10.1 WF
    TF700T-1B072A --> Around 1st week June

    There will be a 700 WF + LTE
  • Visual - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    I don't get it really, why are all those manufacturers so clueless?
    After the Kindle Fire set the precedent, an ARM tablet will never be a success unless it goes for around $200 or so. It is completely pointless to release it at $450.
    At the same time, there are users like me ready and willing to pay triple that for a good x86 tablet. Yet no one wants to release one...
  • JasonInofuentes - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    The only way that Amazon's model works is if there's revenue coming in from content distribution. And that's why you see every major tablet ODM/OEM trying to get involved with a 3rd party content partner (think Rovi). So, if Samsung's Media Hub suddenly becomes a hit and generates tons of revenue, then they might chop their tablet prices in half. Alternately, sales of the tablets can sky rocket and companies can consider competing on thinner margins based on volume.

    My guess? Tablets will become commodity devices just like laptops and be sold at fixed price points based on components, with oddballs (like Amazon on the low-end and Apple on the high-end) bookending the market based on their business model.
  • mcnabney - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    You really think Apple is on the high end for tablets?
    The Acer tablet only undercuts the new iPad by $50, but that extra $50 will buy you a hell of a lot better screen and a much, much better GPU. Oh, and access to a whole lot more tablet-based software.
    Sorry tablet makers, but Apple just raised the standards while keeping the price the same. If you are going 10" the screen better be 1200p. Only Asus appears capable of competing here and they will need to drop the price of the upcoming high resolution Transformer a bunch.
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    The price difference is $150 as this Acer tablet has 32GB of NAND, whereas the low-end iPad has only 16GB. No doubt that Apple has set the bar high though, the new iPad is definitely the best tablet in terms of hardware at the moment. Reply
  • Conficio - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    And, Apple has the System in place that besides paying for the hardware you keep on paying Apple for using new software or content on the device.

    Add to that Apple's lock on you being supported, and you are in QuickBooks land. When you pick up QuickBooks, can you tell that some of the major functions, like the ability to send invoices per e-mail, to import your bank account data from your bank, go puff after three years, because they depend on Intuit's servers and they simply close the service for older versions. So yes, if you want to buy into a subscription eco system (Amazon, Apple iOS (and soon Mac OS X), online gaming, DRM music, ...) then do so, but for my money I think twice to do so.
  • steven75 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Wtf are you talking about? iOS is no more of a "subscription ecosystem" than Android.

    And iTunes hasn't had DRM music for a few years now. Good lord!
  • Tanclearas - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link

    Marketing works...

    You took the bait and are blindlessly repeating what Apple fed you. "We have a better screen and better GPU, so we're better."

    The real story? "We had to improve the GPU to drive the extra pixels on the screen, and we kept the CPU exactly the same, while delivering a heavy, hot chunk of metal that essentially performs exactly the same as the device we have been selling for a year now."

    Now, don't read into this that I think Nvidia isn't guilty of the same thing. "We're giving you moar corez!" Tablets aren't ready for quad-core, but Nvidia does at least have a more balanced product (fast processor with fast graphics rather than medium processor with high-end graphics).

    As for "a whole lot more tablet-based software", more is not equal to better. The respective "app stores" both have ridiculous amounts of apps to choose from, most of which are crap. I will grant that more crap ends up in the Android store, but it doesn't mean that there aren't just as many quality apps there. I have far fewer than 100 apps installed on any device (I use both iOS and Android devices), so I really don't need to worry about the other "gazillion" apps that both companies want to brag about having in their stores.
  • djc208 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    And even with the revenue stream it's still not competing directly with this or the iPad. The Fire and Nooks are 7" vs 10", no cameras, no blue tooth. Limited access to apps running heavily custimized versions of Android. I don't think the fire even has an SD card slot.

    They're even more of a walled garden than the iPad. Which is the other reason they can hit those price points.

    Tablets like this have a hard struggle between the people who don't need anything more than the Fire or Nook offer and the iPad. They're left competing for people who want more capability or size than the Nook & Fire but don't like Apple, or want to spend the money Apple wants for an iPad.
  • dagamer34 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Because selling a tablet at $200 means selling it for a loss. They are in no rush to race to the bottom to lose money. Reply
  • Taft12 - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    If this industry has taught us nothing over the last decade, if you're not racing to the bottom, you're not getting any sales.

    Another dud for Acer here (and as always, the merits of the product have almost nothing to do with it)
  • michael2k - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Apple proves otherwise Reply
  • vision33r - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    Right now no 8-10" tablet can charge more than $400, the average consumer is not going to buy Android Tab at that price range when many prior gen tabs are selling at $299 or less.

    Add to that you can get a new iPad 2 for $399 and $349 refurb, not many reasons to spend $400+ unless you are getting an iPad 3 with Retina for $500 and that premium price is well worth it for a super hires display.

    Pretty soon used iPad 3 will go for $449.
  • Confusador - Thursday, March 22, 2012 - link

    I'm excited about this, and it's not because of the price; it's the USB port, and specifically USB host mode. The other critical feature is the removable storage, but most Android devices have that. Very few have the ports I want, though, which gives Acer an edge as long as they stay committed to it. I only wish it could compete on screen resolution.

    If they ever do launch the A700, I'll buy it at almost any price.
  • agent2099 - Friday, March 23, 2012 - link

    Acer has the pricing all wrong on this, for only $50 more you can get an iPad 3 with quadruple the resolution, better battery life, and probably better build quality. This tablet needs to be $350 to compete. Reply
  • TheJian - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    You're wrong. You can't get a 32GB model in ipad3 for $50 more, it's really $150 more for 32gb ($600!). Also, the graphics aren't any faster on the $150 more ipad3 because they are pushing far more pixels. It was REQUIRED to get faster graphics just to get the screen to not be a killer on performance. It was already stated before, it's merely the same as all the others even if it is 4x faster graphics (means nothing if I always have 4x more work to get done correct?).

    Nice pricing, Acer priced it fine for 2x storage of apple low end model (16GB shouldn't even be produced today). For anyone wanting great multitasking stuff Tegra 3 is great. However for the same reason if you didn't think ipad2 was good at multitasking, expect to say the exact thing about ipad3. It is NO better in this area than it's older cousin.
  • Odeen - Tuesday, March 27, 2012 - link

    "16GB shouldn't even be produced today"

    Wrong. 16gb is plenty for base storage when there's a MicroSD card slot available. 16gb becomes space for apps only, with all the media, pictures, movies, music, etc living on the cheap (and swappable) SD card.

    Heck, with App2SD, even APPS can live on the SD card.

    The thing is, until internal storage in a tablet/phone reaches price parity with SD cards, any tablet/phone with more than the base amount of storage will be a ripoff. The 16gb version of this, for $350, would be fantastic. Want more space? Pair with a 64gb MicroSDXC card on special at Adorama for $80. $430 for an 80GB tablet is fantastic!

    For that matter, if I could get a 2gb version of this, for $250-$270, I'd jump on it. Again, bring my own storage, App2SD my apps to the memory card, and have a 64gb quad core tablet at half price of a 64gb iPad.
  • Volfan254 - Monday, April 09, 2012 - link

    Strike 1: Apple refuses to add an expansion slot
    Strike 2: Apple refuses to add USB or any other port
    Strike 3: It's Apple

    You're out.
  • hamids9898 - Wednesday, April 18, 2012 - link

    why not? even if your a fan of IOS your getting so much more for 50 bones

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now