The Nexus One is a Failure (Fat Chance)(designbygravity.wordpress.com)
designbygravity.wordpress.com
The Nexus One is a Failure (Fat Chance)
http://designbygravity.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/the-nexus-one-is-a-failure-fat-chance/
25 comments
I'm still not sure Google was all that concerned with "flipping the distribution channel" per se. It seems just as likely they just wanted to sell the phone and didn't want to have to go through a carrier to do it, just to get retail experience. Did Google every say that was what they were after, or did the breathless tech-press just feed that meme?
> So the al-la-carte carrier choice model may be too late in coming to have an impact
You're right, but it seems a safe bet that Nexus Two will launch simultaneously on a variety of networks.
Incidentally, the N1 just became available here in Canada, and I bought one because our carriers are even worse than US ones (standard contract is 3 years, or full price but still network-locked, non-rootable, etc.). i.e. the distribution channel was already attractive to me, though I admit I'm obviously "fringe".
You're right, but it seems a safe bet that Nexus Two will launch simultaneously on a variety of networks.
Incidentally, the N1 just became available here in Canada, and I bought one because our carriers are even worse than US ones (standard contract is 3 years, or full price but still network-locked, non-rootable, etc.). i.e. the distribution channel was already attractive to me, though I admit I'm obviously "fringe".
It's only now that it's available on the other carries. They did not spend money advertising the phone, all the advertising was on their property in a time of year when they had available advertising space, if they wanted to aggressively push it they would have run an ad on the Superbowl rather than the "Parisian love" commercial and they would have sold much more, but then it would cannibalized the sales of the Motorola Droid and Verizon wouldn't have liked that.
The N1 is the phone Google gives away in conferences and gifts to developers, it's the phone they demo new android features on control the fragmentation, it's now available unlocked and on most carries in the US which is a first for any such device which is good because the carries subsidised model is shit and should be done with.
First, I'd love to have an N1. My MyTouch is woefully underpowered, and I can't wait for my contract to end. Google, if you're reading this, send me an N1. :)
While I agree that Google seemed hardly interested in promoting the N1, I don't necessarily connect this to Google not having higher expectations for the phone. There was certainly much back-channel promotional activity prior to the N1 launch that was setting up the public to expect the N1 to be the force to bring change to how phones are sold. Go back and look at the press coverage. Google had ample opportunity to manage those expectations publicly, but did not do so. Perhaps, as you said, this had to do with a desire to push the phone covertly so as to not upset their carrier partners (Verizon). It makes sense but is hard to know. I do believe that going into the N1 launch they hoped more from the device than it just being a reference standard and a give-away. If that was main intent of the phone, why even try to get it on all carriers? I also do think that Google wants to push device manufacturers to innovate, but with all the promise that people had in the N1, having it flounder doesn't help Google, Android, or help push device manufacturers.
I do believe that Google had/has every intent to disrupt the mobile phone market, and this is just the first step. Its in Google's interest to turn carriers into dumb pipes. And the N1 is certainly the first step. However, I can't believe that people within Google who worked on the project and management didn't have higher expectations for sales, and that Google wouldn't have used superior N1 sales as a means of pushing their agenda.
Despite all of the dynamics involved, the N1 hasn't sold well, and has been more of a nudge to carriers and device manufactures than a force for change.
While I agree that Google seemed hardly interested in promoting the N1, I don't necessarily connect this to Google not having higher expectations for the phone. There was certainly much back-channel promotional activity prior to the N1 launch that was setting up the public to expect the N1 to be the force to bring change to how phones are sold. Go back and look at the press coverage. Google had ample opportunity to manage those expectations publicly, but did not do so. Perhaps, as you said, this had to do with a desire to push the phone covertly so as to not upset their carrier partners (Verizon). It makes sense but is hard to know. I do believe that going into the N1 launch they hoped more from the device than it just being a reference standard and a give-away. If that was main intent of the phone, why even try to get it on all carriers? I also do think that Google wants to push device manufacturers to innovate, but with all the promise that people had in the N1, having it flounder doesn't help Google, Android, or help push device manufacturers.
I do believe that Google had/has every intent to disrupt the mobile phone market, and this is just the first step. Its in Google's interest to turn carriers into dumb pipes. And the N1 is certainly the first step. However, I can't believe that people within Google who worked on the project and management didn't have higher expectations for sales, and that Google wouldn't have used superior N1 sales as a means of pushing their agenda.
Despite all of the dynamics involved, the N1 hasn't sold well, and has been more of a nudge to carriers and device manufactures than a force for change.
To me those numbers just come down to:
To me it's proof how people are controlled more by marketing and advertising then everything else and in effect controlled by media overall which is kind of scary.
All in all, google will only look how android spreads around the world and not on a single device.
besides: 60000 android units are shipped per day, nowadays, thats what is important for google.
- Apple has good (the best) marketing -> many units sold
- Motorola/Verizon starts huge ad campaign -> many units sold
- Google had _no_ marketing -> few units sold
To me it's proof how people are controlled more by marketing and advertising then everything else and in effect controlled by media overall which is kind of scary.
All in all, google will only look how android spreads around the world and not on a single device.
besides: 60000 android units are shipped per day, nowadays, thats what is important for google.
Google advertises the Nexus One fairly heavily online.
I would LOVE it if they could stop showing Nexus One ads to people (like me) that already have them. It must be possible to read my Google account cookie and see that I bought an N1.
Especially if you have ever visited the Nexus One landing page. Ever since, all I see are N1 ads.
Also sales channels--the Nexus One isn't available in the real world. Most people don't want to plunk cash down for a device the have never used. The Droid and iPhone are in thousands of retail stores around the country.
Google is advertising it on Hulu.
The only problem I see is Google advertises with a "we do all this stuff" approach, where Apple uses the "here are some things you want to do.." which makes people want it far more.
The only problem I see is Google advertises with a "we do all this stuff" approach, where Apple uses the "here are some things you want to do.." which makes people want it far more.
Ok, i am not in the US, so i can only comment on what i can see "from here" ;)
But to me it looks like hulu.com is a webservice average joe user doesn't use anyway.
What counts is tv ads, posters, magazine ads and the likes.
What i have seen is, that Verizon/Motorola did a lot of advertising (super bowl ad, etc.). Now, google does hulu ads. thats a whole different level.
I don't think not buying a product they've never heard of automatically makes a person "controlled by marketing". Making someone aware of something they might like is different to controlling what they buy.
I do think the amount of marketing and advertising in our lives is a bit scary, but I don't think this is an example of why.
I do think the amount of marketing and advertising in our lives is a bit scary, but I don't think this is an example of why.
> In their first 74 days on the market, Flurry estimates that Google has sold 1.14 million Nexus Ones and Droids combined. In the iPhone’s first 74 days on the market, it sold 1 million units.
How long people will keep comparing other phones sales to the iPhone 1G sales, which was $500, edge-only, physically unavailable for the first 21 days, and sold without the App Store?
Besides, the 3G and 3Gs each broke 1 million in 3 days.
If you're going to compare numbers, at least compare numbers that make sense.
How long people will keep comparing other phones sales to the iPhone 1G sales, which was $500, edge-only, physically unavailable for the first 21 days, and sold without the App Store?
Besides, the 3G and 3Gs each broke 1 million in 3 days.
If you're going to compare numbers, at least compare numbers that make sense.
My thoughts on this from a few days ago: http://martin.drashkov.com/2010/03/nexus-one-as-halo-product...
I don't know about the sales, but I love my Nexus One. I never had an iphone 3Gs but the Nexus One blows away my old iPhone 3G.
Blows away the iPhone how?
I can't speak for the grandparent poster here but for me, the killer difference between the N1 and the iPhone is that the browser is far, far faster in the N1.
The rendering speed of the N1 amazed me the first time I pulled up a page. It also has enough RAM to keep more than one page open at a time without having to re-load as you switch windows (as I discovered with the iPhone). This may have been addressed somewhat in the 3GS but I only had a 3G model.
I also appreciate OTA syncing for contacts and calendars that doesn't cost me $100/year.
The integration with Google Voice is also a plus (having it auto-switch your voicemail over, and make all outgoing calls through your GV number).
The rendering speed of the N1 amazed me the first time I pulled up a page. It also has enough RAM to keep more than one page open at a time without having to re-load as you switch windows (as I discovered with the iPhone). This may have been addressed somewhat in the 3GS but I only had a 3G model.
I also appreciate OTA syncing for contacts and calendars that doesn't cost me $100/year.
The integration with Google Voice is also a plus (having it auto-switch your voicemail over, and make all outgoing calls through your GV number).
The speed issue is mostly a shortcoming of the 3G. The 3G is so slow under iPhone OS 3.0, I'd have a hard time recommending it to anyone. The 3GS doesn't have the same problem, but as I don't have a N1 it's hard for me to compare them.
One of the less often discussed, but to me most important features of the N1 is it's awesome call quality. They've got a second mic on the back of the phone to detect ambient noise, as well as some kind of noise suppression tech for both incoming and outgoing audio that's apparently made by by these folks: http://www.audience.com/index.html . They've got a couple demo's on their site of the difference their technology makes.
Disclaimer: I've never tested the call audio quality on any model of iPhone, so I can't make a direct comparison between the two. I can say that my N1's call audio quality is far better than on my old Razor (both on Tmobile).
Disclaimer: I've never tested the call audio quality on any model of iPhone, so I can't make a direct comparison between the two. I can say that my N1's call audio quality is far better than on my old Razor (both on Tmobile).
Speed mostly, but also the camera, ability to customize, widgets, the screen and hardware, the android 2.1 operating system, the many Google apps such as Google Voice and Google Goggles. I mean there are clearly some UI advantages that the iphone has where the equivalent in android is a little frustrating, but overall I think this Nexus One is a million times better than the 3G. I'm not talking about the iPhone 3GS, which I never owned. I'm comparing the Nexus One to my iPhone 3G.
Don't you need to compare the pricing difference between the different phones to get a more accurate count?
Iphones at $600, $400 or $200? Droids at $200 or $500 ? Nexus ones at $200 or $500 ?
Eyeballs are great in theory; however, if the units sold aren't as profitable as your competition, then I'm not sure it is a good idea to get far outside your core areas.
In addition, given the strategy and ideas for Android Google is competing more with Microsoft then Apple in the mobile market.
Iphones at $600, $400 or $200? Droids at $200 or $500 ? Nexus ones at $200 or $500 ?
Eyeballs are great in theory; however, if the units sold aren't as profitable as your competition, then I'm not sure it is a good idea to get far outside your core areas.
In addition, given the strategy and ideas for Android Google is competing more with Microsoft then Apple in the mobile market.
Today (in the US), most consumers purchase through retailers (wireless carrier stores and 3rd party retailers), and the phones are directly tied to specific carriers. The Nexus One was an attempt to marginalize this model by providing a direct channel together with a menu of carrier choices for the consumer to pick from. So far, the sales of the Nexus One show that direct to consumer hasn't worked. However, as the choice of carriers available for the Nexus One is just now more plentiful, its a bit premature to judge whether the al-la-carte carrier choice will have significant impact.
The problem I see for the Nexus One is that its now approaching middle-age for a mobile phone, and newer phones are certainly going to emerge in the coming months that steal the attention. So the al-la-carte carrier choice model may be too late in coming to have an impact, and therefore may not be the force for change in how consumers purchase phones and choose carriers.