Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

maybe you are right and nokia intended to scare off the customers. maybe that's why it failed, maybe it's for it was supposed to fail. don't know - but i am very interested what the factors are that scare off the customers, be it intended or not.

you say its:
- form factor
- missing mms support.(do customers even know that the n900 is not mms capable until they bought it)

that's all? what else?

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

Try to google "Gartner N900" and you'll get 68,400 results!
Slashgear reports,

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

:confused: Who said Nokia intended to scare off customers?

The form factor should clearly show we should not be comparing with iPhones. Back to Marketing Fundamentals; First (1 Segmentation) determine the kinds of customers that exist, (2 Targeting) select which ones we are best off trying to serve and, finally, (3 Positioning) implement our segmentation by optimizing our products/services for that segment and communicating that we have made the choice to distinguish ourselves that way.

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

From whoever paid them to do the research.;)

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

I think there was kind of a disclaimer in the article...

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

I was kidding before, though it's true for some cases, anyway. My apology.

What you quoted is exactly where the controversial is.

Gartner did not state clearly in their disclaimer what exactly the statistics for operating systems are. It's impossible to count the licenses sold, as you may know Maemo has no licensing term of royalty as in Symbian.

Some guess that they use no. of unique IP that were accessing to the repositories. Again very little evident has shown that Gartner requested the Nokia to give the actual figure accessing their repositories, and Nokia obviously would not compile in giving such statistics.

So what exactly is the statistics and where do they come from? I personally think it's out of thin air as usual. Just in my personal opinion anyway.

I wondered if the predicted sales figures would be favourite to Nokia if they've not been cooperating with any business analyst in disclosing sales figure in the first place.

Anyway, I personally don't mind if N900 was sold less 10K in the first 5 months; if it's really the case, I'd even feel rather privileged in having a N900. :D

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

to be honest: when i bought the phone i thought, well thats a start for a linux phone. maybe some tweaks and it could be a showcase for a linux phone.
it took me few hours - at most a week to be sure: not possible. easier to replace the whole thing than to put it straight. now again replacing the whole thing is a problem for some closed cruft.
both together prevent from my point of view the phone from using it as a flagship that shows what a linux phone is capable of.

maybe i am not the smartest but if i look around it seems that no other was smart enough to do the trick. no matter if nitroid, debian, ubuntu, shr or whatever you take: nobody was able to get the thing up and running smoothly. so who can?

only now that it is almost outdated we get slowly the necessary stuff. and no surprise, as soon as the cruft is opened a little, everywhere something gets done: shr came out yesterday or was it 2 days ago? nitroid got it mostly running. ubuntu's phone stack supports n900(but the rest ...) and so on. and why is this? why not in the first place put the stuff in the open? and sure we can see the effect: now things start to work. and it will be for the benefit of maemo as well as will potentially get improved stuff for the device from upstream - unfortunately a little late and still obstacles to overcome.

like i said: maybe i am not the smartest. but nobody? i love to hear the experience of others. but i feel i cannot recommend the device to a casual user if i /and all the others/ have a hard time to really get it going.

and with some comments i get the impression of a "its a feature not bug" attitude i am confronted with.

i got the impression that it is easier to replace maemo than to fix it. nokia got that impression. was it maemos fault: i don't know. you tell me. but i have a felling that meego did a huge step in the right direction(thats the big movement we see out of a sudden) but doubt that it was big enough. and that step was not qt.

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

Theoretically, Gartner might have used data from retailers (how many N900/Blackberry/iPhone they sold) and use this proportion, along with known figures for some devices from manufacturers.

I have an N900 which came from country A (from Nokia retailer here?) through country B (middle-stop) to country C (the end user; the device brand new). The path took more than a year (warranty expired). It would be interesting to know how Gartner and Nokia counted it, to what year and country they attributed it.
Though it cannot explain all the discrepancies in data, of course...

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

I hope they're not getting their data from Google: http://www.google.com/insights/searc...%20N900&cmpt=q
:D:D:D

Re: Why N900 failed on consumer market ?
 

When Maemo came out on AU, it was the only phone I saw to be worth buying. I don't know the statistics but there is a possibility that the phone didn't do as well here. The main reason being it not supporting some mode making it only usable with certain company plans. But well, I still got it. Had to come back 4 weeks in a row because they kept running out of n900s each week within a short period of time of stocking. I even had to break my existing contract and pay fines to switch companies. As it looked to me, this phone had a lot more potential than most others on the market.