or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microsoft frets Google's Nexus One will suffer Zune's failure
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft frets Google's Nexus One will suffer Zune's failure

post #1 of 77
Thread Starter 
Microsoft announced to the press that Google will face a series of Zune-like problems with its Nexus One as it tries to balance its Android platform.

Speaking at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, Microsofts Robbie Bach, president of the company's Entertainment & Devices Division, told Bloomberg that he envisioned that Google's foray into directly selling and marking the phone could scare away other Android licensees.

Doing both in the way they are trying to do both is actually very, very difficult, Bach said. Googles announcement sends a signal where theyre going to place their commitment. That will create some opportunities for us and well pursue them.

Speaking from experience

Bach presided over Microsoft's own "PlaysForSure" Windows Media strategy for delivering a licensed software platform that hardware makers could use to build MP3 players, in competition with Apple's iPod. When that program failed to gain much traction, Microsoft took matters into its own hands by announcing a plan to deliver a Microsoft-branded Windows Media player under the Zune brand.

The company insisted that the Zune would only compete against Apple's iPod, leaving PlaysForSure licensees to continue their growth in parallel. However, as was obviously the case even at the time, the Zune only managed to kill off PlaysForSure devices and assume their small share of the overall MP3 market without making any progress into Apple's territory.

Bach recently told analysts who were critical of the company's foray into music players that it continues to feel it has a shot in the music business and that it views the market as critical to the company's overall strategy. However, he also admitted that given the chance to do things over, the company would have done things differently, although he didn't explain what he thought would have worked better.

Regardless of the path Microsoft had taken, its Windows Media platform appeared headed for disaster. Without the Zune, the company would be dealing with the same kinds of problems that it faces in smartphones, where it has (so far) avoided releasing its own branded phone in deference to its Windows Mobile licensees, primarily HTC.

But that alternative strategy hasn't stopped Microsoft's phone platform from quickly sliding into irrelevance in terms of actual sales, consumer mindshare nor in developer attention. Consumer products benefit from tight integration to a greater degree than PCs, where Microsoft has successfully ruled the roost as the world's dominant PC operating system provider.



Microsoft vs Google: don't follow our lead

Bach's warnings to Google aren't the first time a Microsoft executive has scoffed at its rival for doing the same thing it had done previously. Chief executive Steve Ballmer laughed off Google's Chrome OS initiative last summer, telling the crowd at the company's Worldwide Partner Conference, "I don't know if they can't make up their mind or what the problem is over there, but the last time I checked, you don't need two client operating systems [Android and Chrome OS]. It's good to have one."

Ballmer's comments were curious because his own company maintained two distinct PC operating systems throughout most of the 90s: the consumer Windows 95/98/ME based on DOS, and the completely separate Windows NT/2000 operating system it targeted at business users.

Additionally, the company launched the entirely new Windows CE operating system targeted at handheld devices and embedded apps in parallel to its desktop offerings. Even today, Microsoft still maintains two very different client operating systems in its primary offerings: Windows 7 for desktop PCs and the Windows CE-based Windows Mobile platform.

The company is also struggling to wean PC users and licensees from Windows XP to the latest Windows 7 release, so that the company can at least narrow down its primary support efforts to one PC client operating system. It's not there yet.

Microsoft vs Google: don't follow our lead

Google isn't managing its Android platform as strictly as Microsoft ran Windows, allowing its licensees to incorporate their own user interfaces and not forcing them to follow a strong reference design in terms of hardware. This may allow the company to escape from the same fate Microsoft faced with the Zune, and allow the company to successfully do what Microsoft hasn't yet dared: ship smartphones and PC devices that directly compete with its partners.

At the same time, Google's Nexus One has almost universally been described by tech observers as a "Droid killer" in reference to its one-upmanship of last season's flagship Android model. The company has tried to play off any threat by advertising the Droid as Verizon's alternative to Nexus One for users who prefer that carrier. However, it has also announced plans to bring its own branded model to Verizon in the near future.

Whether this will alienate Motorola as an Android partner just after the company focused all of its resources on Google's platform remains to be seen. Google has indicated that it may launch new Nexus One successors in partnership with other manufacturers.

The move may also intimidate the beleaguered Sony Ericsson, which has floundered from Windows Mobile to Symbian to Android looking for a sophisticated phone platform that could allow it to compete with the iPhone. Sony has indicated that it will pull out of its partnership with Ericsson if the group does not return to profitability, a move that would kill what is the third most significant Android licensee.

Meanwhile, LG has worked to keep one foot firmly planted in the Windows Mobile camp while talking about Android products, while Samsung has announced that it will launch its own Bada platform rather than focusing on Android. Even the maker of the Nexus One, HTC, has floated the plan to build BREW phones that it can sell for cheaper than its array of Android or Windows Mobile devices.

The more different competitors Apple faces in smartphones, the better it fares. One major reason why Apple lost its pioneering position in graphical desktop PCs to Microsoft in the 90s was related to the company's efforts to stamp out rivals in "look and feel" lawsuits during the late 80s that shut down windowing products from HP and GEM, leaving Microsoft free rein to consolidate a competitive-free monopoly juggernaut around its own Windows product.

In this decade, Apple has conspicuously refrained from attacking rivals on copyright or patent infringement issues in both the iPod and iPhone markets, outside of defensive measures it has taken against patent challenges from Creative and more recently Nokia. Competing in the market has historically worked out much more successfully for Apple than trying to compete in court.
post #2 of 77
The first graph is wrong. The smartphone column should be mostly open now that Symbian is open. At the very least it should be mostly licensed.
post #3 of 77
Quote: Microsoft vs Google: don't follow our lead

Best advice Microsoft can give to anyone.
post #4 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

At the same time, Google's Nexus One has almost universally been described by tech observers as a "Droid killer" in reference to its one-upmanship of last season's flagship Android model. The company has tried to play off any threat by advertising the Droid as Verizon's alternative to Nexus One for users who prefer that carrier. However, it has also announced plans to bring its own branded model to Verizon in the near future.

Whether this will alienate Motorola as an Android partner just after the company focused all of its resources on Google's platform remains to be seen.

One way of confirming the alienation would be for Motorola to make a bid for Palm.
post #5 of 77
Of course they would say this, Google is direct competition. They hit Google, Droid, and any Android variant.

They can use the losses in Zune to prop up Windows based phones. Great way to get their investment back.
post #6 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The company is also struggling to wean PC users and licensees from Windows XP to the latest Windows 7 release, so that the company can at least narrow down its primary support efforts to one PC client operating system. It's not there yet.

I was under the impression Microsoft issued a July 2010 cutoff for XP users for support. Personally Windows 7 blows XP out the water so those who choose not to upgrade (probably because they are running ancient PCs) are just stupid not to do so, and even netbooks can run Windows 7 without choking out.

If only MS made a Zune phone...but id settle just for Zune on mac to begin with.
post #7 of 77
AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA! HA!

Ahem...

Microsoft is quickly going down the path of irrelevancy.
post #8 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

The first graph is wrong. The smartphone column should be mostly open now that Symbian is open. At the very least it should be mostly licensed.

Depends on the point of view I guess. People do not really interact with Symbian, they interact with e.g. S60 (which is not open)... even the requirements for third party apps depend more on the GUI than on the underpinnings.

Another question (along these lines) would be, if Android and Windows Mobile devices using glued-on custom GUIs can really be considered "open" or "licensed" when the entire user experience is proprietary...

===

Other than that, it is just another attempt of MS trying to make predictions based on own inabilities. They have never worked out. All Google needs to do to limit negative effects of making an "own" (not really, it is a HTC phone) model, is to make sure that other parties get timely access to new versions of the OS. As the sources are available, this would allow them to compete fairly. MS making an own phone would always give them a huge lead (if they do it right), as they could implement functionality others have no access to (without going through lengthy, error-prone and expensive cycles of reverse engineering or paying extra for each interface to be licensed).

The fact remains: At this point Windows Mobile is not offering anything that puts it ahead of Android (and the distance to WebOS and iPhone OS is even bigger). Android is free, Windows Mobile is not. The cost of developing custom GUIs should be fairly similar - actually Android might even have a clear lead here, as creating custom GUIs for a system with available sources should be a lot easier than dealing with a closed system.
post #9 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by ifail View Post

If only MS made a Zune phone...but id settle just for Zune on mac to begin with.

Frankly, I'm not too sure that Zune on Windows is going to last much longer.

They stopped all Zune models except for the Zune HD and pulled that one back to the United States only. Unless Microsoft increased Zune marketshare during the holiday selling season, I'd wager that Zune is just about gone.
post #10 of 77
The Zune HD sucks. I went to BestBuy to look for it. First, they did not have a display unit for months. Then they finally got it and it had NO content on it. So you could see pretty animations for the menus but nothing much else. And that screen, while I guess it is nice on some level, it seemed really small. Is it even as big and the iPod Touch? Seemed smaller - so what is the point?

Then you go to look at an iPod touch, it is loaded with games, all sorts of cool stuff and an huge eco-system of stuff and apps. You have to be insane to think you'd get more out of owning a Zune.
post #11 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831 View Post

Frankly, I'm not too sure that Zune on Windows is going to last much longer.

They stopped all Zune models except for the Zune HD and pulled that one back to the United States only. Unless Microsoft increased Zune marketshare during the holiday selling season, I'd wager that Zune is just about gone.

The Zune HD isn't a bad product though, one of my friends is a die hard Apple fanboy, and she is in love with the Zune HD, and she has 2 iPod touches and an iPhone. It's got a great screen for movies and a slick interface, and she says it's much easier to use as an MP3 player than the iPod app for iPhone OS, She said if it had the Apps that are available for the iPhone, she'd choose it instead of an iPod Touch.
post #12 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterz1337 View Post

The Zune HD isn't a bad product though, ...

Agree, it is just too little too late. As MS has drawn a random line between the PMP and the phone development, it lacks too many things the iPod touch has out of the box (contacts, email, calendar, notes) and that do make sense, even on a WiFi-only device. It has a poor browser. And the entry price to their ecosystem is too high, as they have removed all lower price models from the line-up. They simply do not have the international coverage Apple has, and even where they try, it is completely unattractive (stupid obscure point based pricing that confuses potential buyers, pretty high prices - e.g. 720p movies are 70-90% more expensive in the Xbox marketplace when compared to iTunes)... not the way to attack the market leader.

On top of that: most growth in the MP3/PMP market is international now, the US has a much higher level of market saturation. Limiting a device to the most saturated market is a strategy only MS can come up with.
post #13 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

Quote: Microsoft vs Google: don't follow our lead

Best advice Microsoft can give to anyone.

This presents something of a conundrum: Given MS's recent business decisions and practices, "don't follow our lead" might seem sound advice. But since the source is MS itself, one would do well to consider doing the exact opposite....unless MS is getting it right this time.
post #14 of 77
well, Zune/MS bashing is fun, and Google's Android strategy is certainly an interesting topic. but still this AI article is pretty much a rehash of previous ones. the hot topics this day are instead the rumored delay of WinMo 7 until 2011, with the upcoming unveiling of WinMo 6.6(?) next month in its place. Come on, guys, take a whack!

http://www.techspot.com/news/37563-R...n-to-2011.html

http://windowsitpro.com/article/arti...ws-mobile.html
post #15 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Bach presided over Microsoft's own "PlaysForSure" Windows Media strategy for delivering a licensed software platform that hardware makers could use to build MP3 players, in competition with Apple's iPod. When that program failed to gain much traction, Microsoft similarly took matters into its own hands by announcing a plan to deliver a Microsoft-branded Windows Media player under the Zune brand.

If Microsoft truly believes that PlaysForSure's demise came as a result of the Zune, then Microsoft has much bigger problems!
post #16 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

well, Zune/MS bashing is fun, and Google's Android strategy is certainly an interesting topic. but still this AI article is pretty much a rehash of previous ones. the hot topics this day are instead the rumored delay of WinMo 7 until 2011, with the upcoming unveiling of WinMo 6.6(?) next month in its place. Come on, guys, take a whack!

http://www.techspot.com/news/37563-R...n-to-2011.html

http://windowsitpro.com/article/arti...ws-mobile.html

post #17 of 77
The Zune HD isn't bad at all, but lacks any cohesiveness with WinMob, thus again both platforms shooting itself in the foot. It's a good example though of how Microsoft does things, first try is an uttler embarrassment, 2nd try is much better but still behind, and third time is a charm.

And while 480x272 may be widescreen, it doesn't to much good when the device features web browsing. In that case give me 480x320.
post #18 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterz1337 View Post

The Zune HD isn't a bad product though, one of my friends is a die hard Apple fanboy, and she is in love with the Zune HD ...

Just to be picky ...

If she is in love with the Zune she would be a "fanboi" not a "fanboy."
post #19 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by iansilv View Post

AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA! HA!

Ahem...

Microsoft is quickly going down the path of irrelevancy.

Yes, that usually comes from owning 95% of desktop OS market...
post #20 of 77
some zune reviews (on amazon) are hilarious

I eventually did what I had dreamed of doing ... took the Zune on my kitchen floor and fixed my problem with a few blows of a hammer.



i wonder what users will do to their winmo 7 phones???
post #21 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterz1337 View Post

The Zune HD isn't a bad product though, one of my friends is a die hard Apple fanboy, and she is in love with the Zune HD, and she has 2 iPod touches and an iPhone. It's got a great screen for movies and a slick interface, and she says it's much easier to use as an MP3 player than the iPod app for iPhone OS, She said if it had the Apps that are available for the iPhone, she'd choose it instead of an iPod Touch.

I never understand when people say things like that. Perhaps you can go ask your friend what it is that makes the Zune HD "much easier to use" as an MP3 player than a Touch?

Cause it appears to me that on a Touch you tap the music app icon and go straight to a list of music, sortable by artist, album, or song, with options for playlists or the genius function. The album view use horizontal cover flow with album art.

On the Zune you tap "Music" in a text list and go to a music app that lets you sort by artist, album or song. The album view is a scrolling vertical list with album art.

I'm having trouble seeing how much easier either one could be.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #22 of 77
This isn't nearly the same thing...

Microsoft created a closed brand to compete with their licensed brand. Only a moron would stay with a company that would do something like that.

Google hasn't done this...they're just selling phones direct to customers. How does this alienate them from hardware manufacturers exactly?
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #23 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

This isn't nearly the same thing...

Microsoft created a closed brand to compete with their licensed brand. Only a moron would stay with a company that would do something like that.

Google hasn't done this...they're just selling phones direct to customers. How does this alienate them from hardware manufacturers exactly?

It's not as bad, but playing favorites isn't a good way to encourage an ecosystem around Android.
post #24 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

This isn't nearly the same thing...

Microsoft created a closed brand to compete with their licensed brand. Only a moron would stay with a company that would do something like that.

Google hasn't done this...they're just selling phones direct to customers. How does this alienate them from hardware manufacturers exactly?

Because Google is selling hardware and taking a piece of their pie. If you think Motorola isn't pissed that they will be competing with a Google phone on VZW in the coming months, pick up the phone and call them to ask.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #25 of 77
What Jobs was able to do was coral the dweebs (programmers) of this world into producing something usable. Make the hardware and the software-it's the only model that works.

Just look at any tv interface, cable interface or for that matter any camera interface and it's mostly unintuitive crap! Or better yet look at one of those 'simple' slide show picture frames and the software is just plain hopeless!

Apple has it right. Google, MS, Dell, Sony, HP have it wrong! Sorry.

Let's build a house were the plumber, electrician, roofer and framer don't have the same set of plans.
post #26 of 77
I have been long Apple and I am concerned about the competitive threat from the Android phones. I went to the T-Mobile store to check out the models. They did not have the Nexus One, but I tested the HTC phones. The UI is not intuitive and the operation is balky. Commands do not get executed smoothly. I would need to read the manual, something that I hate to do. The hardware itself was flimsy. The store and the staff gave the image of a half way house.

Then I went to the VZ store to check out the Moto Droid. The hardware was solid and felt like traditional Moto design. Still the UI and the rest of the software was too complex and not intuitive.

I am not underestimating the competition, but I am not impressed. Sure, GV, etc make the product attractive for niche users. Or folks not with ATT.
post #27 of 77
Man, "Prince" would make a great Admin Assistant with his PowerPoint charting skills.
post #28 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

Yes, that usually comes from owning 95% of desktop OS market...

That's wrong. It comes from laziness and lack of direction. MS will be profitable for now because they are the standard. Once the web is capable of performing all of the needs of the basic user, then they are in trouble because the web becomes the standard. At that point you'll start to see the average user moving towards Linux and Chrome because it will be good enough.

You may see people also move towards the Apple tablet because it is geared towards this because the OS as we know it know it now will not be the same in ten years.

Dynasties don't last long, espescially in tech where things move so fast.
post #29 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3 View Post

That's wrong. It comes from laziness and lack of direction. MS will be profitable for now because they are the standard. Once the web is capable of performing all of the needs of the basic user, then they are in trouble because the web becomes the standard. At that point you'll start to see the average user moving towards Linux and Chrome because it will be good enough.

You may see people also move towards the Apple tablet because it is geared towards this because the OS as we know it know it now will not be the same in ten years.

Dynasties don't last long, espescially in tech where things move so fast.

MS will always be strong in its core enterprise market, just like IBM has for 60 years despite its ups and downs. but its Office money machine will slowly dissipate as growing alternatives force continued price cuts. its desktop monopoly will gradually decline too as mobile products of all kinds grow to equal volume - until then one day a Chinese or Indian company brings out a competing desktop OS that takes away its second and third world markets as well. but in the consumer products business, including cloud services and advertising, it will remain what it is today: one of many and usually an also ran.

Like IBM, all that still will produce a lot of profits for decades. but its days of true dominance - a bit more than a decade - are already fading. that couldn't last. it never does.
post #30 of 77
Quote:
Even today, Microsoft still maintains two very different client operating systems in its primary offerings

At least three if you include XBox360, which is a distant relative of Windows NT. But there's also Zune's OS which is different from Windows Mobile, and Windows Mobile is going to be pretty fragmented with pre-6.5, 6.5, and 7.0+ versions on the market at once.

In short, Microsoft is saying "Don't screw up all your operating system development like we did." They got Windows 7 more or less right so they're probably not going to suffer Apple-in-the-90's fate, but they're sure not firing on all cylinders.
post #31 of 77
Microsoft made a lot of mistakes with the Zune. I did love my HD but the first gen Zune was meh. Still the Zune brand isnt out for the count, atleast not for the next 3 years.

Microsoft's biggest mistake is wrong timing. Here is what i think they should have done.

The Zune 30 should have been ready to roll in late 04. While they still wouldn't have caught the iTunes, the Zune was mildly popular and had roughly 11% of the market in its prime, the earlier would have been the better.

Nov 05 rolls around. Xbox 360 comes out and Zune Media Player is what is used for playback on the console and looks/functions like the desktop partner (Zune launched nearly a full year after the 360, this really shows MS lack of foresight). To stream you music from PC to 360, Zune desktop software needs to be installed, this now builds it some on PC. Now they have mass awareness of their product and stand a better chance, but thats not how it went down sadly.

So what can they do to turn it around? Well Zune Phone would be nice (no one cares about WinMo, subsequently the same will happen with Zune on WinMo) and have it be its own brand, and with the way their marketshare is falling there isnt a better time to strike than now. Also one has to assume whatever next console from Microsoft will push Zune more heavily for media features.
post #32 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

MS will always be strong in its core enterprise market, just like IBM has for 60 years despite its ups and downs. but its Office money machine will slowly dissipate as growing alternatives force continued price cuts. its desktop monopoly will gradually decline too as mobile products of all kinds grow to equal volume - until then one day a Chinese or Indian company brings out a competing desktop OS that takes away its second and third world markets as well. but in the consumer products business, including cloud services and advertising, it will remain what it is today: one of many and usually an also ran.

Like IBM, all that still will produce a lot of profits for decades. but its days of true dominance - a bit more than a decade - are already fading. that couldn't last. it never does.

And incidentally, Microsoft owns its success as a dominating OS vendor to IBM's mindshare in the enterprise market.

CP/M was a better and more mature OS, and it was licensed just like MS-DOS eventually was. Being "IBM compatible" was a selling-point that made all the difference in the world.
post #33 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by esummers View Post

It's not as bad, but playing favorites isn't a good way to encourage an ecosystem around Android.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

Because Google is selling hardware and taking a piece of their pie. If you think Motorola isn't pissed that they will be competing with a Google phone on VZW in the coming months, pick up the phone and call them to ask.


Google has already stated that they will offer other phones from other manufacturers in their e-store. This HTC phone is only the first. Furthermore, Google has also made it clear that this is an HTC phone, not a Google branded phone. Let's also not forget that Google worked closely with Motorola and Verizon on the Droid; it was the first device to get Android 2.0 with its turn-by-turn navigation. This type of "favoritism" is going to happen with each new hardware / OS release.

All Google is really attempting to do is remove the carrier from the equation and offer a direct to consumer experience. By law, mobile carriers must allow any compatible device to run on their networks. Google is providing the phone and will also bundle service plans just as Best Buy and any other retailer does. This will give Google a way to control the platform better. This is more similar to the Windows desktop market, than it is to Microsoft's mobile platforms market, in which they have an incentive to give an advantage towards its own branded hardware versus any licensed competitors.

EDIT: Even more differentiating... Android is completely free and open sourced meaning manufacturers or carriers can modify the operating system in any manner they wish; they are not dependent on Google. This was not true of PlaysForSure, Windows Mobile, or Windows CE, where Microsoft controlled the development of the operating system. All Google promised was a free alternative to Windows Mobile to handset makers and wireless carriers.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #34 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

Because Google is selling hardware and taking a piece of their pie. If you think Motorola isn't pissed that they will be competing with a Google phone on VZW in the coming months, pick up the phone and call them to ask.

And to ease of some pain from Google's back, avoid searching for this on Google - try Yahoo instead
Rashmi Khosa
Reply
Rashmi Khosa
Reply
post #35 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

Google has already stated that they will offer other phones from other manufacturers in their e-store. This HTC phone is only the first. Furthermore, Google has also made it clear that this is an HTC phone, not a Google branded phone. Let's also not forget that Google worked closely with Motorola and Verizon on the Droid; it was the first device to get Android 2.0 with its turn-by-turn navigation.

All Google is really attempting to do is remove the carrier from the equation and offer a direct to consumer experience. By law, mobile carriers must allow any compatible device to run on their networks. Google is providing the phone and will also bundle service plans just as Best Buy and any other retailer does. This will give Google a way to control the platform better. This is more similar to the Windows desktop market, than it is to Microsoft's mobile platforms market, in which they have an incentive to give an advantage towards its own branded hardware versus any licensed competitors.

What are you talking about? to remove the carrier or to bundle service plans means to be either an MVNO or just rolling out your own mobile network. And evidently enough, Google is not in that business. The chain is incomplete without a carrier. They are irreplacable. The customer won't buy a fancy gadget for posterity's sake
Rashmi Khosa
Reply
Rashmi Khosa
Reply
post #36 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

Google has already stated that they will offer other phones from other manufacturers in their e-store. This HTC phone is only the first. Furthermore, Google has also made it clear that this is an HTC phone, not a Google branded phone. Let's also not forget that Google worked closely with Motorola and Verizon on the Droid; it was the first device to get Android 2.0 with its turn-by-turn navigation. This type of "favoritism" is going to happen with each new hardware / OS release.

All Google is really attempting to do is remove the carrier from the equation and offer a direct to consumer experience. By law, mobile carriers must allow any compatible device to run on their networks. Google is providing the phone and will also bundle service plans just as Best Buy and any other retailer does. This will give Google a way to control the platform better. This is more similar to the Windows desktop market, than it is to Microsoft's mobile platforms market, in which they have an incentive to give an advantage towards its own branded hardware versus any licensed competitors.

EDIT: Even more differentiating... Android is completely free and open sourced meaning manufacturers or carriers can modify the operating system in any manner they wish; they are not dependent on Google. This was not true of PlaysForSure, Windows Mobile, or Windows CE, where Microsoft controlled the development of the operating system. All Google promised was a free alternative to Windows Mobile to handset makers and wireless carriers.

But that certainly isn't how the whole thing has been perceived. To the public, the Nexus One is the Google Phone. And it's perceived as a Droid killer because Google went the extra mile to make an exemplary handset with their software. Not HTC-- that's not how it's being marketed.

If I were Motorola, whatever input Google had given would be cold comfort right now. Who's talking about Droid now? Nobody. Google gave them about 15 minutes in the sun, then totally preempted their deal. And Motorola really, really needs a successful handset right now.

You might be technically correct about who did what, but perceptions matter, and the perception is pretty clear. Google trumped Motorola with a better phone. Motorola can't be too pleased.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #37 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Microsoft frets Google's Nexus One will suffer Zune's failure

I don't think MS is "fretting" about it - they're HOPING for it. Who came up with this headline?
post #38 of 77
This sounds reasonable, then again MS also said that the iPhone will fail if they don’t open up the OS to other vendors. \
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #39 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkhosa View Post

What are you talking about? to remove the carrier or to bundle service plans means to be either an MVNO or just rolling out your own mobile network. And evidently enough, Google is not in that business. The chain is incomplete without a carrier. They are irreplacable. The customer won't buy a fancy gadget for posterity's sake

I'm talking about the carrier getting their hands on the device and OS and modifying it. Removing features and adding their own crap on them, ruining the overall experience. This is what is killing Android as a platform.

Google is taking hardware direct from the manufacturer, putting their OS on it, then selling it direct to the customer. This allows Google to control the experience.

The carrier only comes in to play when a plan is needed/included.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #40 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

But that certainly isn't how the whole thing has been perceived. To the public, the Nexus One is the Google Phone. And it's perceived as a Droid killer because Google went the extra mile to make an exemplary handset with their software. Not HTC-- that's not how it's being marketed.

If I were Motorola, whatever input Google had given would be cold comfort right now. Who's talking about Droid now? Nobody. Google gave them about 15 minutes in the sun, then totally preempted their deal. And Motorola really, really needs a successful handset right now.

You might be technically correct about who did what, but perceptions matter, and the perception is pretty clear. Google trumped Motorola with a better phone. Motorola can't be too pleased.

Umm, I'm pretty sure Motorola's perception does not match public perception. Google stated it was in fact a HTC handset, not a Google handset. I don't think Motorola gets its information from the headlines, but rather through direct communication with Google. Headlines are not going to tell us that Motorola and Google are currently working on another phone that Google could offer up alongside the Nexus One. And I'm willing to bet that phone will be revealed at about the same time the Nexus One is available on Verizon's network.

I highly doubt that Motorola is unpleased about all of this... although they may be upset with all the morons that have misinterpreted all of this.


EDIT: Nexus One is only available on T-Mobile. So the Motorola Droid is still considered to be the best Android phone available on Verizon. So anyone looking for a good Android phone on Verizon, will be talking about and buying up Droids.
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microsoft frets Google's Nexus One will suffer Zune's failure