Actually, there are better places than trying to differentiate on price.
Printing with the iPad is a prickly issue today. If HP were to even launch one printer that worked with the TouchPad, it would have been an opening salvo that Apple will have to scramble to catch up.
Secondly, cameras represent the last bastion of consumer goods that hasn't been computerized the way a music player has been computerized. HP could have licensed WebOS to camera manufacturers and build up a defense against further penetration from Apple. Nikon, Canon etc should be concerned that they have nothing if Apple decided to eat their lunch.
Huh? HP launched more than two dozen printers (or updated them) that work with the iPad. HP is, in fact, the only brand that has printers which work with the iPad. The TouchPad works more or less with the same printers, it doesn’t do any better than the iPad in that respect.
It doesn’t seem like the availability of printers makes a huge difference.
The camera idea is interesting. They also failed to attempt an iPod Touch competitor (though component prices could make that a non-starter). And there are at least two other arenas that remain insufficiently computerized: the living room, and the kitchen.
Put simply, HP had a tremendous opportunity, and they squandered it through lack of vision.
Looking at the quality of the HP TouchPad ads reminds me of the hilarous movie The Producers, where the show has to be a flop or it will financially destroy the movie makers. HP hired comedians to make fun of potential customers, like looking photos of buck-toothed relatives. Then there was the VP demonstrating the Touchpad without the camera getting a clear shot of how to operate it. Finally, shutting the show when it has barely started.
Printing is not the killer feature you think it is – especially for a device like a tablet (consumption oriented and in many cases a great replacement for paper).
It can! But only to specific HP printers (just like the TouchPad). Printing is one of those things that’s nice to have but ultimately not a (lone) deciding factor.
Currently all implementations suck if you don’t have one of the few supported HP printers†. Maybe a more encompassing solution would have helped the TouchPad (for example the ability to use any printer in the network) but I doubt that for such a feature alone TouchPads would have sold that much better.
Apple already had a feature implemented (in one of their betas) that allowed you to use printers connected to your Macs but they ditched it for some reason. Maybe technical reasons? Maybe politics? (Could they have a deal with HP?)
Having one (or even a few) HP printers that support the TouchPad – as you suggested – is demonstrably not good enough. The TouchPad flopped regardless.
—
† Android is a different story but as far as I can see not a very pleasant one.
Guys, it's called AirPrint and Apple advertises it quite visibly. It's one of the major features of iOS 4. You can see an extensive tout for it on Apple's website here
All of the printers that support AirPrint are made by HP. AirPrint is really just an adapter on top of HP's proprietary ePrint. I believe ePrint even lets you send documents to the printer over email from a computer or any other device.
Normally Cloud Print for Android (or any other device) works by running a print server which is bundled with the Chrome web browser on a Windows PC connected to a normal printer. Instead with ePrint the network print server exists on the printer itself so you can send documents to it directly.
Obviously, the HP TouchPad works with ePrint natively out of the box. So all of these mobile operating systems are designed to work with the same line of printers which are all made by HP.
Technically, Android can work with more printers assuming you want to rely on a Windows box to act as your print server.
Printing with the iPad is a prickly issue today. If HP were to even launch one printer that worked with the TouchPad, it would have been an opening salvo that Apple will have to scramble to catch up.
Secondly, cameras represent the last bastion of consumer goods that hasn't been computerized the way a music player has been computerized. HP could have licensed WebOS to camera manufacturers and build up a defense against further penetration from Apple. Nikon, Canon etc should be concerned that they have nothing if Apple decided to eat their lunch.