Maybe it can be killer with lower price…
I don’t think that “lower price” should be a point in this stage of development. First of all the device itself should be killer. If the price helps to sell it good later it’s nice. That’s a problem of consumer- development: Lots of people are slowing down the process by only proposing things they can afford later instead of “thinking big”…
It’s all about balance. Get too of a high price and you won’t sell anything. Get too low of a price and the quality/features won’t appeal to consumers. It’s quite tricky.
Price is always a factor. Economics trumps everything.
Agreed, thats why we didn’t go overboard on camera, but also why we didn’t skimp on display (and even managed to get an even-better display)
I just said that the price should not be the main thing at this stage of consumer- development. For sure in later steps the price will be important, but now the technical needs of the potential consumer are asked…
I’m not saying we can’t but it seems like we’re pretty divided on what DD should be. That’s why I like the modular route or at least something that provides the ability to plug in add ons of the users choice.
True, but it’s specifically the value that the buyer perceives from the combo of features/cost that drives a purchasing decision. Some people will stretch their wallet to get the features they want. Some people still stick to a budget and either not buy a more expensive item or just make do with a reduced set of features from something in their price range. As @fanoftech4life said, its tricky.
We either pick a price point and build to that or design what people really want and then look at cost and make adjustments as needed. I think the latter is a better approach in this case.
I agree that we’re very divided (which in this case is ok, everyone has different needs). I think because of this we need to be careful not to fall into the trap of making so many compromises that in trying to satisfy everyone, we end up with a product that no one is really happy with. We do need to have a good balance of features/cost, and DD should be unique, but we also need to have a clearly defined scope and target consumer/problem we’re solving.
Which is why deciding on the form factor is a good first decision to make. @Xinjie, are we ready for a poll? The duration in the OP was through Oct 30, which was three days ago
I think it mainly comes down to the fact that dock itself is an extremely loose term. We have dock proposals ranging from essentially a USB hub with a couple more port, to an entire eGPU box. Totally different kind of products.
Compared to the V development, we have decided from the beginning that it would be an ultraportable like a Surface Pro or MacBook Air. It was not going to be a “toy tablet” like the iPad or Galaxy Tab, and it was not going to be a DTR (Desktop Replacement) either. Meanwhile, we haven’t decided on this yet. Until then, we will get people imagining everything from a Galaxy Tab to an Alienware 17.
Totally agree here. We will have to choose, and accept that the community may decide against the product we need, and we will have to get it somewhere else. So, for me, the main question is:
What unique feature(s) could Dondald Duck give me that I won’t be able to find in the market?
That’s why, even if I would (and will) get a portable adapter for on the go, I won’t vote for it. I can choose among others.
As for middle-sized docks and eGPU, most features are also out there. The main hope here relies in the price…
and modularity could be a way of decreasing the price, but also of increasing it, depending on how we solve it.
Edit: Modularity could also be a “uniqueness factor” in itself, and still avoid compromises. Quite a challenge, though. It could make the resulting device cheaper than two separate devices, or even more expensive.
My point is: let’s create something we really couldn’t get somewhere else, price/form factor/feature wise.
I mean, there are two categories to compete in. 1st is the price of the product, and 2nd is the product itself (and everything else). V dock (just as an example) can compete strongly in one, or littlebit at both of them…
Some great ideas. As some have noted, a modular system may be the best bet for all of us. With one it could provide the needs of many. If you want to have a light weight on the go system you can build for that; if you want a near desktop replacement for some gaming you can build for that.
Ultimately, building a modular design for multiple build paths would be time consuming in designing and buildings, but this could be an incredible addition to this system. This will truly make it stand out.
I want an eGPU so that I can travel light, but not sacrifice performance when in the office. Pure and simple. That need is far too niche to expect Donald to meet.
I’m convinced of that now because the set of needs for an eGPU don’t overlap into the dock/port replicator venn diagram very much. If Eve wants in on the eGPU niche, I think they should do so with a different device that can work well with Donald (aka Donald connects to eGPU and eGPU connects to computer.)
Finally, I keep reading “modular” as “proprietary connector system(s)” … Wouldn’t that kill Eve’s desire to be universal? Wouldn’t it be more useful to provide a set of devices with standard interconnect technologies?
What we mean by modular is simply a set of modules that allow the dock to grow to meet the different needs of users. Proprietary connectors are not necessarily part of that. If the system connects to the V using USB-C, for example, then it could still be used with other devices. How the modules connect to the main dock would have to somewhat proprietary but an extra cable could be provided to use a module by itself with the V.
Just one quick question: what’s the setup of the new surface book i7? Isn’t it possible to build a eGPU for the V like the GPU in SB2 in a second V-like housing? It will be as transportable as a V is… And it will make the V i7 Windows Mixed Reality ready… and it will run most of the 3D programs and games like the SB2…!?
Surface Book 2 uses quad core processors, so Eve V is still far away from it in terms of CPU performance…
I asked about GPU performance… How did they managed to get a good GPU inside that tiny (for GPU purposes) case…
The 1060 could be a MaxQ model for all we know, which has lower TDP than the normal 1050 Ti, and also lower than the GTX 965M that was featured in the first generation SB.
It doesn’t even have to necessarily be a MaxQ per-se, they are allowed to limit the TDP to MaxQ-level without labeling it as MaxQ, as what Razer does to the Blade Pro 17"
I skimmed through this topic reading posts here and there.
This product would not something that would really attract my attention, unless it really has something unique to it.
The market offer plenty of docks allowing to expand connectivity in various ways. Some are more portable, some less.
With such big offer, a docking station would have a chance to stand out and make a market for itself only if it featured something really unique, while not sacrificing any of the features currently available on other, more standard, docks.
In my opinion, the only way to achieve such goal would be to offer a docking station composed of two parts:
- the first part representing the “minimum set of portable features” (various port types, possibly an embedded battery and so on). On these, I trust that the community will come up with something wonderful.
- the second part would have to be the “X factor”. To me it would be some more cumbersome case allowing to add a graphics card of your choice. This is the point that I want to stress about as I think makes the difference and gives the product a chance to win some market.
The idea is that, normally, you would carry around a dock like many others, with nothing particular to it except maybe the battery.
Once home, you would be able to connect the second case and turn your device in a desktop-class gaming machine.
I wouldn’t include a graphics card to keep the cost low: just the slot and case to host one of your choice. I would see myself spending the extra bit for the dock to get access to the feature and, later on, buy the graphics card I think would suit me best. On the other hand I wouldn’t see myself buying a super-expensive dock that includes the graphics card.
Of course the dock would have to be compatible with any Thunderbolt enabled laptop/tablet…
My two cents.
I was replying to this part. My answer is nope, because even if the GPU is the same, the CPU is much weaker.