03/26/2010, 03:58 AM
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Member
![]() Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 62
Likes Received: 0
Thanks: 73
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Looks like this might be why carriers are marketing android more aggressively than WebOS, apparently google is sharing ad revenue with carriers:
Google Sharing Advertising Revenue With Android Carriers, Handset Manufacturers? |
03/26/2010, 04:36 AM
|
#2 (permalink) | |
|
Member
![]() Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 3,674
Likes Received: 471
Thanks: 89
Thanked 395 Times in 265 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
03/26/2010, 04:36 AM
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Member
![]() Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 356
Likes Received: 7
Thanks: 87
Thanked 27 Times in 19 Posts
|
This could also be the reason Apple is mad at Google. The revenue sharing idea is not that crazy. Google is trying to secure its dominance in web advertisement.
Palm is too small. Microsoft is competing with Palm on mobile platform, so it is not likely it would whole heartedly support Palm. The only company in the same boat as Palm is Apple, but iPhone's strong position make it less vulnerable. One option for Palm is go completely open source for WebOS. But it could be a poison pill for itself as well. Another option is for Palm to create more end user applications. I think they are doing some of that with the new Facebook and hot spot apps. I would go even further to open source these Palm apps. |
03/26/2010, 04:39 AM
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
Member
![]() Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 3,674
Likes Received: 471
Thanks: 89
Thanked 395 Times in 265 Posts
|
Quote:
*However*, if this is a successful strategy, maybe that makes WebOS an interesting prospect for someone like Yahoo? |
|
03/26/2010, 08:11 AM
|
#7 (permalink) |
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,348
Likes Received: 0
Thanks: 387
Thanked 789 Times in 484 Posts
|
I have to say I disagree with the premise of the thread. Carriers aren't choosing to push Android "over the Pre" because of money. The fact is, they had a diverse and mature lineup of products ready to market before Palm did with WebOS.
Some people here swear that if Pre launched in June of 2009 on Verizon with Droid-esque advertising, it would've gotten the same or better sales. Just aint so. WebOS 1.0 or 1.1 was a rushed, buggy beta that was released because it had to be, not because it was ready. There were few apps, no Facebook app, no 3D games, no video recording, a slower UI, hardware defects aplenty...oh, and a company that was deadset on branding their new OS with some esoteric, atmospheric commercials with monks and a stoned Borg Queen. And did I mention that shortly after launch, the two biggest rival carriers claimed they'd be carrying the same device 6 months or so from now? No big Droid-esque high res screen. No huge catalog of apps. No free voice-activated Google navigation. No dock or car mode. No mature 2.0 OS. No guaranteed exclusive for the forseeable future. No mobile hotspot. No extra 256MB of RAM. No extra 8GB. It would've been nothing like the Droid launch. And it's not just Droid. Android was already onto their "Plus" version of their original handsets (The HTC Hero being a "plus" to the G1 and MyTouch) before Palm's 1.0 even made it to market. Droid was well into final designs and manufacturing (not to mention high-level partnership with Motorola, Google, and Verizon) by the time Palm even began to get their act together in late 2009. Google may offer incentives to partners, but they also offer a more diverse, modern, and complete product line than pretty much anybody else around. Put simply, they were ready to go when Microsoft, Palm, and everyone else besides Apple WASN'T. |
03/26/2010, 08:54 AM
|
#9 (permalink) |
|
Member
![]() Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 172
Likes Received: 0
Thanks: 7
Thanked 37 Times in 19 Posts
|
It is also because Android is license free. Why develop your own OS when Android is free? It says the manufacturers big money and with all the free marketing they get with just having android installed its more revenue in their pocket
__________________
Back to your bridge evil troll you have no powers here. |
03/26/2010, 08:56 AM
|
#10 (permalink) |
|
Member
![]() Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 578
Likes Received: 0
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
|
It probably has more to do with one very simple fact - the easy sell.
1. Get TURN BY TURN navigation, spoken to you... no need for a GPS 2. It syncs wonderfully with your gmail and google calendar 3. It's google, you know "google" the most popular everything on the web so searching, voice driven search, etc. are all built into the phone for Google's myriad of web products. 4. Tens of thousands of apps, soon to easily best the iPhone with much more usable apps 5. Don't like the keyboardless, get the one with the keyboard. Unfortunately with Palm, don't care for the Pre form factor, the Pixi is not an alternative. Get the Android phone type that works for you. This alone says "kaching." Web OS is surely superior but it's definitely not something you see in the 2 minute conversation in the store or even easy to realize in a demo. After using both for a short period of time you realize the differences - which is after sale. |
03/26/2010, 11:58 AM
|
#12 (permalink) | |
|
Banned
![]() Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 3,614
Likes Received: 0
Thanks: 264
Thanked 466 Times in 285 Posts
|
Quote:
Maybe we'd have seen a slab device by now..in addition to the Pre Plus, more webOS advancement, etc. Perhaps it'd be Palm announcing that 4G phone. Really win over sprint employees who basically act as Palm's sales reps. So where's all the critics of the Evo saying...sprint? Why sprint? Remember, Engadget recommended Palm stay away from Sprint..even if its wimax..and that it was a mistake. Last edited by cardfan; 03/26/2010 at 12:17 PM. |
|
![]() |
|
| Tags |
| android vs pre, carriers, marketing |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|



