[ZX9]

Why don't we have top-of-the-line WP hardware available for $350 unlocked like the Nexus 5? Why are RT devices starting at $450 instead of $200 like the Nexus 7? Licensing fees. I know it's a traditional part of the MS scheme, but it's time to back down or get pushed out. Market share in the growing tablet industry is being surrendered, and WP's growth will be forever limited (IN THE US) if they cannot offer competitive, quality hardware--or any hardware--for the prices that Google's Nexus brand puts out. Nokia's strategy relies on eating into the cheaper-hardware territory, which right now on the shelves is dominated in the US by Nexus. The 520 has done well, but we don't have any higher-end hardware offerings that aren't heavily inflated in unlocked price by putting carriers first (ahem AT&T). There may be more reasons, but licensing fees seems to be the one preventing OEMs from branching out
(It may help if Nokia hardware gets fully integrated into MS.)
Just food for thought.

[Maaz Mansori]

Your post seems to infer that the primary price difference is licensing fees. This is completely inaccurate. First off, the Nexus 7 cannot be compared to a Surface 2. A Surface 2 (Microsoft's own product) isn't subject to license fees, but more importantly they aren't even the same size. A comparable Google tablet, the Nexus 10, starts at $399. Secondly, there are devices from other manufacturers running full Windows 8.1 that are less expensive than that.
Licensing fees vary but I'm sure RT licenses aren't that much compared to full Windows 8.1 and Android licenses aren't completely free either.
However, I do agree that small 7 inch RT devices in the $200-$300 range should be available.

[Microsoftjunkie]

Cost difference also comes from its build quality and I know for sure Surface devices are built way better than any Nexus.

[mv740]

350$ for top phone.... Google is selling it at loss and they arent shipping them by million each day lol that why you can buy them direct from then, limited stock, or for 700$ with your cellphone provider ( that's what happened with nexus 4 last year)

[Dos101]

I wouldn't consider a Nexus device to be the top of the line though. Sure it has a modern smartphone CPU and a good amount of RAM, but build quality isn't the greatest, and it has a poor camera compared to other high-end phones. For the price it's pretty good, but these days most people are putting ecosystem at the top of their list when choosing a phone, so to say Microsoft needs a Nexus-like device is drastically overstating things.

[ag1986]

It's not top of the line but cannot be beaten in terms of value for money (400 off-contract is a steal).

[Doctor Pork]

You do realize that the Android OEMs price their phones and tablets the same and they don't pay licensing fees for Android... Nor do they make significant profits with the exception of Samsung. It's just Google that can price it this way because they have endless amount of ad money to burn. Matching google means the end for independent OEMs with the possible exception of Apple.

[Doctor Pork]

It's not top of the line but cannot be beaten in terms of value for money (400 off-contract is a steal).

Meanwhile here in Sweden, the nexus 5 will launch at 4500 sek while the Lumia 920 is sold for 2500 at the moment. If you want to compare to US prices, to divide by ten is usually fairly accurate as we also have to pay vat and have higher prices in general for electronics in Europe. The nexus is sold by LG and not subsidized by Google.

The realistic way to compete with prices is to sell older handsets cheaper, to launch at nexus prices would destroy long term profitability by setting an expectation for low prices.

[ntice_521]

Dell is selling an x86 android tablet for $180, while the cheapest win8 tablet is $300. I guess the cost of win8 is most of the difference. Maybe RT is cheaper, but who wants RT?

I don't understand phone pricing. Somehow consumers have been brainwashed into paying high prices for phones. Tablets are much more competitive.

[hilleer]

Dell is selling an x86 android tablet for $180, while the cheapest win8 tablet is $300. I guess the cost of win8 is most of the difference. Maybe RT is cheaper, but who wants RT?

I don't understand phone pricing. Somehow consumers have been brainwashed into paying high prices for phones. Tablets are much more competitive.

who wants RT? did you even think about your statement before posting? I mean.... Android is NO WHERE close to full windows, obviously higher cost should Be pretty common, however android and rt is about same match - like Ios and an ipad..

[pseudoware]

I don't understand phone pricing. Somehow consumers have been brainwashed into paying high prices for phones. Tablets are much more competitive.

Over time, I think more consumers will become more aware of prepaid/off-contract options and the cost benefits.

I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft came out with a low-cost, subsidized, low to mid range phone at some point.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Doctor Pork]

Dell is selling an x86 android tablet for $180, while the cheapest win8 tablet is $300. I guess the cost of win8 is most of the difference. Maybe RT is cheaper, but who wants RT?

I don't understand phone pricing. Somehow consumers have been brainwashed into paying high prices for phones. Tablets are much more competitive.

If we campare the 8 inch Android tablet Dell is selling with the 8 inch Dell Venue Pro which runs Windows 8:

1. The Android tablet has 16 GB of storage versus 32 GB for the Windows version .
2. The SoC in the android tablet is a last generation Clover trail plus and not the significantly faster Bay trail processor in the Venue pro.
3. The RAM might be 2GB in both the tablets, but the windows version uses much faster DDR3 RAM vs DDR2 for the android version.
4. The licensing is obviously a bit more expensive for Windows as you get both full WIndows 8.1 and bundled free office.
5. The Venue pro mentions dual band WiFi and most likely then uses a faster WiFi chip.

Cheap android tablets are cheap for a reason, and there is no need to compete with the bottom of the barrel Chinese android tablets who most likely do not pay Microsoft for their patent infringements either. If someone wants to get that low, well, it is the android brand that is taking the hit... Even if the specifications might seem similar, there might be significant differences in price and performance between the cheapest storage available and a more expensive one. Guess which one the budget OEMs choose? Besides, can anyone do this with an android tablet?