The 16GB model is back in stock today at the [Google Canada] Play Store.
They also show the 8GB model as out-of-stock there.

I've ordered the 16GB one, to find out what all the fuss is about.

At least one person has external USB storage working with the Nexus 7 tablet now, using the StickMount app.

There's an app for that: Ultimate Rotation Control.

Here's an interesting tidbit from the Apple v. Samsung legal battles.

Profit margins on the iPad are 23% to 32% and profit margins on the iPhone are 49% to 58%.

That means that the cost of manufacturing a $500 iPad is $340 to $385, assuming Apple sells them all at retail price. (I imagine most are still sold directly and not through other channels, but I could be wrong. If I am, the manufacturing cost would be less.)

Costs of an iPhone are harder to figure, since they virtually all get sold through indirect channels and the final retail price is, almost certainly, below cost.

I saw another article today (but lost the link) that quoted Asus/Google saying the Nexus 7 was being sold at cost (no Google markup) from the Play Store.

So not below cost, but at cost. Makes sense.

I have to say that I picked one up last Thursday from the supermarket and I'm impressed.

We have an ipad so I thought that the 7 inch format would be crap, but its not. It feels a lot more ergonomic to me, I love the feel of the back of it and its nice to hold in one hand.

I'm impressed with android and its cemented the fact that my next phone will be the next nexus when that comes along.

I bought the 16gb and have zero regrets.

That same coverage seems to say that the marketing costs are not included in their break even aim. Andy Rubin said as much when interviewed.

And that is just for the Play store, presumably they have to make a loss on the ones in the retail channel. Unless somehow selling them on the Play store costs more than the retailers margin, which seems unlikely.

Well, I doubt the world's biggest advertising firm (Google) is much worried about marketing costs.

But yeah, somebody's losing a small amount of money on the ones being sold through "normal" retail channels. All part of building up a new product base, I guess.

If I remember correctly Google make more ad income from iOS users than from Android, so surely they'd be better off advertising iPhones and iPads than the Nexus

Sure. And twenty years ago Nokia made more money from tyres than mobile phones, so surely it made more sense for them to have stuck with that.

While Nokia is still huge (#2) in mobile phones today, they're no longer #1 or #2 for smartphones. Apple is #2 in that category. But there are now more Android handsets out there than iOS ones, and about a million new Android devices are activated daily. Hard to ignore that kind of growing market opportunity.

Cheers

I'll point out the one other flaw in the numbers I'm seeing. Most comparison for the iOS side aren't actually for iOS. it's just for the iPhone. Apple also sells (quite successfully) a non phone device called an iPod Touch which does almost everything the iPhone does. As far as development is concerned, they are nearly identical.

And then to round out the "devices" definition, add in the iPad. Development here is a little different if you want to make a quality app, but the same also applies on the Android side.

Though to muddy the waters, it all depends on what #1 means. The marketshare numbers might be fuzzy, but it's clear that iOS leads in profit for the manufacturer. Nokia's #2 spot for all phones doesn't seem to be helping them much these days, where Apple's #2 spot in smartphones is assisting them greatly. iOS still also leads strongly in revenue for developers.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

And now to muddy the market numbers even more, I'm buying a Nexus 7 to poke at. This will be my first pure Google Android experience. The Samsung Android experience I tried in the past was pretty bad, and pure Android also was kinda poor when it was running on my old iPhone and WebOS tablet.

The problem with the logic is that Nokia would have definitely been better off selling only tires rather than phones. As far as I know, the company they spun off, Nokian, actually MAKE money selling the tires. Incidentally they're the only winter tires I've used on my personal cars for the past 17 years.

I don't see the cross-over point on the horizon where Google will start making more from Android than it does from iOS. The development costs associated with Android are going to continue to eat a huge chunk of dollars, while the income from iOS comes pretty much for free - a few million paid to Apple for the privilege of being the default search engine.

Is that still true going forward? I thought Apple was busy dumping all Google services from their platform. But then I don't really pay much attention to these things.

Google remains the default search option in Safari 6 (just released this week), along with iOS 6 (in development). The only change of note here is that on iOS 6, the search box simply says "Search", instead of the provider (Google/Yahoo/Bing).

iOS 6 is moving away from using Google Maps, so that Apple can add navigation, vector based maps, and other features missing from the iOS platform. No confirmed reason has emerged for the change, and speculation is all over the place. From public statements in 2009, Google intended to bring the new features to the platform, but never did.

OS X and iOS continues to support GMail, contact and calendar syncing. YouTube video uploading is also still in a number of places in both OS X and iOS.

Can anyone confirm a bug in Android/Jellybean/Nexus 7?

I have a visited an internal IP address and was able to enter the address quite happily, the IP address is now in the history. (say 192.168.0.1)

Now I try to visit another internal address (say 192.168.0.2) - each time I press a digit, it highlights the "cached" entry and the numbers disappear from the keyboard and I have to re-enable numbers only for them to disappear again when I reach the next number. Kinda makes entering in internal ip addresses a pain in the ass.

Adrian

Still happens in Jellybean on the N7.

Doesn't happen on ICS on my SGS III but I do have Swiftkey installed. The old site is in the history and I can tap it or just type it in completely. Swiftkey stays on the number page. Changed back to the stock keyboard and it's ok too. Perhaps I'm doing it wrong?

I can't tap it and edit it though. If I tap it goes straight to the page. I can however edit it after that.

I'm not sure there is much you can do wrong, reproducing it on the N7 (with no swiftkey) is as easy as tapping in the URL box, switching to numbers and typing the first number of the address. It instantly switches back from numbers to letters.

Should point out that this in in Chrome. I've posted in the google chrome forum, or rather I've dug up a post from a couple of months back where somebody reported it but never followed up the response from the google bod.

I don't see that happening in the default Android Browser, either with or without Swiftkey enabled.

Maybe it's a Chrome bug?

Yup, tried it with Chrome, and I saw the annoying behaviour immediately. Now I remember one of the reasons I switched back to the Android web browser (from ICS).

Chrome does that stupid thing with both the Android keyboard app as well as with Swiftkey enabled. Ugh.

Google has postponed the release of the Nexus Q until such time as they can come up with a purpose for it and then write software and/or make hardware mods to cater to it.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/31/3207482/nexus-q-consumer-launch-delayed

Folks who have pre-ordered will get the current device, which Google is now calling a "preview device" for free - with no mention that whether it will be upgradeable to a final product down the road.

I wouldn't expect the Q any time in 2012. I wouldn't hold my breath for 2013 either, but who knows.

Bottom line: classy. They should teach this in business school.

The image at the article above shows a use that isn't ideal - too great a chance of slippage.

So what?

I don't get it. Where's your dog in this fight?

What fight? The product had/has no equals, except maybe a bowling ball - and you can use one of those to, you know, bowl with. We were discussing how the product didn't make any sense, was a solution to no problems and was just generally less than half-baked. Google's just come to realize the same thing - long after announcing it. If it weren't so pathetic, it would be hilarious. Who else does stupid stuff like this?

The Google fight. It's quite tiring.

Well, Google's not a hardware company, so I expected some missteps. I give them credit for listening to their customers. Apple tried to sell the iPod Hi-Fi for $350 when everyone knew it was more expensive, less capable, and frankly, uglier than third party units available at that time.

Of course it's bad PR to announce a product and then have to rework it before release, but it beats rushing a flop to market.

The thing is, a $50 price today still wouldn't help the Q. Mis-pricing something (and I don't think Apple did that with their speaker dock) is a far cry from engineering something that does.... Nothing.

What we've seen is a completely different way of doing business. When you have a nearly unlimited bankroll all the typical rules and cautions go out the window.

Giving it away certainly does sound a little bit like giving up on the current "product" (whether completely or just this version). It could just be their version of PR and making friends.

Bruno makes a living selling add-ons for Apple products.

I could just as easily do the same thing for Windows as well, but choose not to.