Review of iPad pricing

NEW YORK: The new iPad model comes with several improvements over the original version but the same price tag - hobbling efforts by rivals at breaking Apple Inc's hold on the emerging market for Tablet computers.

Competitors such as Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc can't seem to match the iPad's starting price of US$499. Tablets that are comparable to the iPad in features cost hundreds of dollars more, while cheaper Tablets are inferior to the iPad in quality.

This is highly unusual in the gadget business, where early products, such as the first Blu-ray players or digital cameras, are expensive. Competition then gradually brings prices down. With the iPad, the reverse is happening.

It looks as if this is a result of Apple's strategy. The company appears to have chosen, right from the start, to make less of a profit from its iPads than it does from iPods and iPhones. The move is particularly odd for a company that isn't known for cheap products.

Apple's profit margin on the US$499 entry-level iPad model is about 25%, according to an estimate by Toni Sacconaghi at Bernstein Research.

By contrast, the company's profit margin for all products, before corporate overhead, was 38.5% in the most recent quarter. He and other analysts estimate the margin for the iPhone 4 is 50% to 60%. (Apple charges about US$600 or RM1,900) for it, though it's cheaper in stores because wireless carriers subsidise it.)

Apple is telling investors to expect overall margins to keep declining, meaning competitors can't expect much of a reprieve.

Misses

There are cheaper Tablet computers available, but they don't perform as well. They have poor screens, poor touch sensitivity and poor software, and they are slow.

For example, Archos sells a Tablet that's roughly iPad-sized for US$370. Reviewers at CNET and Laptop Magazine say its screen washes out unless you're right in front of it, and it has problems sensing touch.

A Tablet that can match the iPad 2 in quality and features costs much more. For example, Motorola's Xoom sells for US$800, or US$600 if the buyer agrees to a two-year data service contract with Verizon Wireless.

The iPad 2 with the same amount of memory - 32 gigabytes - and cellular data capability on AT&T's or Verizon's network costs US$729, no contract required.

The Galaxy Tab from Samsung Electronics Co is half the size of the iPad, yet costs US$500. And that price is only available if the buyer pays an activation fee and signs up for at least one month of data service from Verizon, at a minimum total cost of US$55.

The Tablet can be had for as little as US$300, but that requires two years of data service, or hundreds of dollars in fees.

Some 100 different models of Tablet computers have already gone on sale or are on the way. Gartner Inc project that 65 million tablets will be sold worldwide this year, and analysts expect the bulk of them will be iPads.

Apple sold 15 million of the original iPad in its first nine months on sale. Research firm IDC says three-quarters of all Tablets sold in the last three months of 2010 were iPads.

Hurt coming?

J.P. Morgan analyst Mark Moskowitz believes there's a "bubble" building in Tablets, with supply potentially outstripping demand by 36% this year.

That could put additional pressure on Tablet prices, though Moskowitz believes manufacturers will be hurt less than suppliers of components, which are able to command higher prices now because Tablet makers are eager to secure displays and other parts.

Samsung, Motorola and other Tablet makers will have to rely on other products they have to cushion the blow.

Analysts say Apple has a couple of advantages that let it sell an iPad profitably at a price that would put another manufacturer at break-even, or at a loss.

Apple sells about a third of iPads in its own stores and from its website. By cutting out the middleman, Apple is able to keep more of the slim profit margin for itself.

Also, the iPad uses many of the same chips as iPhone and iPods. That means Apple is able to buy them in huge quantities, bringing down costs.

Wayne Lam at research firm IHS iSuppli estimates that Apple alone buys 20% to 25% of the world's production of Flash memory chips, which go into phones, iPods, memory cards and the iPad.

Lam also speculates that Apple is using its clout and its cash to ensure supplies of another crucial component: Touchscreen displays, which make up a large share of the Tablet's cost.

Wiley move

Apple said in January that it had spent US$3.9bil on long-term contracts to secure supplies for the next two years of a "very strategic" component it wouldn't name.

If Apple is indeed tying up a lot of the production capacity, competitors could have difficulties getting screens at a reasonable price.

Apple did not return messages to comment on that or its overall pricing strategy. Motorola had no comment.

Apple also designs its own processing chips to run iPad and the iPhone, based on blueprints it licenses from ARM Holdings Inc. For the Xoom, Motorola buys its main processing chip from nVidia Corp, meaning there's one more vendor to pay.

One other factor is the software powering the Tablet. The Xoom and other rivals generally use Google Inc's Android system, which Lam says demands more memory, raising the cost of the product.

Apple's iPad software isn't as ambitious about "multitasking," or the ability to run more than one application at the same time, so it doesn't need as much memory.

In short, using Android forces iPad competitors to produce more expensive machines, Lam said. They might be able to bring component costs down by working closely with Google to optimise the software, but meeting the needs of a range of devices and companies is difficult.

Because Apple controls its own software, it's a better position to tailor it to its own devices.

That adds up to very difficult math for competitors. - AP

Review of iPad pricing

NEW YORK: The new iPad model comes with several improvements over the original version but the same price tag - hobbling efforts by rivals at breaking Apple Inc's hold on the emerging market for Tablet computers.

Competitors such as Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc can't seem to match the iPad's starting price of US$499. Tablets that are comparable to the iPad in features cost hundreds of dollars more, while cheaper Tablets are inferior to the iPad in quality.

This is highly unusual in the gadget business, where early products, such as the first Blu-ray players or digital cameras, are expensive. Competition then gradually brings prices down. With the iPad, the reverse is happening.

It looks as if this is a result of Apple's strategy. The company appears to have chosen, right from the start, to make less of a profit from its iPads than it does from iPods and iPhones. The move is particularly odd for a company that isn't known for cheap products.

Apple's profit margin on the US$499 entry-level iPad model is about 25%, according to an estimate by Toni Sacconaghi at Bernstein Research.

By contrast, the company's profit margin for all products, before corporate overhead, was 38.5% in the most recent quarter. He and other analysts estimate the margin for the iPhone 4 is 50% to 60%. (Apple charges about US$600 or RM1,900) for it, though it's cheaper in stores because wireless carriers subsidise it.)

Apple is telling investors to expect overall margins to keep declining, meaning competitors can't expect much of a reprieve.

Misses

There are cheaper Tablet computers available, but they don't perform as well. They have poor screens, poor touch sensitivity and poor software, and they are slow.

For example, Archos sells a Tablet that's roughly iPad-sized for US$370. Reviewers at CNET and Laptop Magazine say its screen washes out unless you're right in front of it, and it has problems sensing touch.

A Tablet that can match the iPad 2 in quality and features costs much more. For example, Motorola's Xoom sells for US$800, or US$600 if the buyer agrees to a two-year data service contract with Verizon Wireless.

The iPad 2 with the same amount of memory - 32 gigabytes - and cellular data capability on AT&T's or Verizon's network costs US$729, no contract required.

The Galaxy Tab from Samsung Electronics Co is half the size of the iPad, yet costs US$500. And that price is only available if the buyer pays an activation fee and signs up for at least one month of data service from Verizon, at a minimum total cost of US$55.

The Tablet can be had for as little as US$300, but that requires two years of data service, or hundreds of dollars in fees.

Some 100 different models of Tablet computers have already gone on sale or are on the way. Gartner Inc project that 65 million tablets will be sold worldwide this year, and analysts expect the bulk of them will be iPads.

Apple sold 15 million of the original iPad in its first nine months on sale. Research firm IDC says three-quarters of all Tablets sold in the last three months of 2010 were iPads.

Hurt coming?

J.P. Morgan analyst Mark Moskowitz believes there's a "bubble" building in Tablets, with supply potentially outstripping demand by 36% this year.

That could put additional pressure on Tablet prices, though Moskowitz believes manufacturers will be hurt less than suppliers of components, which are able to command higher prices now because Tablet makers are eager to secure displays and other parts.

Samsung, Motorola and other Tablet makers will have to rely on other products they have to cushion the blow.

Analysts say Apple has a couple of advantages that let it sell an iPad profitably at a price that would put another manufacturer at break-even, or at a loss.

Apple sells about a third of iPads in its own stores and from its website. By cutting out the middleman, Apple is able to keep more of the slim profit margin for itself.

Also, the iPad uses many of the same chips as iPhone and iPods. That means Apple is able to buy them in huge quantities, bringing down costs.

Wayne Lam at research firm IHS iSuppli estimates that Apple alone buys 20% to 25% of the world's production of Flash memory chips, which go into phones, iPods, memory cards and the iPad.

Lam also speculates that Apple is using its clout and its cash to ensure supplies of another crucial component: Touchscreen displays, which make up a large share of the Tablet's cost.

Wiley move

Apple said in January that it had spent US$3.9bil on long-term contracts to secure supplies for the next two years of a "very strategic" component it wouldn't name.

If Apple is indeed tying up a lot of the production capacity, competitors could have difficulties getting screens at a reasonable price.

Apple did not return messages to comment on that or its overall pricing strategy. Motorola had no comment.

Apple also designs its own processing chips to run iPad and the iPhone, based on blueprints it licenses from ARM Holdings Inc. For the Xoom, Motorola buys its main processing chip from nVidia Corp, meaning there's one more vendor to pay.

One other factor is the software powering the Tablet. The Xoom and other rivals generally use Google Inc's Android system, which Lam says demands more memory, raising the cost of the product.

Apple's iPad software isn't as ambitious about "multitasking," or the ability to run more than one application at the same time, so it doesn't need as much memory.

In short, using Android forces iPad competitors to produce more expensive machines, Lam said. They might be able to bring component costs down by working closely with Google to optimise the software, but meeting the needs of a range of devices and companies is difficult.

Because Apple controls its own software, it's a better position to tailor it to its own devices.

That adds up to very difficult math for competitors. - AP

Review of iPad pricing

NEW YORK: The new iPad model comes with several improvements over the original version but the same price tag - hobbling efforts by rivals at breaking Apple Inc's hold on the emerging market for Tablet computers.

Competitors such as Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc can't seem to match the iPad's starting price of US$499. Tablets that are comparable to the iPad in features cost hundreds of dollars more, while cheaper Tablets are inferior to the iPad in quality.

This is highly unusual in the gadget business, where early products, such as the first Blu-ray players or digital cameras, are expensive. Competition then gradually brings prices down. With the iPad, the reverse is happening.

It looks as if this is a result of Apple's strategy. The company appears to have chosen, right from the start, to make less of a profit from its iPads than it does from iPods and iPhones. The move is particularly odd for a company that isn't known for cheap products.

Apple's profit margin on the US$499 entry-level iPad model is about 25%, according to an estimate by Toni Sacconaghi at Bernstein Research.

By contrast, the company's profit margin for all products, before corporate overhead, was 38.5% in the most recent quarter. He and other analysts estimate the margin for the iPhone 4 is 50% to 60%. (Apple charges about US$600 or RM1,900) for it, though it's cheaper in stores because wireless carriers subsidise it.)

Apple is telling investors to expect overall margins to keep declining, meaning competitors can't expect much of a reprieve.

Misses

There are cheaper Tablet computers available, but they don't perform as well. They have poor screens, poor touch sensitivity and poor software, and they are slow.

For example, Archos sells a Tablet that's roughly iPad-sized for US$370. Reviewers at CNET and Laptop Magazine say its screen washes out unless you're right in front of it, and it has problems sensing touch.

A Tablet that can match the iPad 2 in quality and features costs much more. For example, Motorola's Xoom sells for US$800, or US$600 if the buyer agrees to a two-year data service contract with Verizon Wireless.

The iPad 2 with the same amount of memory - 32 gigabytes - and cellular data capability on AT&T's or Verizon's network costs US$729, no contract required.

The Galaxy Tab from Samsung Electronics Co is half the size of the iPad, yet costs US$500. And that price is only available if the buyer pays an activation fee and signs up for at least one month of data service from Verizon, at a minimum total cost of US$55.

The Tablet can be had for as little as US$300, but that requires two years of data service, or hundreds of dollars in fees.

Some 100 different models of Tablet computers have already gone on sale or are on the way. Gartner Inc project that 65 million tablets will be sold worldwide this year, and analysts expect the bulk of them will be iPads.

Apple sold 15 million of the original iPad in its first nine months on sale. Research firm IDC says three-quarters of all Tablets sold in the last three months of 2010 were iPads.

Hurt coming?

J.P. Morgan analyst Mark Moskowitz believes there's a "bubble" building in Tablets, with supply potentially outstripping demand by 36% this year.

That could put additional pressure on Tablet prices, though Moskowitz believes manufacturers will be hurt less than suppliers of components, which are able to command higher prices now because Tablet makers are eager to secure displays and other parts.

Samsung, Motorola and other Tablet makers will have to rely on other products they have to cushion the blow.

Analysts say Apple has a couple of advantages that let it sell an iPad profitably at a price that would put another manufacturer at break-even, or at a loss.

Apple sells about a third of iPads in its own stores and from its website. By cutting out the middleman, Apple is able to keep more of the slim profit margin for itself.

Also, the iPad uses many of the same chips as iPhone and iPods. That means Apple is able to buy them in huge quantities, bringing down costs.

Wayne Lam at research firm IHS iSuppli estimates that Apple alone buys 20% to 25% of the world's production of Flash memory chips, which go into phones, iPods, memory cards and the iPad.

Lam also speculates that Apple is using its clout and its cash to ensure supplies of another crucial component: Touchscreen displays, which make up a large share of the Tablet's cost.

Wiley move

Apple said in January that it had spent US$3.9bil on long-term contracts to secure supplies for the next two years of a "very strategic" component it wouldn't name.

If Apple is indeed tying up a lot of the production capacity, competitors could have difficulties getting screens at a reasonable price.

Apple did not return messages to comment on that or its overall pricing strategy. Motorola had no comment.

Apple also designs its own processing chips to run iPad and the iPhone, based on blueprints it licenses from ARM Holdings Inc. For the Xoom, Motorola buys its main processing chip from nVidia Corp, meaning there's one more vendor to pay.

One other factor is the software powering the Tablet. The Xoom and other rivals generally use Google Inc's Android system, which Lam says demands more memory, raising the cost of the product.

Apple's iPad software isn't as ambitious about "multitasking," or the ability to run more than one application at the same time, so it doesn't need as much memory.

In short, using Android forces iPad competitors to produce more expensive machines, Lam said. They might be able to bring component costs down by working closely with Google to optimise the software, but meeting the needs of a range of devices and companies is difficult.

Because Apple controls its own software, it's a better position to tailor it to its own devices.

That adds up to very difficult math for competitors. - AP

Intel to pay RM5bil to nVidia in patent settlement

SAN FRANCISCO: Intel Corp is paying US$1.5bil (RM5bil) to end a fight it started with nVidia Corp over a key computer technology.

The legal battle centered on nVidia's ability to make "chipsets" that are compatible with Intel's latest processors - a fight that has implications for many of the world's computer users, since Intel and nVidia chips are ubiquitous.

nVidia is a top maker of graphics chips. Intel is the leader in microprocessors, the "brains" of personal computers. Both companies also made chipsets, which are used to help both types of chips talk to each other, among other jobs.

Intel sued nVidia in February 2009, alleging that nVidia would need to pony up for a new licence to make chipsets that are compatible with Intel's latest processors. nVidia countersued, arguing that a licence it has had in place since 2004 is sufficient.

Both sides had a lot at stake. Intel needed the patent deal for access to nVidia's graphics technologies. nVidia needed it because without the ability to talk to Intel's processors, nVidia's chipset business would be essentially dead. Indeed, nVidia announced in October 2009 that it was exiting the chipset business.
Intel will pay nVidia the US$1.5bil in licensing fees over the next five years as part of the deal announced yesterday.


The reason Intel finds itself in the unlikely position of paying nVidia is that Intel gets a licence to nVidia's entire patent library out of the deal, while nVidia gets a licence to some of Intel's patents, but not those covering Intel's primary products - particularly microprocessors and chipsets based on the so-called x86 design.

The settlement comes as the companies are adjusting to their changing roles in the semiconductor industry, as smartphones and Tablets force chipmakers to design smaller and more energy efficient chips, and the explosion of high-definition content online has placed an increased premium on high-quality graphics.

Intel's general counsel, Doug Melamed, said the settlement "preserves patent peace and provides protections that allow for continued freedom in product design."

nVidia's CEO, Jen-Hsun Huang, said the "agreement signals a new era for nVidia" and "reflects the substantial value of our visual and parallel computing technologies."

Parallel computing is the equivalent of multitasking - making computers process different types of data at once, an approach that's critical for rendering graphics.

nVidia's Huang added that the agreement "underscores the importance of our inventions to the future of personal computing, as well as the expanding markets for mobile and cloud computing."

Intel, dominant in PCs, is facing the rise of smartphones and Tablets that use lower-power chip designs than the one Intel uses. nVidia, whose graphics chips have largely been popular with gamers, is trying to boost its profile with mainstream computer users as more people stream high-definition Internet video through their computers, which is taxing for chips that aren't specifically designed for it.

Those pressures have put Intel and nVidia more in competition with each other. Intel has been trying to not only reduce the power consumption of its chips to get into the new types of mobile devices but also to improve its chips graphical performance - with the aim of wooing business from nVidia.

Meanwhile, nVidia has been hammering Intel publicly, arguing that graphics chips that can do general-purpose processing as well are the future. nVidia has also announced plans to build its own general-purpose processors based on the lower-power standard.

Intel also had to pay for another recent settlement with a rival. In 2009 Intel agreed to pay its primary rival in microprocessors, AMD Inc, US$1.25bil (RM4bil) to settle AMD's antitrust allegations. - AP

Intel to pay RM5bil to nVidia in patent settlement

SAN FRANCISCO: Intel Corp is paying US$1.5bil (RM5bil) to end a fight it started with nVidia Corp over a key computer technology.

The legal battle centered on nVidia's ability to make "chipsets" that are compatible with Intel's latest processors - a fight that has implications for many of the world's computer users, since Intel and nVidia chips are ubiquitous.

nVidia is a top maker of graphics chips. Intel is the leader in microprocessors, the "brains" of personal computers. Both companies also made chipsets, which are used to help both types of chips talk to each other, among other jobs.

Intel sued nVidia in February 2009, alleging that nVidia would need to pony up for a new licence to make chipsets that are compatible with Intel's latest processors. nVidia countersued, arguing that a licence it has had in place since 2004 is sufficient.

Both sides had a lot at stake. Intel needed the patent deal for access to nVidia's graphics technologies. nVidia needed it because without the ability to talk to Intel's processors, nVidia's chipset business would be essentially dead. Indeed, nVidia announced in October 2009 that it was exiting the chipset business.
Intel will pay nVidia the US$1.5bil in licensing fees over the next five years as part of the deal announced yesterday.


The reason Intel finds itself in the unlikely position of paying nVidia is that Intel gets a licence to nVidia's entire patent library out of the deal, while nVidia gets a licence to some of Intel's patents, but not those covering Intel's primary products - particularly microprocessors and chipsets based on the so-called x86 design.

The settlement comes as the companies are adjusting to their changing roles in the semiconductor industry, as smartphones and Tablets force chipmakers to design smaller and more energy efficient chips, and the explosion of high-definition content online has placed an increased premium on high-quality graphics.

Intel's general counsel, Doug Melamed, said the settlement "preserves patent peace and provides protections that allow for continued freedom in product design."

nVidia's CEO, Jen-Hsun Huang, said the "agreement signals a new era for nVidia" and "reflects the substantial value of our visual and parallel computing technologies."

Parallel computing is the equivalent of multitasking - making computers process different types of data at once, an approach that's critical for rendering graphics.

nVidia's Huang added that the agreement "underscores the importance of our inventions to the future of personal computing, as well as the expanding markets for mobile and cloud computing."

Intel, dominant in PCs, is facing the rise of smartphones and Tablets that use lower-power chip designs than the one Intel uses. nVidia, whose graphics chips have largely been popular with gamers, is trying to boost its profile with mainstream computer users as more people stream high-definition Internet video through their computers, which is taxing for chips that aren't specifically designed for it.

Those pressures have put Intel and nVidia more in competition with each other. Intel has been trying to not only reduce the power consumption of its chips to get into the new types of mobile devices but also to improve its chips graphical performance - with the aim of wooing business from nVidia.

Meanwhile, nVidia has been hammering Intel publicly, arguing that graphics chips that can do general-purpose processing as well are the future. nVidia has also announced plans to build its own general-purpose processors based on the lower-power standard.

Intel also had to pay for another recent settlement with a rival. In 2009 Intel agreed to pay its primary rival in microprocessors, AMD Inc, US$1.25bil (RM4bil) to settle AMD's antitrust allegations. - AP

Intel to pay RM5bil to nVidia in patent settlement

SAN FRANCISCO: Intel Corp is paying US$1.5bil (RM5bil) to end a fight it started with nVidia Corp over a key computer technology.

The legal battle centered on nVidia's ability to make "chipsets" that are compatible with Intel's latest processors - a fight that has implications for many of the world's computer users, since Intel and nVidia chips are ubiquitous.

nVidia is a top maker of graphics chips. Intel is the leader in microprocessors, the "brains" of personal computers. Both companies also made chipsets, which are used to help both types of chips talk to each other, among other jobs.

Intel sued nVidia in February 2009, alleging that nVidia would need to pony up for a new licence to make chipsets that are compatible with Intel's latest processors. nVidia countersued, arguing that a licence it has had in place since 2004 is sufficient.

Both sides had a lot at stake. Intel needed the patent deal for access to nVidia's graphics technologies. nVidia needed it because without the ability to talk to Intel's processors, nVidia's chipset business would be essentially dead. Indeed, nVidia announced in October 2009 that it was exiting the chipset business.
Intel will pay nVidia the US$1.5bil in licensing fees over the next five years as part of the deal announced yesterday.


The reason Intel finds itself in the unlikely position of paying nVidia is that Intel gets a licence to nVidia's entire patent library out of the deal, while nVidia gets a licence to some of Intel's patents, but not those covering Intel's primary products - particularly microprocessors and chipsets based on the so-called x86 design.

The settlement comes as the companies are adjusting to their changing roles in the semiconductor industry, as smartphones and Tablets force chipmakers to design smaller and more energy efficient chips, and the explosion of high-definition content online has placed an increased premium on high-quality graphics.

Intel's general counsel, Doug Melamed, said the settlement "preserves patent peace and provides protections that allow for continued freedom in product design."

nVidia's CEO, Jen-Hsun Huang, said the "agreement signals a new era for nVidia" and "reflects the substantial value of our visual and parallel computing technologies."

Parallel computing is the equivalent of multitasking - making computers process different types of data at once, an approach that's critical for rendering graphics.

nVidia's Huang added that the agreement "underscores the importance of our inventions to the future of personal computing, as well as the expanding markets for mobile and cloud computing."

Intel, dominant in PCs, is facing the rise of smartphones and Tablets that use lower-power chip designs than the one Intel uses. nVidia, whose graphics chips have largely been popular with gamers, is trying to boost its profile with mainstream computer users as more people stream high-definition Internet video through their computers, which is taxing for chips that aren't specifically designed for it.

Those pressures have put Intel and nVidia more in competition with each other. Intel has been trying to not only reduce the power consumption of its chips to get into the new types of mobile devices but also to improve its chips graphical performance - with the aim of wooing business from nVidia.

Meanwhile, nVidia has been hammering Intel publicly, arguing that graphics chips that can do general-purpose processing as well are the future. nVidia has also announced plans to build its own general-purpose processors based on the lower-power standard.

Intel also had to pay for another recent settlement with a rival. In 2009 Intel agreed to pay its primary rival in microprocessors, AMD Inc, US$1.25bil (RM4bil) to settle AMD's antitrust allegations. - AP

Review: Foxconn Mini Tablet powered by Android and Nvidia

Somebody publish the prototype for the above Foxconn-manufactured, Tegra 2-powered Android prototype, and we’ll be honest — it was awfully sweet. There wasn’t much going on beyond some gaming action — we didn’t see it boot into standard Android — though it was running the 3D football title you see above at a pretty healthy clip (check out the video after the break). NVIDIA reps weren’t very keen on sharing info about the device, though we can tell you that it’s apparently got 1GB of RAM inside cuddled up to that 1GHz ARM Cortex 9 CPU, a front-facing camera, and the WSVGA screen measures 8.9-inches (it’s also a much wider aspect ratio than something like the iPad). We’re going to hold any judgment till we see this thing cooking with a full UI, but we’re not knocking it — get this in at the right price, and we’ll likely be first in line.

Review: Foxconn Mini Tablet powered by Android and Nvidia

Somebody publish the prototype for the above Foxconn-manufactured, Tegra 2-powered Android prototype, and we’ll be honest — it was awfully sweet. There wasn’t much going on beyond some gaming action — we didn’t see it boot into standard Android — though it was running the 3D football title you see above at a pretty healthy clip (check out the video after the break). NVIDIA reps weren’t very keen on sharing info about the device, though we can tell you that it’s apparently got 1GB of RAM inside cuddled up to that 1GHz ARM Cortex 9 CPU, a front-facing camera, and the WSVGA screen measures 8.9-inches (it’s also a much wider aspect ratio than something like the iPad). We’re going to hold any judgment till we see this thing cooking with a full UI, but we’re not knocking it — get this in at the right price, and we’ll likely be first in line.

Review: Foxconn Mini Tablet powered by Android and Nvidia

Somebody publish the prototype for the above Foxconn-manufactured, Tegra 2-powered Android prototype, and we’ll be honest — it was awfully sweet. There wasn’t much going on beyond some gaming action — we didn’t see it boot into standard Android — though it was running the 3D football title you see above at a pretty healthy clip (check out the video after the break). NVIDIA reps weren’t very keen on sharing info about the device, though we can tell you that it’s apparently got 1GB of RAM inside cuddled up to that 1GHz ARM Cortex 9 CPU, a front-facing camera, and the WSVGA screen measures 8.9-inches (it’s also a much wider aspect ratio than something like the iPad). We’re going to hold any judgment till we see this thing cooking with a full UI, but we’re not knocking it — get this in at the right price, and we’ll likely be first in line.

Windows 7 64-bit : Frequent hangs, lock-ups and freezes

Last time I decided to install Windows 7 64-bit enterprise edition on my machine ( HP DC 7800 c, dual core, 8Gb RAM, NVIDIA 285). I managed to copy and install all setting from my previous Vista 64 bit using easy migration tool in windows. Windows 7 detected all the hardware correctly even my bluetooth device that was not detected in windows vista. I install all my office and work related apps without a hitch.

However, after a while my windows 7 machine would occasionally freeze or lock-up and the only way to restore is to do a hard reset; pushing the on/off button on my machine. Looking around for assistance I turned to the internet for possible solution.

Among the key suspects were the NVidia driver and the power saving plan. I also suspected the setting in bios which enabled the hardware assisted virtualisation. so what I did was to install latest nvidia driver… well it didn’t help. So was changing the power saving options….. I even reset the setting I did in bios… all to no avail. It was frustrating to me.


Then, I got a new workstation from a project. It’s Dell workstation T5500, Intel Xeon Quad Core, 12 GB RAM, 2 TB HD and dual NVidia FX580 with 512Mb memory. I thought all is fine. It came with windows vista 64 bit. I let it run for a 2-3 days with out problem. Then I upgraded it to Windows 7, and it was fine for a couple of days. Then I install all the software that I need. It sure seems to em that everything was OK.

Unfortunately it wasn’t so. My new PC show the same strange behavior. It would randomly lock up and I had to do a hard reset. There wasn’t any particular reason. Sometimes it just stop when I was doing Word, at other times when I was browsing. Yet it also stop dead in the water even when I was not running any apps ( except those that run in the background). I was at lost.

So I tried all find the root cause. The event viewer does not offer much help. Nor does logging. and doing performance logging. I downloaded the new Nvidia driver.. still it hangs. I reset the power saving plan.. same result. I undo any settings in the bios by resetting to default factory setting… and still same problem occurs. Thinking that the CPU was heating up, I downloaded Core Temp to monitor its temperature. All the cores are functioning within normal parameter (.. refering to Lt. Cmdr Data in ST:TNG ). So what was the problem…..

Finally I read somewhere that some anti-virus program were causing strange behaviour in 64-bit OS. SO I uninstall AVG Free version (v. 9.0)… and my PC is working fine.. it has been 30 hours of operation without any hiccup….. Go Figure.

It seems to me that somehow AVG 32 bit causes my OS to stop responding. However, I also installed a 64bit windows 7 on my old HP pc, but without the Nvidia graphics board.. just using the onboard Intel Chip, and the PC does not display any symptom of freezes or lock-up.

So I guess that 9.0 free edition + NVIDIA Graphics + 64Bit WIndows 7 = frequent lock-up expected. Hopefully this is true. I shall see for the next week if my machine would still function normally. Any input from readers will be appreciated.

added: I have to conclude that my Av program is the cause for this misery since I have had no problem with my machine now, even when the system is running continuosly for 5 days. Right now I am testing my machine with Avast! pro (trial version).

Windows 7 64-bit : Frequent hangs, lock-ups and freezes

Last time I decided to install Windows 7 64-bit enterprise edition on my machine ( HP DC 7800 c, dual core, 8Gb RAM, NVIDIA 285). I managed to copy and install all setting from my previous Vista 64 bit using easy migration tool in windows. Windows 7 detected all the hardware correctly even my bluetooth device that was not detected in windows vista. I install all my office and work related apps without a hitch.

However, after a while my windows 7 machine would occasionally freeze or lock-up and the only way to restore is to do a hard reset; pushing the on/off button on my machine. Looking around for assistance I turned to the internet for possible solution.

Among the key suspects were the NVidia driver and the power saving plan. I also suspected the setting in bios which enabled the hardware assisted virtualisation. so what I did was to install latest nvidia driver… well it didn’t help. So was changing the power saving options….. I even reset the setting I did in bios… all to no avail. It was frustrating to me.


Then, I got a new workstation from a project. It’s Dell workstation T5500, Intel Xeon Quad Core, 12 GB RAM, 2 TB HD and dual NVidia FX580 with 512Mb memory. I thought all is fine. It came with windows vista 64 bit. I let it run for a 2-3 days with out problem. Then I upgraded it to Windows 7, and it was fine for a couple of days. Then I install all the software that I need. It sure seems to em that everything was OK.

Unfortunately it wasn’t so. My new PC show the same strange behavior. It would randomly lock up and I had to do a hard reset. There wasn’t any particular reason. Sometimes it just stop when I was doing Word, at other times when I was browsing. Yet it also stop dead in the water even when I was not running any apps ( except those that run in the background). I was at lost.

So I tried all find the root cause. The event viewer does not offer much help. Nor does logging. and doing performance logging. I downloaded the new Nvidia driver.. still it hangs. I reset the power saving plan.. same result. I undo any settings in the bios by resetting to default factory setting… and still same problem occurs. Thinking that the CPU was heating up, I downloaded Core Temp to monitor its temperature. All the cores are functioning within normal parameter (.. refering to Lt. Cmdr Data in ST:TNG ). So what was the problem…..

Finally I read somewhere that some anti-virus program were causing strange behaviour in 64-bit OS. SO I uninstall AVG Free version (v. 9.0)… and my PC is working fine.. it has been 30 hours of operation without any hiccup….. Go Figure.

It seems to me that somehow AVG 32 bit causes my OS to stop responding. However, I also installed a 64bit windows 7 on my old HP pc, but without the Nvidia graphics board.. just using the onboard Intel Chip, and the PC does not display any symptom of freezes or lock-up.

So I guess that 9.0 free edition + NVIDIA Graphics + 64Bit WIndows 7 = frequent lock-up expected. Hopefully this is true. I shall see for the next week if my machine would still function normally. Any input from readers will be appreciated.

added: I have to conclude that my Av program is the cause for this misery since I have had no problem with my machine now, even when the system is running continuosly for 5 days. Right now I am testing my machine with Avast! pro (trial version).

Windows 7 64-bit : Frequent hangs, lock-ups and freezes

Last time I decided to install Windows 7 64-bit enterprise edition on my machine ( HP DC 7800 c, dual core, 8Gb RAM, NVIDIA 285). I managed to copy and install all setting from my previous Vista 64 bit using easy migration tool in windows. Windows 7 detected all the hardware correctly even my bluetooth device that was not detected in windows vista. I install all my office and work related apps without a hitch.

However, after a while my windows 7 machine would occasionally freeze or lock-up and the only way to restore is to do a hard reset; pushing the on/off button on my machine. Looking around for assistance I turned to the internet for possible solution.

Among the key suspects were the NVidia driver and the power saving plan. I also suspected the setting in bios which enabled the hardware assisted virtualisation. so what I did was to install latest nvidia driver… well it didn’t help. So was changing the power saving options….. I even reset the setting I did in bios… all to no avail. It was frustrating to me.


Then, I got a new workstation from a project. It’s Dell workstation T5500, Intel Xeon Quad Core, 12 GB RAM, 2 TB HD and dual NVidia FX580 with 512Mb memory. I thought all is fine. It came with windows vista 64 bit. I let it run for a 2-3 days with out problem. Then I upgraded it to Windows 7, and it was fine for a couple of days. Then I install all the software that I need. It sure seems to em that everything was OK.

Unfortunately it wasn’t so. My new PC show the same strange behavior. It would randomly lock up and I had to do a hard reset. There wasn’t any particular reason. Sometimes it just stop when I was doing Word, at other times when I was browsing. Yet it also stop dead in the water even when I was not running any apps ( except those that run in the background). I was at lost.

So I tried all find the root cause. The event viewer does not offer much help. Nor does logging. and doing performance logging. I downloaded the new Nvidia driver.. still it hangs. I reset the power saving plan.. same result. I undo any settings in the bios by resetting to default factory setting… and still same problem occurs. Thinking that the CPU was heating up, I downloaded Core Temp to monitor its temperature. All the cores are functioning within normal parameter (.. refering to Lt. Cmdr Data in ST:TNG ). So what was the problem…..

Finally I read somewhere that some anti-virus program were causing strange behaviour in 64-bit OS. SO I uninstall AVG Free version (v. 9.0)… and my PC is working fine.. it has been 30 hours of operation without any hiccup….. Go Figure.

It seems to me that somehow AVG 32 bit causes my OS to stop responding. However, I also installed a 64bit windows 7 on my old HP pc, but without the Nvidia graphics board.. just using the onboard Intel Chip, and the PC does not display any symptom of freezes or lock-up.

So I guess that 9.0 free edition + NVIDIA Graphics + 64Bit WIndows 7 = frequent lock-up expected. Hopefully this is true. I shall see for the next week if my machine would still function normally. Any input from readers will be appreciated.

added: I have to conclude that my Av program is the cause for this misery since I have had no problem with my machine now, even when the system is running continuosly for 5 days. Right now I am testing my machine with Avast! pro (trial version).