Samsung gets Galaxy phone on all 4 carriers... WTF Google why not the N1?!

[ap3604]

Just saw on Engadget how Samsung accomplished the goal that Google failed at: Getting its Galaxy phone line on all 4 carriers

Why again didnt Google just play nice and be flexible to the carriers demands?

Why not allow Verizon and Sprint to have a little control over their versions of the N1 in order to ensure the N1 becomes a national success?

If Samsung can accomplish this, why couldnt Google?

Seems like such a waste of a perfect opportunity

Verizon ropes in Samsung Fascinate, US Cellular gets a Galaxy S too -- Engadget

[nexus1inAZ]

I think the main reason Google didn't pull off the 4 major carriers with the N1 is due to the custom interface issue. From what I have read Google wanted the carriers to keep the N1 basic vanilla and Verizon and Sprint both wanted to add their interfaces, this was the major reason it fell through.

[Gone]

Originally Posted by nexus1inAZ

I think the main reason Google didn't pull off the 4 major carriers with the N1 is due to the custom interface issue. From what I have read Google wanted the carriers to keep the N1 basic vanilla and Verizon and Sprint both wanted to add their interfaces, this was the major reason it fell through.

If that is the case i am glad they passed...

[ap3604]

Originally Posted by nexus1inAZ

I think the main reason Google didn't pull off the 4 major carriers with the N1 is due to the custom interface issue. From what I have read Google wanted the carriers to keep the N1 basic vanilla and Verizon and Sprint both wanted to add their interfaces, this was the major reason it fell through.

If that is the case Google should have caved for the benefit of the customer instead of being so stubborn. I could care less whether or not the N1 had sense UI on it (alot of people hack this on the N1 anyways) as as long as my customers have the option of purchasing my product.

Seems like Google's pride was getting WAAAY too much in the way and ended up hurting the customer (you and me) instead for the sake of pride =/

[alphawave7]

I think Google was less interested in selling huge numbers, and wanted to put forth a unique, powerful phone, simply to showcase their Android OS capabilities. In that, they succeeded tremendously, as Android is now being activated by 160,000+ units every month.

[shadowsky]

I think it differentiates the product, nearly all custom android phones out there use a custom UI. The nexus one is one of the few that don't. Also in most places in the world, the majority of carriers use GSM which means you can buy the phone unlocked and use it on whichever carrier you like.
I have a feeling Google never intended this phone to sell big, they called it a "mobile lab" pre-launch. I think they are pushing out updates onto nexus one first (as they have been doing so far) as a kind of "beta test". The fact that they did not market the nexus one aggressively meant most people who own a nexus one would be enthusiast who would welcome early updates and wouldn't mind the occasional minor glitch as a result. Even if sh*t happens they have kept it within a smaller group of android users, users who are probably more willing to give feedback to fix the problems.

[AndroidIsTheTruth]

Well other than AT&T, Verizon and Sprint were both getting there own phone close to the N1. I don't think this has anything to do with the carriers and more with products. At the time when N1 was suppose to go with Sprint and Verizon the Incredible and Evo were going to be dropping subsidized. Google was selling the phone on their store anyways. From a sells standpoint it would have been a lost to start mass producing CDMA phones and them not selling. Atleast with GSM phones, they were already made for T-Mobile so just a few changes and they could be sold to AT&T customers.

Samsung don't necessary care about selling unsubsidized phones and google aren't working with them directly to sell google branded phones. Samsung are their own MFR and it's easier for them to sell to companies than it would for Google to sell and having HTC build the phones. They would come more out of pocket than Samsung would and not getting the same return.

People with these subsidized phones are going to have a harder time getting updates. You're going to have 4 builds, 4 carriers, so that 4x custoemr with these phones will have to wait for the carriers to approved any updates.

I really don't think some people realize the importance and freedom of having a unbranded unsubsidized phone.

[number 9]

Originally Posted by ap3604

If that is the case Google should have caved for the benefit of the customer instead of being so stubborn. I could care less whether or not the N1 had sense UI on it (alot of people hack this on the N1 anyways) as as long as my customers have the option of purchasing my product.

Seems like Google's pride was getting WAAAY too much in the way and ended up hurting the customer (you and me) instead for the sake of pride =/

The N1 is Google's phone. It wasn't meant as a mass market, carrier customizable handset. The reason Google sold the phone the way they did was to let people escape the restrictions placed on them by carriers(contracts, UI, bloatware, etc.). As a showcase for Android, it would contradict the reason for the N1's existence to put Sense, or Espresso or Motoblur or whatever on it, not to mention giving carriers direct access to things like disabling certain features of the OS. If they did that, there would really be nothing special about the N1.

Besides who wants a Google 'Spectacular', or a Google Droid 'Impressive' or a Google 'Wow our company makes pretty lame names up for our phones!'.

Look no farther than the iPhone to see that, in this country at least, the carriers are winning, and even Google and Apple are at their mercy. Google tried to break free from the carriers but couldn't. It wasn't Google being stubborn, it was sticking to their principles IMO, and I'm also glad they did.

I think you should be asking "Why are cellular service providers so stubborn and restrictive" instead. The providers hurt the customers, not Google.

Carriers: Want an iPhone but don't like AT&T? Too bad! Want an Incredible on your preferred carrier? No! Want WiFi Hotspots? 30 dollars more please!

Google: Want free GPS with voice guided navigation? No problem. Want to customize your phone any way you want? Go ahead. Want to root? Absolutely(at your own risk, of course).

I mean look at the "Galaxy S" on the 4 carriers. It's 3 or 4 different versions, not one phone! One has a keyboard and led flash and FFC, the others don't. At&t's looks different from T-Mobile's, we don't know what the VZW and USC versions are like but they will have their own flair and make them totally separate versions as well.

There are two N1's. The only difference is radio bands.

[dd4005]

Y'all have a strange market over there stateside. With the exception of Apple, I believe all phones are available subsidized by all phone carriers in europe. I can choose my carrier based on contract configuration and then choose the phone I want them to subsidize me (for signing a contract). Any phone any carrier, it's how it should be everywhere. Only the iphone (afaik) is restricting themselves to one specific carrier unless jailbroken.

Personally I buy my phone direct/cash and then choose a prepaid/pay-as-you-go sim-only account and it works out better anyway.

[AndroidIsTheTruth]

One only has to look at Nokia and can see the HUGE difference between the unbranded e71 and AT&T stripped version of e71x

I shelled out big money for the e71 and bought direct from Nokia before it even hit AT&T market. Then I heard it was picked up and all people did was hugely complain about restrictions and features stripped from the e71 version.

Then I was being cheap and bought a Samsung Impression under a renew contract. I couldn't add my own GPS service w/o hacking the system. AT&T would not let any other GPS service allowed on the phone other than AT&T navigation and pay the 9.99 service for it.

Trust me, people are going to complain hugely about Galaxy S on AT&T like they do the Backflip and Aria because AT&T adds bloatware that can't be taken off or restrict 3rd party apps from being added on w/o going through the back door.

I told myself I'd NEVER buy a subsidized phone again. That's one reason I've always been loyal to Nokia cause they always gave customers options of buying subsidized phones or unsubsidized for most of their models.

I like AT&T service for the most part, but refuse to continue to buy into their BS contract for a restrictive phone.