Active Topics

 


Page 5 of 20 « First 34 5 6715 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
benny1967's Avatar
benny1967 is offline benny1967
2010-11-23 , 14:14
Posts: 3,790 | Thanked: 5,718 times | Joined on Mar 2006 @ Vienna, Austria
#41
Originally Posted by lanwellon View Post
Why N900 failed on consumer market?
Doesn't "failing" somehow imply "trying"? Maemo wasn't meant for the consumer market, so while it's true to say it wasn't successful there, I wouldn't use the word "fail". AFAIK, it was even more successful than Nokia had planned - which isn't necessarily a good thing in terms of image, cost for customer care etc.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to benny1967 For This Useful Post:
acvetkov is offline acvetkov
2010-11-23 , 14:17
Posts: 161 | Thanked: 70 times | Joined on Feb 2010
#42
Originally Posted by bubor View Post
why they still use linux versioning? Because they use vanilia kernel with lot of own patches.
Please read the whole post, then comment I have explained why it is _not_ linux. Making a pointless comment on a thing already explained?!
 
lunat is offline lunat
2010-11-23 , 14:34
Posts: 256 | Thanked: 92 times | Joined on Oct 2010
#43
Originally Posted by bubor View Post
why they still use linux versioning? Because they use vanilia kernel with lot of own patches.
if it has patches it is not vanilla....

but you are right that linux is the kernel only and has nothing and absolutely nothing to do with libs or qt or any other software.
Last edited by lunat; 2010-11-23 at 14:42.
 
geneven is offline geneven
2010-11-23 , 14:44
Posts: 5,795 | Thanked: 3,151 times | Joined on Feb 2007 @ Agoura Hills Calif
#44
Originally Posted by benny1967 View Post
Doesn't "failing" somehow imply "trying"? Maemo wasn't meant for the consumer market, so while it's true to say it wasn't successful there, I wouldn't use the word "fail". AFAIK, it was even more successful than Nokia had planned - which isn't necessarily a good thing in terms of image, cost for customer care etc.
Whenever I see this argument, it's hard for me to believe. Like executives were saying, "hey, let's make a quality product and lose a lot of money! Yeah, that would be cool!"
__________________
All I want is 40 acres, a mule, and Xterm.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to geneven For This Useful Post:
BigBadGuber! is offline BigBadGuber!
2010-11-23 , 14:53
Banned | Posts: 706 | Thanked: 296 times | Joined on May 2010
#45
The reason why it failed is simple: Its NOT idiot proof like iPhone and UI not as smooth and polished.
 
bubor is offline bubor
2010-11-23 , 14:54
Posts: 14 | Thanked: 11 times | Joined on Jul 2010
#46
Originally Posted by acvetkov View Post
Making a pointless comment on a thing already explained?!
You did talk about the libs, what isnt the linux.
 
cfh11's Avatar
cfh11 is offline cfh11
2010-11-23 , 14:56
Posts: 1,062 | Thanked: 961 times | Joined on May 2010 @ Boston, MA
#47
True, any company wishes that their product will be the next big thing. But when you set your sights low for sales volume and adjust your business model accordingly with limited marketing/support, the definition of success changes.

I believe Nokia has actually stated that the n900 sales far exceeded their expectations (wish I had a citation for this). Then to Nokia, this is the exact opposite of failure.

Citation: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...ow/5984678.cms
__________________
Want to browse streamlined versions of websites automatically when in 2g? Vote for this brainstorm.

Sick of your cell signal not reconnecting after coming out of a bad signal area? Vote for this bug.
Last edited by cfh11; 2010-11-23 at 15:00.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cfh11 For This Useful Post:
lunat is offline lunat
2010-11-23 , 14:56
Posts: 256 | Thanked: 92 times | Joined on Oct 2010
#48
yes. but somehow it puzzles why they put a badly supported unfinished prototype instead of a quality product on the marked. in regard to quality the n900 is realy bad in regard to capabilities its rather highend.
i don't think realy like they wanted it to be a flop but well its nokia: nokia always diversified instead of concentrating on one successfull device. they allways put out a lot of different devices. well the next is different and might be a hit.

Originally Posted by geneven View Post
Whenever I see this argument, it's hard for me to believe. Like executives were saying, "hey, let's make a quality product and lose a lot of money! Yeah, that would be cool!"
 
daperl's Avatar
daperl is offline daperl
2010-11-23 , 14:56
Posts: 2,427 | Thanked: 2,986 times | Joined on Dec 2007
#49
Originally Posted by extendedping View Post
I disagree with your disagree. No company puts out products hoping they will have limited appeal/sales, if the tablets are niche, they became niche when they never took off, not because nokia wanted a niche product. Evidently they were not made or marketed right, as look what certain tablets are doing now. In 20/20 hindsight its is easy to just say stuff was meant to be niche, but I doubt that was how the devices were pitched internally within Nokia.
What about when a company says in a live world wide broadcast that product A is just step 4 of 5? How does that fit into your ideal business plan scenario?

Take a good, long, hard look at the n900. Who the fvck were they marketing it to? It's got an IR and FM transmitter for Christ's sake!
__________________
N9: Go white or go home
 
extendedping is offline extendedping
2010-11-23 , 15:04
Posts: 838 | Thanked: 292 times | Joined on Apr 2010
#50
everything is a step in a process, 4 of 5 2 of 3 or 1 of 100. Was the original iphone a step 5? And it has not been improved since? How did that step 1 device sell? I really don't know what this step 4 business is. It is a product and they wanted it to sell like hotcakes.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to extendedping For This Useful Post:
Reply
Page 5 of 20 « First 34 5 6715 Last »

Tags
making popcorn, op stop posting

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:49.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top