Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1.    #1  
    There's an interesting article from Rethink Wireless addressing the role of Nexus in Google's overall business strategy. It's titled "Nexus One: ordinary phone, disruptive business model." Here is a snippet:
    Is the Google Nexus One really a ground breaking 'superphone', the term used by the company itself? Or merely an Android version of the HTC HD2 (complete with gigahertz processor), slimmed down and made to look like an iPhone? The fact is, it doesn't really matter, because the pros and cons of the gadget itself were not the point of Google's launch into the handset market yesterday. If we're looking for Google to shift the goalposts in devices, we'll wait for the (allegedly) imminent 'Chrome Tablet' or 'cloudbook', which might help establish new design norms. The Nexus One certainly doesn't do that, nor does it advance the Android software experience significantly, except by introducing the 2.1 OS upgrade.

    The device is important because it is another tactic to promote Google's desired model for the mobile world - open access, a new role for the carrier, and an 'open' experience rigorously monitored by Google.
    And the link. Nexus One: ordinary phone, disruptive business model - Rethink Wireless
  2. #2  
    Apple offered the iphone online as well. But the nexus won't be a success unless it's offered in stores. The masses won't rush online to buy. US customers won't pay unlocked prices.

    Android is still a mess and one that Google didn't improve with this.
  3. daforrds's Avatar
    Posts
    14 Posts
    Global Posts
    15 Global Posts
    #3  
    i think the marketing of the phone is already failing slightly. the name of the phone, nexus 1, is ridiculous. i think it is worse than the pre. lets face it though, on terms of naming the product, everyone is going to lag behind apple because they already established their brand with itunes, the ipod, and now they just extend it to their loyal fan base, which in reality, that is what they have....a fan base.
  4. #4  
    Many Americans did pay unlocked prices for the 1st LOCKED iPhone amazingly. I wouldn't count anything out just yet, especially if Google does this right.

    But the majority of Americans always looking to get that "deal" on the carrier phone is the main reason US carriers have customers by the . It really would be a good thing to snap Americans out of the "free" phone mindset, but many don't seem to see that yet. If Google markets this correctly, something may finally change and carriers will actually have to truly COMPETE on service alone, instead of phone selection.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by The Phone Diva View Post
    But the majority of Americans always looking to get that "deal" on the carrier phone is the main reason US carriers have customers by the . It really would be a good thing to snap Americans out of the "free" phone mindset, but many don't seem to see that yet. If Google markets this correctly, something may finally change and carriers will actually have to truly COMPETE on service alone, instead of phone selection.
    Well said Diva. I'm a full-price, no contract kind of guy whenever I can get it. The only phone I've recently purchased with a contract, ironically, is the iPhone 3G I purchased in July 08 because there was no other choice at release. Luckily, due to AT&T's poor network, I was able to get out of my ETF after 6 months.

    For many years I've felt that wireless providers should be more forthcoming with their pricing schemes. Access fees should only be for access. Phone costs should only be for phones. There should be no such thing as an ETF. In a perfect world:
    1. A provider sells you a phone at an advertised price and you own the phone at that point.
    2. If you can't afford their up-front price, provider should be able to extend you credit on the price of the phone, which you will own when the credit is paid off. The pay off period/monthly payment is negotiable and subject to the laws governing fair lending practices.
    3. If I already own a phone compatible with a network, the only say the provider has in my using it is how I will pay them for the services I use.
    4. Your monthly fee is for network access in whatever form that takes - nothing more. It doesn't offset phone subsidy or hidden account admin costs. Naturally, your monthly fees should vary based on the types/amount of services you sign up for. You should be able to change these services without incurring a commitment (for a reasonable admin fee if appropriate)
    5. A reasonable, up-front startup/admin fee is acceptable.
    6. ETFs should be outlawed. Right now providers earn profit from them, even the supposed declining balance variants, regardless of what providers like Verizon try to make you believe. There's no way an ETF balance should be greater than 1/24th of the original ETF with one month remaining on a two-year contract. Consequently, providers are clearly using ETFs as a punitive measure to mitigate early contract terminations and/or defections to other providers (churn).

    Good for Google and Apple in their attempts to chip away at the stranglehold wireless providers have on their subscribers. While greed may be good for wireless stockholders, counter-greed is even better for consumers. Google's and Apple's approaches, while not necessarily cheaper, are certainly more honest and transparent from a consumer's standpoint.
  6. #6  
    I'm not sure about Apple. Seems the iPhone exclusivity helped AT&T screw over customers. The one good thing is the freedom from carrier bloat. But then Apple has it's own method of locking down phones. And AT&T has such a grip on the App Store, it crippled features for those in OTHER COUNTRIES. Hopefully Google and the carriers will be more open with it's phone.
    HP has officially ruined it's own platform and kicked webOS loyalists and early TouchPad adopters to the curb. You think after you drop it like a hot potato and mention it made no money and is costing you money, anyone else wants it??? Way to go HP!!

    And some people are fools to keep believing their hype. HP has shown they will throw webOS under the bus and people are still having faith in them??? News flash: if it's own company won't stand behind it, it's finished!
  7. solarus's Avatar
    Posts
    554 Posts
    Global Posts
    575 Global Posts
    #7  
    I'm not convinced about the strategy either. Buying from Google isn't a whole lot different than buying an iPhone from Apple, granted the buyer gets the option of buying the Nexus 1 unsubsidized. The iPhone did pretty good when it was available unsubsidized but it didn't really take off with the masses until it was subsidized. I'm not convinced the unsubsidized Nexus 1 will represent a significant portion of total Nexus 1 sales, not when a) there isn't much significant difference between the Nexus 1 and other Android products in the pipeline and 2) Americans in general have not shown any inclination to spend $400 - $500 for a mobile phone, at least no en mass.

    Google could use some sort of advertising features to help subsidize the phone in the future but I'm the kind of person who would rather be tied to a network than give Google access to more of my personal info. Then again when I look at each of the networks, each has at lest two phones (or will have shortly) I could live - I don't find myself pulled to one network or another simply because of their device line-up.
  8. madcow706's Avatar
    Posts
    74 Posts
    Global Posts
    80 Global Posts
    #8  
    I think googles strategy is in the law of averages. Once AT&T gets google phones they will be on every major cell carrier in the US, with at least 2 to 3 phones (more on some then others) on each carrier. That is Huge. Google will have their hand in the smartphone arena on every carrier, and the carriers will push the phones because they are cheaper for them. Look at the big push the Droid has on Verizon, you can't escape it, that is advertising for google, no matter what network you are on. It will stay on peoples mind when they go and get a new phone, that hey, maybe I should check this android thing out. That is what google is doing. Flooding the market with product. Every other cell phone OS will be hard to keep up with that.
  9. hubz1124's Avatar
    Posts
    37 Posts
    Global Posts
    41 Global Posts
    #9  
    anyone interested in the Nexus should check out the verizonish ETF's their imposing on it

Posting Permissions