Mobilitysite - Latest Comments in “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Good Guy Robert — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:19:36 -0000

WRONG. Verizon is not the biggest reason. Spec for spec, it's a better device. Android 2 I'm sure is not quite as smooth, but I'll bet it's pretty damn nice, and pretty damn flexible. As for apps, are you currently using all 90,000 of the ones on the iPhone? Even if the app selection for android wasn't about to explode, I think I'd get by with 10,000 of them. just a hunch.

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Pony99CA — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:25:57 -0000

First, I'm not the one who claimed a WM device would probably have mediocre sales. I'm citing a counterexample to your claim; if you can't disprove it with actual sales figures, citing a much older feature phone (not even a smart phone) is just weak.

Second, Motorola did produce a boatload of RAZRs -- and I believe they sold very well for a while. Motorola's problem was riding that horse too long and not innovating.

Finally, the RAZR was probably at the end of its lifespan; I don't think the Q series was. They could have produced a WM 6.1 or WM 6.5 Q and possibly had a good seller. They could have produced a Blur interface for WM -- and probably more quickly than they did for the Cliq (because they already had lots of WM developers in house).

I'm not saying that producing Android phones is a bad move. In fact, I think it's probably a good one. I just think putting all of their smart phone eggs into the Android basket is a huge gamble. Just like money management, diversification is generally a good thing. Look how well RIM has done since coming out with various form factors, for example, or how well HTC and Samsung are doing supporting multiple platforms.

Of course, only time will tell if this move pays off for Motorola.

Steve

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Doug Miller — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 12:09:32 -0000

So was the Razr. Maybe they should just make a boatload of those?

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Pony99CA — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:08:14 -0000

Pet peeve alert. "Would have", not "would of". (People say "would of" because the contraction of "would have" is "would've".)

We now return to our regularly scheduled rants.

Steve

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Kevin G — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:07:09 -0000

I have an iphone, I love the apps, the integration, the interface. But I can't tell my customers all day, "I will have to call you back I am about to lose my signal" The droid is the best alternative in my opinion and it does have the one most important element that makes its a better phone; the Verizon network. I won't give up my iphone, just won't use it for making calls. Only time will tell if my droid will eventual supplant my iphone as my overall device of choice.

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Pony99CA — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:06:12 -0000

I thought the Motorola Q was a good seller for Motorola. Do you have figures that show otherwise?

Steve

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Doug Miller — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:52:26 -0000

What else should Motorola have done? Do you think that they would have been better off developing yet another (with probable mediocre sales, and probable smaller margins - higher cost of licensing, lower revenue in order to get people to buy) Windows Mobile device instead?

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Wayne Schulz — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 13:49:25 -0000

It's hard to see how Motorola is going to start a new lucrative franchise if they base their smartphone on an open source OS. It's one thing to milk the Razr for years during the infancy of cellular. Now they introduce the Droid which lookswise is equal to just about every other touch device (don't they all look the same after a while) and is running a free open source phone operating system.

They've got early buzz for better screen display and Android 2.0. They'll probably carry that lead for at most two months.

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Ed — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 11:55:54 -0000

I would of bought a iphone if it was on verizon.

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

Zealot — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 09:19:39 -0000

I think that anointing the Droid a hit already is a stretch, similar to the mistake that was made with the Palm Pre. Pedestals are awfully easy things to get knocked off of, especially when you are a newly released device. Lots of problems can crop up.

I also worry about so many analysts saying that the main strength of the Droid is that it isn't on AT&T. Once the iPhone is no longer exclusive to AT&T (and that will happen sooner or later) will the Droid's advantages disappear?

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

badersk — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 08:07:58 -0000

I leve in Atlanta and the network is pretty good here although is seems to be slower during peak times. I agree with you that the iPhone seems to cater more to games and have ignored getting full business like support. As for keyboards and office sync I like my WM Phone with live mesh and as for keyboards you don't get any better than the Touch pro 2 and it is available on all the major networks. This is the Phone I want to replace my aging tilt.

Re: “Why Motorola’s Droid Is a Sure-Fire Hit: Analysis”

eugarps — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 07:59:11 -0000

I like my iPhone but its failings for me have to do with its failings in power and compatibility. I use my phone as small notebook substitutes and Apple has ignored my market in favor of games. I'll watch the Droid and see if it gives me a syncable MS Office app and an external keyboard interface. If it's just another pretty face for the uber-texters and gamers, I'll lose interest pretty quickly. My next phone will probably be the HTC Touch Pro 2 from Verizon. I'm bored with the AT&T network.