Related
I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.
kylepotts said:
I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
kyle I think you misunderstood.
of course google is not producing the handsets, but rumors have it that they will realease an android phone manufactured/designed by them.
The guy that wrote the article didnt mean that google shouldnt develop android, only that it is a risky business for google to enter in, while they can just sit back and reap the benefits of the wide diffusion android is having.
and to be honest, in more than a way, i kind of agree with him.
Despite interpretations, that article is STILL retarded.
For example; how about the fact that Google *already did it* -- a year ago.
In fact, I have one.
It came in a box labelled "Android Dev Phone 1".
Second, this is *exactly* what the mobile phone business *needs*. It should be CRIMINAL for a carrier to peddle hardware.
The effect of separating the carrier from the hardware is this;
1) It destroys the links between plans and devices, i.e., they won't be saying that if you want X phone, you need to buy an X plan at $827.50/month.
2) It eliminated the subsidization component of phone plans, which given fair competition means that plans should drop in price.
3) It means that YOU as the customer get to choose the hardware that YOU want. Do you let your LANDLINE provider tell you what telephone to use? Or do you go to radio shack and buy whichever one you want? Do you let your internet provider tell you what computer to buy?
4) It means elimination of network locks, and freedom to change providers AT WHIM.
5) It means elimination of long term CONTRACTS, and freedom to change providers at WHIM.
6) It means that when a provider gets a customer, they need to continue to compete with other providers, otherwise the customer will switch.
7) Did I mention that competition leads to LOWER PRICES?
man, relax...
first of all I never said it wouldnt be a great thing for consumers if they do. I know it would, and agree with you that carriers have been playing consumers for years. the guy that wrote the article simply stated the reasons why google shouldnt do that, from a business point of view. it is a huge risk and i doubt the results would be the same as we are used to (Hero etc), at least initially.
(ADP1 was/is in limited availability.. IMHO they made that to 'test' the market reception towards a new mobile OS).
kylepotts said:
I saw this on Digg, read it and left a very angry comment. This is a horrible article.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog...l;jsessionid=GPDCAHFFTFPQTQE1GHRSKH4ATMY32JVN
Yea I spelled idiot wrong, Its for dramatic effect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has to be one of the stupidest articles I have ever read. First Google doesn't even make the phones manufactures lie HTC do. Google creates the OS on the device. You says "Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds." How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
You say that Google will create a netbook with android on it, and then start talking about android on smartphones. Android on smartphones and android on netbooks are very different beasts.
Horrible article. Do you research next time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
maybe YOU need to learn how to read and interpret information.
google is PLANNING on MAKING their OWN DEVICES and start a phone manufacturing business.
android is not made by google anyways.. INITIALLY it was developed by google,but NOW the Open Handset Alliance has taken over. this allows other companies like google,motorola,archos,asus,htc,etc to develop their own flare based on android.
"You says 'Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds.' How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
"
your question is just straight up dumb.. no **** google has never made an smartphone or netbook so therefore! no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone
i mean really.. youre reading a business article but youre WAY to dumb to understand it.
brian_v3ntura said:
maybe YOU need to learn how to read and interpret information.
google is PLANNING on MAKING their OWN DEVICES and start a phone manufacturing business.
android is not made by google anyways.. INITIALLY it was developed by google,but NOW the Open Handset Alliance has taken over. this allows other companies like google,motorola,archos,asus,htc,etc to develop their own flare based on android.
"You says 'Additionally, there's absolutely no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone that will draw in the crowds.' How is that even possible when Google doesn't create smart phones?
"
your question is just straight up dumb.. no **** google has never made an smartphone or netbook so therefore! no indication that Google knows how to develop a high-end smartphone
i mean really.. youre reading a business article but youre WAY to dumb to understand it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey come on? Do we really need to mud sling? I was just bringing this up. No need to call me dumb as it is my opinion.
kylepotts said:
Hey come on? Do we really need to mud sling? I was just bringing this up. No need to call me dumb as it is my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you the one who made the most stupid comment on the article. even tho you was completely WRONG and irrelevant
Ok
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!
rfj1979 said:
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you rfj
nmesisca said:
kyle I think you misunderstood.
of course google is not producing the handsets, but rumors have it that they will realease an android phone manufactured/designed by them.
The guy that wrote the article didnt mean that google shouldnt develop android, only that it is a risky business for google to enter in, while they can just sit back and reap the benefits of the wide diffusion android is having.
and to be honest, in more than a way, i kind of agree with him.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that phone was the Motorola droid
lbcoder said:
Despite interpretations, that article is STILL retarded.
For example; how about the fact that Google *already did it* -- a year ago.
In fact, I have one.
It came in a box labelled "Android Dev Phone 1".
Second, this is *exactly* what the mobile phone business *needs*. It should be CRIMINAL for a carrier to peddle hardware.
The effect of separating the carrier from the hardware is this;
1) It destroys the links between plans and devices, i.e., they won't be saying that if you want X phone, you need to buy an X plan at $827.50/month.
2) It eliminated the subsidization component of phone plans, which given fair competition means that plans should drop in price.
3) It means that YOU as the customer get to choose the hardware that YOU want. Do you let your LANDLINE provider tell you what telephone to use? Or do you go to radio shack and buy whichever one you want? Do you let your internet provider tell you what computer to buy?
4) It means elimination of network locks, and freedom to change providers AT WHIM.
5) It means elimination of long term CONTRACTS, and freedom to change providers at WHIM.
6) It means that when a provider gets a customer, they need to continue to compete with other providers, otherwise the customer. will switch.
7) Did I mention that competition leads to LOWER PRICES?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sorry i had to
play captain obvious here:
1 plenty unauthorized dealers (mall kiosks, corner stores in the hood) will sell a smart phone and new contract without a data plan or other required add-ons. show em the money.
2 usually one company starts a trend and others will follow. I.e. myfavs, I forgot who started it but all the big dogs have it now
3 never ever had a phone company tell me what phone I had to use, only suggestive selling to suit my needs, and I can always buy one off the street an use. i took in my old dash to a t-mo corporate store and got my daughter on a one year contact, 300 min a month plan and didnt have to buy a phone or add ons.
4 unlocked phones are already on the market, online and certain retail stores, also applys to #3
5 plenty of no commitment options in almost every big and small carrier.
6 they do with quality customer service and incentives for long term customers. when a company lacks those 2 basic things people will take their mony elsewhere.
7 yea basic economics they don't teach anymore in public schools
Are you just plain thick? Or are you being intentionally obtuse?
We're talking about regular consumers here, not people who can figure out things on their own.
Point is this; how many phone manufacturer's advertise phones that AREN'T linked to some carrier?
How many RETAILERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't linked to some carrier?
How many CARRIERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't locked to their network?
Your regular stupid consumer who wants to buy a phone will see the sparkly ad on TV, will go to their nearest big-box store, and will get suckered into a lifetime commitment with some carrier just for the sake of having that sparkly phone that they saw on TV.
The OBJECTIVE is for phones to ALL be sold entirely in the free, so that joe consumer can go into the big box store, grab a phone off the shelf, pay in cash (no ID), sign NOTHING, walk out with it, and shove in whatever sim card they like with whatever plan they like.
The average consumer does NOT go down to a greasy store with no air conditioning that smells like barf to buy a phone that's been HACKED, and it is quite impossible to get a no-commitment phone from a big box store or off some carrier's website. Yes, if you *already* have a phone, the carrier should let you plug your card into it, but NO, most retarded consumers *DON'T KNOW THIS*.
The fact that it is damned difficult to get a no-strings-attached phone, and that the average idiot watching ads on TV doesn't even know that you can means that there IS a link between hardware and carrier. Which means that EVERY ONE of your arguments is entirely INVALID.
phatmanxxl said:
sorry i had to
play captain obvious here:
1 plenty unauthorized dealers (mall kiosks, corner stores in the hood) will sell a smart phone and new contract without a data plan or other required add-ons. show em the money.
2 usually one company starts a trend and others will follow. I.e. myfavs, I forgot who started it but all the big dogs have it now
3 never ever had a phone company tell me what phone I had to use, only suggestive selling to suit my needs, and I can always buy one off the street an use. i took in my old dash to a t-mo corporate store and got my daughter on a one year contact, 300 min a month plan and didnt have to buy a phone or add ons.
4 unlocked phones are already on the market, online and certain retail stores, also applys to #3
5 plenty of no commitment options in almost every big and small carrier.
6 they do with quality customer service and incentives for long term customers. when a company lacks those 2 basic things people will take their mony elsewhere.
7 yea basic economics they don't teach anymore in public schools
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rfj1979 said:
It's not that big of a deal it's just his opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
opinion of what? what his comment said on the article pretty much had nothing to do with what google is planning.
lbcoder said:
We're talking about regular consumers here, not people who can figure out things on their own.
Point is this; how many phone manufacturer's advertise phones that AREN'T linked to some carrier?
How many RETAILERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't linked to some carrier?
How many CARRIERS *ADVERTISE* phones that aren't locked to their network?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apples and Oranges.
Carriers and retailers don't advertise (or even carry) non sim-locked high end phones because most phones are subsidized with the contract. This doesn't mean that a a carrier doesn't welcome unlocked phones though. Selling service to a consumer that already has the equipment means that the service contract doesn't have to pay for the equipment and the carrier profits from the consumer much faster.
This also means that it is possible (how likely is up for debate though) for a carrier to enter a contract with Google and subsidize a part of the equipment cost and offer a locked version of the Google phone for much a cheaper cost to the consumer.
Just because Google may offer an unlocked version of a phone doesn't exclude the possibility of a locked/subsidized version from a carrier.
I think it is a great idea. The worst that could happen is that it doesn't sell and fades into obscurity. Worth the risk if you ask me.
Noooo....Apple's iPhone does better because it appeals to more people, because there all stupid. Android users phiddling with an iPhone is like giving Einstein some paper and a box of crayons
http://www.pcworld.com/article/1867...irst_week_of_sales_were_weak_report_says.html
Thats a ton of complaints coming out for only 20k sales.
Not being available in T-Mo stores really hurt sales. I think being able to see this screen and hold it in person would move a hell of alot more units.
he Nexus One didn't benefit from such a strong marketing push like the Motorola Droid (estimated $100 million), despite Google's phone featuring so-far unique Android features. This has reflected in poor first week sales for the Nexus One, as per the table below. (Click image above to enlarge)
Instead, Google chose a soft launch for the Nexus One, selling it through their website. But the steep $500 Google is asking for the unlocked device and the mixed reviews the Nexus One received didn't help to maximize first week sales.
Flurry's report mentions that the Nexus One lacks the "wow factor" and the general perception that the device is not seen as revolutionary, but rather just evolutionary from other Android phones.
Om Malik, of GigaOm, notes that Flurry's estimated sales numbers for the Nexus One might even be a bit far fetched. He mentions Google has been giving away the Nexus One to its employees and also lent it to many members of the media for reviews, which could have bumped up Flurry's analytics.
Next to the poor first week sales figure, the Nexus One has also seen mounting complaints over the 3G connectivity of the device and the lack of developer tools for the Android 2.1 platform.
In her review of the Nexus One, my colleague Ginny Mies notes that Google's phone "isn't quite the game-changer people hoped it would be, though it certainly trumps other phones in performance, display quality, and speed." Next to pros like a dazzling OLED display, snappy performance and sleep, slim design, she marks the lack of multitouch support and the software keyboard as cons.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm actually glad. I dont want the nexus one to become a fashion icon like the iPhone did.
EDIT: YOU! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING HERE
melterx12 said:
I'm actually glad. I dont want the nexus one to become a fashion icon like the iPhone did.
EDIT: YOU! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING HERE
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
awww Fuuudgdeeee
Had to be 2 new yorkers didnt it. lol
Agree with this though. Ive been saying I hope a ton of people want it but few get it. That way Google is pressed to resolve there customer service and HW issues and early adopters dont look like bandwagon jumpers for the latest fashion device.
On the flip side... I hope Google doesnt turn around and blame Tmobile. Tmo and Google have been continually bringing out Android sets I hope that relationship doesnt sour because of this.
Actually 20k in sales for a phone that has reportedly had the vast majority of users buy the unlocked version is pretty damn good (Leo Laporte mentioned it on TWiT on Sunday)
melterx12 said:
I'm actually glad. I dont want the nexus one to become a fashion icon like the iPhone did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As much as I give credit to Apple for what they've done with the iPhone, the iPhone has become the "razr" of phones.....the "Wal-Mart" of phones....
The bad press on this phone is silly. It takes nothing into consideration, bends around the truth, and just sounds misinformed. This phone had a soft launch, wasn't available in stores, no television ads, and wasn't really advertised by Google until the day of it's launch.
These soft launches make an impact. Word will spread and then it will pop up and explode on Verizon. I'm not even trying to defend the device, it just makes me angry seeing so much misinformed crap popping up on the web.
"But the steep $500 Google is asking for the unlocked device and the mixed reviews the Nexus One received didn't help to maximize first week sales."
Mixed reviews meaning angry fanboys? I don't get it. The thing runs Android really well, is fast as hell, looks great, has a good camera, etc. I have no idea what people were expecting. Android has been out, and this was stated to be an Android device.
mark925 said:
As much as I give credit to Apple for what they've done with the iPhone, the iPhone has become the "razr" of phones.....the "Wal-Mart" of phones....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
everybody and their dog has an iphone. i'd rather have something few others do
To be honest, and trying to be unbiased, I think these numbers are ok for Google. Here's why I say that... given the marketing channel used here (online only sales and advertising), I suspect that Google is banking on a moderate rate of sales early on, with an increase a little later. Most people like to see and touch something prior to dropping hundreds of dollars on it. I think Google is counting on the early adopters to buy the phones, and then once we have them and others start seeing and playing with them, they will start buying. In theory, this should work the same as if the N1 would have been sold in stores, except the initial sales would be lighter and the rate of sales would be steeper after the first few weeks.
My proverbial 2 cents...
#1. It's hard for someone to drop that much cash on a phone unseen. Like others have pointed out, it's hard to sell a mobile phone without being able to "touch" it and play with it at a retail store.
#2. The N1 is one of the first handsets relatively available for purchase which has the Qualcomm Snapdragon processor. I honestly think the "hacking" community for the N1 will be similar of what the G1 (HTC Dream) has seen... In other words, the HTC Passion is basically the next great hacking platform as the HTC Dream experienced.
Cheers,
Kermee
So essentially 1 in 150,000 Americans (ROUGHLY, only considering domestic sales) are packin the N1 - Sounds like a pretty elite/exclusive group if you ask me
booloobunny said:
..."But the steep $500 Google is asking for the unlocked device and the mixed reviews the Nexus One received didn't help to maximize first week sales."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, to add onto this...I don't think the price is steep at all. In fact it is cheaper than many other unlocked devices with lesser hardware. Also, it has been pointed out in many places that getting the unlocked version is cheaper than going with the subsidized version and mandatory plan.
When a phone can be purchased only from one location and one URL only gadget freaks like us know about it's existence. Some of my friends who think they are gadget freaks were shocked to see my phone over the weekend. They didn't even know about it yet. Forget the common man. Unless, the phone is sold in T-mobile, and B&M stores, it will be hard to sell like Driod.
Except for lousy T-mobile 3G inside buildings, I love this phone. But I am seriously thinking about returning just to go back to AT&T as I would like to stay with the best GSM carrier who gets most unlocked 3G phones so I can keep changing my phones every few months.
uansari1 said:
To be honest, and trying to be unbiased, I think these numbers are ok for Google. Here's why I say that... given the marketing channel used here (online only sales and advertising), I suspect that Google is banking on a moderate rate of sales early on, with an increase a little later. Most people like to see and touch something prior to dropping hundreds of dollars on it. I think Google is counting on the early adopters to buy the phones, and then once we have them and others start seeing and playing with them, they will start buying. In theory, this should work the same as if the N1 would have been sold in stores, except the initial sales would be lighter and the rate of sales would be steeper after the first few weeks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. This seems similar to Gmail when it was in Beta....and Gvoice. Only certain people had it and it was invite only. This seems to make a launch more manageable (less volume) and the inital adopters are the ones who typically want it the most and spread the word to others for free.
I want one... I just don't want to pay $530 to be a beta tester. I think once the 3g issues are solved we'll see alot more people pay for the phone
once Verizon and vodaphone get this phone. Sales will SKY rocket.
Instore sales
The only way for a big change in sales would be to sell the Nexus One in stores, mainstream buyers are not going to spend premium money on a handset that they can not handle first.
There are not enough early adopters and tech heads like most of us on this site to make a major impact on sales. Plus many of us are holding off to see how the 3G issue gets handled before buying.
since they didnt really air commercial for the phone and it is only available online. the numbers are pretty good.
melterx12 said:
The HARDWARE to produce the Nexus One costs $175$. This price does NOT include licensing, manufacturing, advertising, shipping, Government Taxes, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah... Putting the parts together... probably costs more than the parts themselves, including labor.
Sure, I could get the "parts" for my car too for less than a quarter of what it sells for... I wouldn't want to try to assemble it though!
Cheers,
Kermee
melterx12 said:
The HARDWARE to produce the Nexus One costs $175$. This price does NOT include licensing, manufacturing, advertising, shipping, Government Taxes, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
...not to mention R&D
I still have people ask me when its coming out when I show them mine, this phone is still very "underground"
melterx12 said:
The HARDWARE to produce the Nexus One costs $175$. This price does NOT include licensing, manufacturing, advertising, shipping, Government Taxes, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you send me a link to where you found out the hardware only cost $175 for the nexus one. I would like to see how much the snapdragon proc costs, and the 512mb of ram, and all the other components in the phone, and just the cost of putting it together.
And I am not referring to licensing, manufacturing, advertising, shipping, Government Taxes, etc.
Just the hardware and the costs to put the phone together. I call bull**** on the $175 dollars.
That is how much it might cost to put together the iphone 3gs with much cheaper hardware. But the Nexus One hardware is another story.
Found this on another board and thought it was worth sharing:
http://androidheadlines.com/2010/05/verizon-dumps-nexus-one-google.html
Does not look like any more phones are going to come directly from Google, however, I am still VERY happy with my Nexus One!!
Ill reserve my judegement for an official announcement, I dont see anything that indicates google is done with phones.
darx said:
Ill reserve my judegement for an official announcement, I dont see anything that indicates google is done with phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are definitely not done with phones. They will continue to develop the software, and might just pull out of the "hardware" business and leave that to HTC.
well the only thing confirmed in the article is that Verizon did not cancel the phone. Google did.
Rest is pure speculation of the blogger. If Google wanted to quit completely... why did they launch the at&t version?
Phones for verizon and Sprint (CDMA etc) are not as straight forward as for T-Mobile and At&T (GSM). The phones have to be locked to verizon and sprint.. they are always at the mercy of the provider. GSM are standard based and all you need is SIM card to move from one service to other. You are not tied to a carrier.
Anyways... I will avoid speculating further myself...There are just way too many things going on in the corporate world.
Just be assured... Google has shares in the market... they will have to release a press release and give good reason to cancel phone business as the phone business was in black. They can't cancel any profitable business without explaining it to investors.
The nexus one is profitable to google? At&t version shouldn't be too hard since it's gsm like T-Mobile. Maybe they just decided they don't want to make a cdma phone since gsm is the standard around the world anyway.
What google wants to do can't be done with the two biggest cell phone companies because it's a closed ecosystem.
Mokurex said:
The nexus one is profitable to google? At&t version shouldn't be too hard since it's gsm like T-Mobile. Maybe they just decided they don't want to make a cdma phone since gsm is the standard around the world anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes. Nexus One is profitable
http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/15/feel-goodroid-nexus-one-is-in-the-black-60k-android-devices-ac/
Not one sentence of that is from a public/official source. Google on the other hand has said publicly that they are making money, they are happy with what they were getting out of it, they plan to stay in it for the long haul. Hmmmm.
I actually like that the nexus has poor sales.... Its a great phone than no one bought (mostly due to zero marketing and lack of tech support) so it gives it a sense of exclusivity. Usually to get such exclusivity you have to buy a crappy phone or a really overpriced one. and google is not hurting financially... this was more of a science project for them
Its quite different from when I had my iphone... I remember I would be out on a dinner and when the “apple ringtone” went off, 10 people would bust out their iphones, no people contantly ask me what phone i have
Google should have put a Beta tag on google.com/phone.
Then no one would have complained about the low sales and it would be clear that this is just them getting their feet wet.
Put it this way: the next phone Google sells on their website, you can be guaranteed that sales (and off-line advertising) will be much higher.
Paul22000 said:
Google should have put a Beta tag on google.com/phone.
Then no one would have complained about the low sales and it would be clear that this is just them getting their feet wet.
Put it this way: the next phone Google sells on their website, you can be guaranteed that sales (and off-line advertising) will be much higher.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, cant wait for Nexus Two.
omg, we are too exclusive now.
no one will have brand new google phone anymore.
I went to google.com/phone and I didn't see anything about this on there. Is this news offical? I'm 24 more days away from ordering my Nexus One and I was hoping to have it delivered to my house and such. Damn, I wanted to get my phone engraved too.
ChillRays said:
I went to google.com/phone and I didn't see anything about this on there. Is this news offical? I'm 24 more days away from ordering my Nexus One and I was hoping to have it delivered to my house and such. Damn, I wanted to get my phone engraved too.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's official http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=681634
I still don't see a timetable in either of those two links. It might be better if I went over to t-mobile store and picked one up.. that way I could see if "dust is under the screen" or some sorta damage on it... idk..
Looks as though they will still sell it online and in stores and eventually they will do away with online all together.
ChillRays said:
I still don't see a timetable in either of those two links. It might be better if I went over to t-mobile store and picked one up.. that way I could see if "dust is under the screen" or some sorta damage on it... idk..
Looks as though they will still sell it online and in stores and eventually they will do away with online all together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep they just "announced" it. No specific date on when they'r pulling the plug on the online store.
I said before launch...I hope its a phone that everyone wants but few have.
Few have it..it IS unique...but noone knows wth it is and just assume its some stupid iphone.
Only cel store folks have had any clue of what it is.
xManMythLegend said:
I said before launch...I hope its a phone that everyone wants but few have.
Few have it..it IS unique...but noone knows wth it is and just assume its some stupid iphone.
Only cel store folks have had any clue of what it is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup, this is actually a selling point for me
People really care about having a "special" phone?
roofles.
JCopernicus said:
People really care about having a "special" phone?
roofles.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im assuming you wear fruit of the loom shirts , lee jeans , walmart sneakers ,no belt , a blank cap , drive a GM vehicle , and use plain black stock headphones.
Some people like to things because they are unique. Some people dont enjoy looking or using the same exact thing or way that everyone else does.
Is that I have not seen a review of the Xoom anywhere. Has anybody else? Somehow Motorola was able to get a Xoom in Chad Ochocinco's hands a month ago but I haven't seen any evidence that Motorola has shipped review units to media members. Will we have to wait until after release on Thursday to see any reviews? This release has been so shady that I'm waiting until after I see a credible reviewer verify all of Motorola's claims before I consider purchasing.
Jrockttu said:
Is that I have not seen a review of the Xoom anywhere. Has anybody else? Somehow Motorola was able to get a Xoom in Chad Ochocinco's hands a month ago but I haven't seen any evidence that Motorola has shipped review units to media members. Will we have to wait until after release on Thursday to see any reviews? This release has been so shady that I'm waiting until after I see a credible reviewer verify all of Motorola's claims before I consider purchasing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There have been countless reviews. You mean you want an in-depth detailed review from someone who gets to use the device "in the wild". That is not out yet, and that is normal for a new device of this sort. The devices we have seen so far aren't ready for primetime, and we can only hope that the XOOM I pick up in 4 days is ready.
The release isn't shady, it's just a little rushed. They are trying to bring the device to market ASAP. Would you rather they push the release by a month and send out samples to reviewers? I think the review I put on YouTube will be better than most professional reviews, except for the methodical, if anecdotal, reviews Engadget and other upper echelon tech blogs post.
setite said:
There have been countless reviews. You mean you want an in-depth detailed review from someone who gets to use the device "in the wild". That is not out yet, and that is normal for a new device of this sort. The devices we have seen so far aren't ready for primetime, and we can only hope that the XOOM I pick up in 4 days is ready.
The release isn't shady, it's just a little rushed. They are trying to bring the device to market ASAP. Would you rather they push the release by a month and send out samples to reviewers? I think the review I put on YouTube will be better than most professional reviews, except for the methodical, if anecdotal, reviews Engadget and other upper echelon tech blogs post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I disagree. It is shady in the way they are forcing people to pay an extra $35 activation fee plus $20 min service just to activate WiFi. Yes, it is stated in the small print but still, bad business and shady in my mind.
keitht said:
I disagree. It is shady in the way they are forcing people to pay an extra $35 activation fee plus $20 min service just to activate WiFi. Yes, it is stated in the small print but still, bad business and shady in my mind.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you consider that Verizon has put money into this project, it's fair to expect them to make a profit on each unit. I think that they should have worked something out with Best Buy that allowed them to take a cut from the 800$, but the result would have been the tablet costing 850$.
Hasn't a rumor been floating around that buying direct from Verizon would require no activation? As counter-intuitive as that may sound, it tracks as Motorola is selling the XOOM 3G wholesale for 550$. So if BB sells it, they keep the 250$ difference, if Verizon sells it, they don't need you to pay for a month of service because they have already made 250$.
It's not shady, but arguably bad business from a consumer image angle. People who don't understand what is going on, or people who simply don't care will look poorly upon the policy. Knowing that there is a WiFi Only version for 200$ less down the road should assuage any issues. But you still have the right to be mad, even if it just gives you heartburn
setite said:
If you consider that Verizon has put money into this project, it's fair to expect them to make a profit on each unit. I think that they should have worked something out with Best Buy that allowed them to take a cut from the 800$, but the result would have been the tablet costing 850$.
Hasn't a rumor been floating around that buying direct from Verizon would require no activation? As counter-intuitive as that may sound, it tracks as Motorola is selling the XOOM 3G wholesale for 550$. So if BB sells it, they keep the 250$ difference, if Verizon sells it, they don't need you to pay for a month of service because they have already made 250$.
It's not shady, but arguably bad business from a consumer image angle. People who don't understand what is going on, or people who simply don't care will look poorly upon the policy. Knowing that there is a WiFi Only version for 200$ less down the road should assuage any issues. But you still have the right to be mad, even if it just gives you heartburn
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sound like a lawyer It is bad business and consumers will speak with their wallets. This price point will not ultimately work. And we still do not know actual issues with the device including what is going on with the SD support. I was all excited about this before but now, I cannot see paying $900 without a single accessory.
keitht said:
You sound like a lawyer It is bad business and consumers will speak with their wallets. This price point will not ultimately work. And we still do not know actual issues with the device including what is going on with the SD support. I was all excited about this before but now, I cannot see paying $900 without a single accessory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. I am planning to go to law school . I agree with you. I just have a habit of playing devil's advocate, and trying to inform other consumers so they don't get enraged and end up hurting themselves by getting angry and making sweeping statements they can't take back. Like when Steve Jobs got angry and committed to never having flash, and forever people like me who need flash can't buy an iPad.
setite said:
There have been countless reviews. You mean you want an in-depth detailed review from someone who gets to use the device "in the wild". That is not out yet, and that is normal for a new device of this sort. The devices we have seen so far aren't ready for primetime, and we can only hope that the XOOM I pick up in 4 days is ready.
The release isn't shady, it's just a little rushed. They are trying to bring the device to market ASAP. Would you rather they push the release by a month and send out samples to reviewers? I think the review I put on YouTube will be better than most professional reviews, except for the methodical, if anecdotal, reviews Engadget and other upper echelon tech blogs post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't seen a single review, just a few hands-on impressions in a controlled environment. I want something that validates the 10 hour battery life and that tells me if the OS is buggy, etc.
I consider it a shady release for the reasons already covered in this thread. The $800 price tag is high, but reasonable, until you consider that it's a $200 premium for 3g/4g, you have to activate data to unlock wifi, and they'll charge you an activation fee of $35 any time you turn on the data. That last part is the biggest kick in the nuts. Motorola, Verizon, and the retailers are all trying to get their cut of the device and the consumers are the ones being punished.
Jrockttu said:
I haven't seen a single review, just a few hands-on impressions in a controlled environment. I want something that validates the 10 hour battery life and that tells me if the OS is buggy, etc.
I consider it a shady release for the reasons already covered in this thread. The $800 price tag is high, but reasonable, until you consider that it's a $200 premium for 3g/4g, you have to activate data to unlock wifi, and they'll charge you an activation fee of $35 any time you turn on the data. That last part is the biggest kick in the nuts. Motorola, Verizon, and the retailers are all trying to get their cut of the device and the consumers are the ones being punished.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. The last part is indeed a true roshambo kick in the nards. I am quite cross about that particular detail as it sort of defeats the purpose of month to month, and makes no sense given my admittedly limited knowledge of how CDMA works. AFAIK all that should be necessary is an OTA provisioning of the tablet when you want to enable service. Something I do on a regular basis for my dad who goes through a new phone every 6 months. He buys crappy flip phones on ebay for 20$ and I activate them using a combination of the Verizon website and a # code on the phone. Easy Peasy, no cost. This makes it clear that they are trying to get you to just keep a minimal data plan month to month, because without a gap of 2 months or more, you will be paying more in the grand scheme if you pay an activation fee each time you lapse. It's almost like a late fee.
Jrockttu said:
I haven't seen a single review, just a few hands-on impressions in a controlled environment. I want something that validates the 10 hour battery life and that tells me if the OS is buggy, etc.
I consider it a shady release for the reasons already covered in this thread. The $800 price tag is high, but reasonable, until you consider that it's a $200 premium for 3g/4g, you have to activate data to unlock wifi, and they'll charge you an activation fee of $35 any time you turn on the data. That last part is the biggest kick in the nuts. Motorola, Verizon, and the retailers are all trying to get their cut of the device and the consumers are the ones being punished.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's up the the manufacturer to release the reviewers from the NDA and let them post reviews. The sheer number of developers that have the Xoom is proof that reviewers have had them for a while. Usually reviews don't come out until the device is actually for sale.
Jrockttu said:
Is that I have not seen a review of the Xoom anywhere. Has anybody else? Somehow Motorola was able to get a Xoom in Chad Ochocinco's hands a month ago but I haven't seen any evidence that Motorola has shipped review units to media members. Will we have to wait until after release on Thursday to see any reviews? This release has been so shady that I'm waiting until after I see a credible reviewer verify all of Motorola's claims before I consider purchasing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There have been Atrix reviews out for a while, but so far, it's been mum on the Xoom. It doesn't make much sense to me either.
That said, I think "shady" is the wrong word. I would use "bizarre". Everything about this has been bizarre, and the fact that nobody even knows when the thing is being released just flabbergasts me. Most launches include things like, you know, release dates, prices, venues, etc.... Right now, the only thing we know for certain is that it will be available at Best Buy in late February for $800, and we haven't known that stuff for very long.
However much I dislike Apple, Steve Jobs would never have let something like this happen... unless we're talking about the mythical white iPhone 4.
Xevilious said:
There have been Atrix reviews out for a while, but so far, it's been mum on the Xoom. It doesn't make much sense to me either.
That said, I think "shady" is the wrong word. I would use "bizarre". Everything about this has been bizarre, and the fact that nobody even knows when the thing is being released just flabbergasts me. Most launches include things like, you know, release dates, prices, venues, etc.... Right now, the only thing we know for certain is that it will be available at Best Buy in late February for $800, and we haven't known that stuff for very long.
However much I dislike Apple, Steve Jobs would never have let something like this happen... unless we're talking about the mythical white iPhone 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's just an amazing failure of a launch. It boggles my mind that they can come off of their "Best of CES" performance and get nothing but bad press thereafter. How can they not effectively communicate the price and release dates across media and retailers? Even after Sanjay Jha confirmed the price, the price still isn't listed on the official Xoom website! So much potential wasted. I'm an Apple hater, but nobody can deny that they know how to run a product launch and these other companies need to take notes every June.
Jrockttu said:
It's just an amazing failure of a launch. It boggles my mind that they can come off of their "Best of CES" performance and get nothing but bad press thereafter. How can they not effectively communicate the price and release dates across media and retailers? Even after Sanjay Jha confirmed the price, the price still isn't listed on the official Xoom website! So much potential wasted. I'm an Apple hater, but nobody can deny that they know how to run a product launch and these other companies need to take notes every June.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly correct. Motorola could stand to take several lessons from Apple, mainly marketing.
Google is offering a 25% discount off the Pixel C for developers. You can read about it here, and sign up for it here.
I signed up and got a code several hours afterwards.
Give it a shot...
:^)
Doc
I'm not gonna lie, as a day 1 adopter, this kind of breaks my balls. Those of us here who dealt with problems with the touchscreen and wifi since release should be receiving this "developer" discount, as we were the ones that were basically beta testing this for Google. I feel somewhat betrayed for this, but I am also glad at the same time, as this should increase the adoption rate of what has turned out to be an amazing tablet.
Sadly this is only for the USA. Too bad for the rest of us
oRAirwolf said:
I'm not gonna lie, as a day 1 adopter, this kind of breaks my balls. Those of us here who dealt with problems with the touchscreen and wifi since release should be receiving this "developer" discount, as we were the ones that were basically beta testing this for Google. I feel somewhat betrayed for this, but I am also glad at the same time, as this should increase the adoption rate of what has turned out to be an amazing tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey if you think that breaks your balls try pre-ordering the HP WebOS tablet at full price
fiver5 said:
Hey if you think that breaks your balls try pre-ordering the HP WebOS tablet at full price
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn, that's a proper kick to the family jewels...
I bought the Pixel C two weeks ago. I called and got an RMA and ordered it again. Saved me $150.
Nexus products always go on sale a few months after release. If you want a brand new Nexus when it first comes out, you pay a premium. This is the case with most electronics anyways.
I'm getting my Pixel C delivered Tuesday
I really want to buy it.. but every single tablet I have bought I rarely use them (nexus 7 1st and 2nd gen, lg g pad)
I'm not sure if the Pixel C would be any different.. decisions decisions
To those of you who've received the discount: how do they decide whether or not you're a developer? And how long did it take for you to receive the code? I've written simple apps, but never published anything.
sindrefyrn said:
To those of you who've received the discount: how do they decide whether or not you're a developer? And how long did it take for you to receive the code? I've written simple apps, but never published anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't think they did any checks I don't have a developer account with google (although I've done a few off playstore apps) I got mine within 30 minutes after submitting the request.
onilink67 said:
Don't think they did any checks I don't have a developer account with google (although I've done a few off playstore apps) I got mine within 30 minutes after submitting the request.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Just got mine.
For reference: I don't live in the US, and my Google account is not registered there. I used a VPN to register for the code, and I plan to have it sent to relatives in the US and have them forward it to me.
sindrefyrn said:
Thanks. Just got mine.
For reference: I don't live in the US, and my Google account is not registered there. I used a VPN to register for the code, and I plan to have it sent to relatives in the US and have them forward it to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you don't need a VPN. I got a code without it but can't use it I don't have any relative in the US so I can't buy it with the code. Still waiting that G extend the promotion...
Sergio3.14 said:
I think you don't need a VPN. I got a code without it but can't use it I don't have any relative in the US so I can't buy it with the code. Still waiting that G extend the promotion...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i would think you would just need an u.s. address with someone who would forward it. personally, i think the developer for N preview thing is somewhat of a guise just to help boost sales without overtly offending those who spent full price on tablet. i have not seen google do a 25% off sale 90 days post release. The recent Christmas promotions did not go to 25% did they?
For info, it's also available for UK and for Ireland, Australia (and somewhere else I can't remember). I'm UK and received my code a few hours after application. There's no check, it's just an offer based around the fact this is a dev device like the Pixels. Unfortunately, el goog have moved away from low price offerings to the faithful (and early) adopter, especially abroad. The N6P went with $50 play credit in the US and nothing elsewhere. Part of me sees this Pixel C discount as some reparation to the lack of pre-order Nexus love.
Ramble over, apologies!
Any word if discount codes are still being sent out? I signed up for one today (Saturday), just curious if I should expect to get one still or not.
oRAirwolf said:
I'm not gonna lie, as a day 1 adopter, this kind of breaks my balls. Those of us here who dealt with problems with the touchscreen and wifi since release should be receiving this "developer" discount, as we were the ones that were basically beta testing this for Google. I feel somewhat betrayed for this, but I am also glad at the same time, as this should increase the adoption rate of what has turned out to be an amazing tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I took advantage of this deal and still feel like it is overpriced at $400 for the 32gb considering its being marketed to developers as a quasi nexus but then we are punished for unlocking the bootloader with 30 second warnings on start...
I'm building aosp for it right now hopefully I can get $400 worth of fun out of it somehow
randomblame said:
I took advantage of this deal and still feel like it is overpriced at $400 for the 32gb considering its being marketed to developers as a quasi nexus but then we are punished for unlocking the bootloader with 30 second warnings on start...
I'm building aosp for it right now hopefully I can get $400 worth of fun out of it somehow
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Judging by your thanks meter, we have something good to look forward to
oRAirwolf said:
Judging by your thanks meter, we have something good to look forward to
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats a silly way to judge anyone I got a build booting and managed to compile a kernel off the chromium 3.18 source but now am wayyyyyyy too drunk on clearance champag (mmmm) to continue tonight haha I still need to figure out how to package up any custom kernel into a .fit image for inclusion into the boot.img
Do you guys think, since the discount was expanded to UK, Australia and so on that there is a chance Google will expand it even further, to maybe other countries in europe?
Penecho said:
Do you guys think, since the discount was expanded to UK, Australia and so on that there is a chance Google will expand it even further, to maybe other countries in europe?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was extended only to English speaking countries so it seems unlikely to me