Sony Ericsson / Sony : Android : 'SE CEO: Google asked us to build the Nexus One, we refused'
>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
Sony Ericsson / Sony >
Android
> 'SE CEO: Google asked us to build the Nexus One, we refused'
Bookmark topic
On 2010-02-19 01:27:40, laffen wrote:
@SloopJohnB
"the common delays"
This is written over and over again, but I realy do not know where any of you have picked up this statement from. A web forum maybe? Please mention more than one model that has been delayed compared to the launch date provided by
X10 was
announced on November 3rd 2009. It was said to be available in Q1. You are welcome to send me notification PM on March 31 if the X10 not are for sale at that date. Another thing is why does Sony Ericsson have these announcement many months before the available product. I am sure they have a good reason even though I dont' know why the do it.
It is widely understood that April is the new release date of the Xperia X10. Sony Ericsson have not confirmed this themselves (it would only draw negative press) but it understood to be so. Vodafone UK expects the X10
in April, T-Mobile Germany expects it
in April and Rogers Wireless (Canada) released
this statement expecting the phone in Q2 2010. Many network providers are eagerly awaiting this phone but I can find none who will release it prior to April.
I really really want this phone.
I also really really like SE and don't want to see the brand damaged.
But announcing phones and releasing them months later, then delaying them, when Motorola and HTC are just chucking them out at a phenomenal rate is a bad look. A very bad look. I even feel embarressed for SE.
SE recently announced a new Global Sales and Marketing Manager Kristian Tear, to take over on 1st April 2010. I bet his first request on accepting the job was to have all major product releases (X10) delayed until he gets his feet under the desk.
This phone is not coming out before April unfortunately.
--
Posted: 2010-02-20 00:42:31
Edit :
Quote
On 2010-02-18 21:25:30, S4k1s wrote:
HTC is a subcontractor,
is not a subcontractor. What part of this don't you understand?...
What's the difference -
is releasing hardware using other people's software platforms, the difference if any is subtle.
signed up to the Symbian Foundation, even donated UIQ! The result is phones running a touch version of S60 which Nokia now says is low-end, then releases Maemo and merges with Intel's Moblin to form Meego.
signs up to Windows Mobile and is still announcing WM phones when Microsoft announces Windows Phone 7 Series with the goal posts moved to where Microsoft can tightly monitor them. Did you notice all the XBox Live branding? How will that fit with Sony's Playstaion brand? Will
be able to redirect that button to it's own online gaming site?
The Google Nexus One is controversial because Google ideally shouldn't compete with the manufacturers of Android devices; it puts the manufacturers at a disadvantage. Well, all manufacturers except the one which makes the Nexus One that is, which could have been
, if only they'd been smart enough to say "Yes".
SE is at the mercy of the companies who manage the smartphone platforms it uses. Is this really any less demeaning than being the first choice of hardware partner with one of the foremost names in software worldwide?
Could this co-operation have benefited
sales in the US?
Frankly, I think the only thing worse than turning down the offer is bragging about it. Dumb move, very dumb.
[ This Message was edited by: carkitter on 2010-02-20 00:23 ]
--
Posted: 2010-02-20 01:15:28
Edit :
Quote
Here is something I found which may lead to the reason why
denied the offer ...
Source is relative to why Samsung launched the Bada platform which is based on C++ code.
Source
The current mobile phone market of around 1 billion devices per year roughly breaks down into four price-points. At the top are the iconic devices that bring new mobile experiences to the world such as the iPhone and N95, next are the less distinctive smartphones such as the Nokia 5800 and Motorola’s Droid, then the feature phones that bring last year’s new experiences to the mass market, and at the bottom are the voice phones for people who really do just want to make a phone call and maybe send an SMS.
Samsung makes most of its profit in the smartphone segment, delivering hundreds of well-designed models for operators and regions all over the world. But these are volatile times for the smartphone segment. Android is bringing more-and-more competition into smartphones, most importantly competitors such as Acer and Dell from the PC manufacturing world who are content with gross margins far below those expected (and sorely needed!) by traditional smartphone OEMs. And at the same time as competition increases, traditional OEMs are finding it more-and-more difficult to differentiate themselves in an Android world.
The inevitable result is a decline in average sales price (ASP); Samsung’s ASP decreased 3% in Q3 2009. Similarly, HTC who focuses entirely on the smartphone segment with Android and Windows Mobile saw their ASP decrease by 4.4% between Q2 and Q3 and expect a further decrease of 5% in Q4. Motorola released their Android-based Droid device in Q3, but after the initial excitement of being the first Android 2.0 device in the market, it has now been labelled a “me too” smartphone and its price is being repeatedly reduced.
2010 has already been hailed “the year of Android” with an unprecedented line-up of Android devices coming to market from 10s of manufacturers.
So, how are manufacturers like Samsung going to stand out in this crowded landscape? Margin pressure is not only coming from consumers due to a lack of device differentiation, but also from mobile network operators who have complete visibility of Android device-creation economics and are demanding cost-based prices from the OEMs. How can OEMs retain the high margins they’ve enjoyed for so long and that their shareholders have come to expect? bada may not be the right answer, but it doesn’t seem like Android is either.
All traditional mobile phone OEMs (except Nokia) are making Android devices, and they have all increased their adoption of Android through 2009. With their bottom-lines under serious threat from the economic downturn, ever increasing operating costs, and Apple’s appropriation of 30% of the profit from the market, the low cost of device-creation promised by Google has proven very tempting.
bada is the first sign that an OEM is looking a bit further ahead and realising that while cost of device-creation may be low in an Android world, there’s also little differentiation, and that means ever lower margins. The struggle to maintain margins has always driven significant changes in the mobile phone industry from cameras, to open platforms, to integrated on-line services; and as Android puts margins under increasing threat we should expect more-and-more major changes in 2010.
Samsung are right that they had to do something. Following the footsteps of Apple, and to some extent RIM, the current answer to differentiation is “own the whole stack”, and so that’s exactly what Samsung is doing.
Will bada save Samsung’s margins? Maybe. Probably not. But the core motivation for change is correct, and from that perspective bada definitely makes sense.
--
Posted: 2010-02-21 03:50:44
Edit :
Quote
Hahaha
This is funny
Drew
--
Posted: 2010-02-21 08:02:07
Edit :
Quote
I think that whole article is flawed except for this bit:
Samsung are right that they had to do something. Following the footsteps of Apple, and to some extent RIM, the current answer to differentiation is “own the whole stack”, and so that’s exactly what Samsung is doing.
If you break down mobile phone sales figures, you'll find that all major manufacturers do well in their home markets and that the size of that home market determines their size overall, eg:
Nokia does well in Europe.
Samsung and LG do well in Asia.
RIM, Motorola and Apple do well in North America.
Every smartphone OS but one suffers from the disadvantage of not being able to connect to iTunes - the world's most popular content download source. Therefore Apple's OS will always have an advantage.
Recent problems between Google and the Chinese Govt have highlighted some interesting things, namely that Google is having a lot of trouble trying to dominate Asian markets like it dominates Western markets. Clearly Asian consumers prefer Asian software (such as Baidu Search) and Samsung would be well advised to pursue it's own smartphone ecosystem. Were it to try and duplicate Apple's iTunes Store and App Store in Asia (complete with content agreements with suppliers in Hollywood, Bollywood and record companies) it may have considerable success. Imagine doing to Apple's content sales business what Baidu Search has done to Google China. That would be a huge pile of money to control.
I don't expect to see Bada promoted a great deal or to have much impact in the West. There are too many OS's as it is. Samsung should really concentrate on Asia where it understands the customers better than American companies do.
--
Posted: 2010-02-21 09:34:46
Edit :
Quote
On 2010-02-21 09:34:46, carkitter wrote:
I think that whole article is flawed except for this bit:
Samsung are right that they had to do something. Following the footsteps of Apple, and to some extent RIM, the current answer to differentiation is “own the whole stack”, and so that’s exactly what Samsung is doing.
If you break down mobile phone sales figures, you'll find that all major manufacturers do well in their home markets and that the size of that home market determines their size overall, eg:
Nokia does well in Europe.
Samsung and LG do well in Asia.
RIM, Motorola and Apple do well in North America.
Every smartphone OS but one suffers from the disadvantage of not being able to connect to iTunes - the world's most popular content download source. Therefore Apple's OS will always have an advantage.
Recent problems between Google and the Chinese Govt have highlighted some interesting things, namely that Google is having a lot of trouble trying to dominate Asian markets like it dominates Western markets. Clearly Asian consumers prefer Asian software (such as Baidu Search) and Samsung would be well advised to pursue it's own smartphone ecosystem. Were it to try and duplicate Apple's iTunes Store and App Store in Asia (complete with content agreements with suppliers in Hollywood, Bollywood and record companies) it may have considerable success. Imagine doing to Apple's content sales business what Baidu Search has done to Google China. That would be a huge pile of money to control.
I don't expect to see Bada promoted a great deal or to have much impact in the West. There are too many OS's as it is. Samsung should really concentrate on Asia where it understands the customers better than American companies do.
Unfortunately you're analysis is flawed, not the article.
RIM does MUCH better outside the North American market when it comes to consumers. They're global and currently the number 2 smarpthone OS and have been for just over 12mths now. Also note they also can sync playlists with iTunes/Windows Media Player - I've personally done this - either their their desktop manager license of IntelliSync from Nokia or something in-house. Apple is not shutting them down on updates like they've been doing to Palm so I believe its a license agreement. So its not just 1 manufacturer that does well outside of their home market, its 3 ... Symbian, BlackBerry OS, and of course Apple iPhone OS.
I'll agree on Bada but I wouldn't count it out prematurely, since Bada needs to have their apps based on C++ there are plenty of coders in the world that have years of experience & expertise to do that.
I'm actually glad that China is sticking it to Google ... about time somebody took it to them. Microsoft got a few bruises and ribs broken, thanks European Nation, and their learning from it, not to mention paying for it ... literally.
still I'm sure there is more to come, as another shift in the mobile space is pending or bound to happen.
--
Posted: 2010-02-21 23:13:39
Edit :
Quote
RIM being the number 2 smartphone OS doesn't put them in the top 5 phone manufacturers. Smartphones only make up a small number of overall phone sales; its only in online discussions where the smartphones command a greater share of the audience.
My statement did not say manufacturers were not successful outside their home markets, only that they were most successful in their home markets. It is commonly predicted that all the smartphone OS's will distill down into just 3 superior OS's; I don't believe that is so. Regional preferences count more than many people realise and that's why I see a good future for Bada if Samsung play their cards right.
If Apple licenses iTunes to RIM (which I doubt) it would be the first such agreement Apple have had. Most likely it is a third-party sync app not developed by RIM (unlike Palm which developed and marketed iTunes sync and fought to keep it) and therefore of no interest to Apple at this stage. The general public do hot hack their devices and therefore don't have access to iTunes other than in the standard manner. I'm sure quite a few Blackberry owners also have iPods.
are definately at a disadvantage by not controlling their own OS, but its too late now for them to try what Samsung is doing and target it at Europe and the US. Apple has conquered the market, Android has significant momentum and Nokia won't give up easily.
--
Posted: 2010-02-22 00:13:07
Edit :
Quote
I doubt Google asked SE to build the nexus, it would of taken SE 10 years to come up with something and still would of had issues.
--
Posted: 2010-02-22 01:43:50
Edit :
Quote
On 2010-02-22 00:13:07, carkitter wrote:
RIM being the number 2 smartphone OS doesn't put them in the top 5 phone manufacturers. Smartphones only make up a small number of overall phone sales; its only in online discussions where the smartphones command a greater share of the audience.
My statement did not say manufacturers were not successful outside their home markets, only that they were most successful in their home markets. It is commonly predicted that all the smartphone OS's will distill down into just 3 superior OS's; I don't believe that is so. Regional preferences count more than many people realise and that's why I see a good future for Bada if Samsung play their cards right.
If Apple licenses iTunes to RIM (which I doubt) it would be the first such agreement Apple have had. Most likely it is a third-party sync app not developed by RIM (unlike Palm which developed and marketed iTunes sync and fought to keep it) and therefore of no interest to Apple at this stage. The general public do hot hack their devices and therefore don't have access to iTunes other than in the standard manner. I'm sure quite a few Blackberry owners also have iPods.
are definately at a disadvantage by not controlling their own OS, but its too late now for them to try what Samsung is doing and target it at Europe and the US. Apple has conquered the market, Android has significant momentum and Nokia won't give up easily.
Well officially Media Sync - which is part of the Blackberry desktop manager application that comes with all recent BlackBerry's over the past 8mths. I wouldn't say Apple has concured the market (in USA or elsewhere) since RIM has them beat ... 36million users strong vs lower than 16 for Apple.
--
Posted: 2010-02-22 06:47:32
Edit :
Quote
Perhaps it went like that:
Mr Google: ''We will release it for 500-550$ sim free''
SE: ''Are you nuts? we should do the same as with Satio, selling it for 700-750$ to steal first buyers then 550$ after 2 months''
Mr Google: ''No we are conscious it will not work like that, the fact is that your satio is a loser because of that!''
SE: ''It's not the Satio the loser but the public, why wouldn't they paid the extra hundreds bucks?''
Mr Google: ''Because they are not stup*d, we want to be good with our potential customers and give a logic price''
SE: ''The hell with you! Do it with HTC if you want, we will release X10 anyway and for 800$, and by the way we will take the OS 1.6 it's cheaper right now, when the 2.1 will be half the price you call us to do an upgrade...''
--
Posted: 2010-02-22 13:40:19
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
