Droid: “The Best Smart Phone Not Made by Apple”
by John Paczkowski
Posted on November 6, 2009 at 5:15 AM PT
Droid, Motorola’s most anticipated cellphone since the launch of the Razr in 2004, arrived at market today, to a warm reception by most accounts. Some 2,000 Verizon Wireless stores opened early this morning, many to lines–though admittedly, the lines are far shorter than those that accompanied the launch of certain rival devices.
According to News.com, 100 people or so lined up outside Verizon’s midtown Manhattan store last night prior to its midnight opening. And various reports posted to Twitter suggest there were queues at other outlets as well, though quite a bit shorter (see below; click to enlarge).
In any event, the fact that there are lines at all must be a welcome sight for Verizon (VZ), which has been looking for a strong rival to Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, and for Motorola (MOT), which hopes Droid will revive its much-diminished post-Razr cellphone business. As one Verizon subscriber eager to trade up to Droid told me, “it’s the best smart phone not made by Apple.”
With endorsements like this, Motorola should be working a bit harder on branding the device as its own. Right now, the Droid marketing push from Verizon Wireless is so overwhelming that you’d think CEO Lowell McAdam designed it himself. Why aren’t we hearing from Motorola as well?
“Droid is potentially a game changer for Motorola,” iSuppli analyst Tina Teng said in a recent research note. “Motorola now is no longer just emphasizing slick form factors, such as it did with its RAZR handset. The company now has focused on the hottest segment of the global mobile handset market–providing compelling smartphone products that are usable and expandable through third-party applications.”
That being the case, Motorola might want to do a bit more to get its name out there.
Comments
Pulling a quote from a prospective customer who is standing in line and who hasn’t used the product yet–then using that quote as your headline–strikes me as irresponsible journalism. The headline makes it sound like you think the Droid is the “best smart phone not made by Apple.” Are you endorsing the Droid or reporting it?
Posted by Chris Hiester at November 6th, 2009 at 7:49 amI’m not endorsing anything. I’m reporting on early interest in the device. That quote makes for a nice sound byte and it is clear from the post that it is the opinion of one customer only. Moreover, the post is clearly NOT an opinion piece or review.
Posted by John Paczkowski at November 6th, 2009 at 8:08 amPerhaps the lines weren’t too long at the retail stores, but Verizon also offered Droid online to Verizon Wireless customers (like me) who didn’t want to queue. I’m sure we will be updated soon enough on today’s aggregate sales numbers.
I agree that Droid is a game changer – not just for Motorola and hardware, but for the App Phone market in general. See my post at: http://thebalanceact.wordpress.....appphones/
Posted by Saira Nayak at November 6th, 2009 at 9:31 amDroid will be a strong competitor to the iPhone. It has good handset technology. It has Google’s support, 2 killer free apps Google Voice and Google Navigation. It is also rumored that NeuroMobile will be available on Droid soon. I’m not ready to switch but I could see why others might.
Posted by Ron Kaper at November 6th, 2009 at 9:53 amMake a smartphone that’s usable…
Now there’s a lofty goal. Especially for Motorola, which some time back, in reaction to the iPhone, said they wanted their business to be “predictably boring.”
That’s a step up there, Moto.
But as I learned long ago, Motorola interfaces are torture to use, so this must be a deal-breaker for them to have Android to play with. Good luck. Force Apple to improve the iPhone faster. I’m betting that’s the Droid’s main contribution to smart phones.
Posted by Eric Welch at November 6th, 2009 at 10:03 amThe Motorola Droid phone is an interesting addition to Verizon’s selections of smart phones. The question is how unique is the Motorola Droid? And what competition will this phone face in the marketplace? The positive is that Motorola is a recognized brand due in part to their years of advertising in the NFL (remember all the helmets tagging that “M” logo). In the pre smart phone days, consumers buying cell phones simply went with the most stylish phones on display and a brand they felt that made them look cool or sophisticated; to which, Motorola obliged. But Motorola soon found itself in an era where the game changer was consumer demand for smart phones with large touch-screen, Internet, and Social Networking smarts.
Motorola Droid will face some stiff competition:
But this time around may be a little different for Motorola. Would Motorola’s phone end up being the dumb shell in a smart universe? That is, Motorola makes the hardware (albeit with some social networking apps); Google makes the Android operating system; while the phone is plastered with the Verizon Droid brand. Here is where the confusion sets in. Because the Motorola device is the first to sport (no pun intended!) Verizon’s Droid logo, Motorola’s faithful and other consumers will think that Droid is synonymous with Motorola. But as other companies such as HTC, LG, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, and others also release Droid phones on Verizon’s network, Motorola is going to find itself buried under a barrage of equally strong competing brands – all using the same Droid name. Can Motorola withstand the manufacturing juggernaut that HTC will unleash with their hundred flavors of Droid smart phones? If you follow the discussions on the Internet, most references to phones incorporating the Google Android operating system (which Verizon brands as Droid) are about the hardware specifications of the devices, and not the operating system. So the key question is – what key competitive advantage does Motorola have to fight all those equally adept competitors who will all incorporate Android into their phones or use the Verizon branded Droid name on their devises? If the argument is hardware design, that is a weak argument. Motorola may soon find itself in a crowded market.
Where is the intellectual property?
Apple, RIM, and Palm all have their hardware, operating system, and software ecosystems. And they own the intellectual property rights to critical technologies in their smart phones. They can present a coherent, consistent, and well branded marketing campaign. But the companies competing in the Android marketplace all have to compete on fancy hardware design, which as we have learned in the PC marketplace is hard to do. Look at Sony; they are successful with the PlayStation 3 because they own the hardware and gaming operating systems software. But in the Windows marketplace, because Sony does not own the Windows operating system, they have to use fancy hardware designs to distinguish themselves, which is a hard job to do. Motorola is fighting a similar battle in the smart phone arena. Motorola’s new phone does not present us with any intellectual property, patents, or special product branding to distinguish itself in the marketplace. Motorola not owning the Android operating system (or even the Droid name) is akin to a publishing business not owning its contents. And in publishing, as the adage goes, the content is king!
Posted by Andrew Augustine at November 6th, 2009 at 12:07 pm> I agree that Droid is a
> game changer
The Droid is not a game changer. The game was changed 3 years ago by Apple and the Droid is Verizon’s first entry into Apple’s game. Droid is the first ever Verizon phone with a modern Web browser, which is an iPhone innovation from 2007. It’s catch-up for Verizon.
Droid is available to the 0.01% of the world’s population that has proprietary Verizon cell service, while iPhone is available to over 50% of the world’s population. The idea that Droid could change Apple’s game is frankly ludicrous.
Calling Droid a “game changer” or “iPhone killer” doesn’t help Droid. The name is licensed from Lucasarts and the first ad is only understandable if you read tech blogs. If 10% of Verizon’s customers buy a Droid that will be massive success but it won’t be a patch on what’s happened with the iPhone, which had a much more successful adoption over the first 3 years than both the iPod and the DOS PC.
Posted by Fred Hamranhansenhansen at November 6th, 2009 at 4:28 pmTo quote Isaac Newton, sort of, Motorola is where they are now because they are standing on the shoulders of a giant-Apple gave them the roadmap, and they-and the others-tweak it just a little bit. When we look back, the iPhone will be truly revolutionary.
Posted by David Owens at November 6th, 2009 at 8:10 pmJohn,
It completely floors me that reviewers never seem to see this one iPhone failing which is the reason I could never own one:
With the iPhone, you have to use quicktime, itunes, a proprietory cable. You cannot drag and drop folders of music to and from your phone.
I detest all of that (and I own two mac computers of my own). I like being able to plug in to a generic USB, on ANY computer anywhere, and just add or remove or copy music to and from the device as much as I want, no interference from a freak controlling Apple.
If I could do that basic file exchanging, I would proably overlook the lack of memory expansion and get one… alas.
Mark.
Posted by mark palmos at November 9th, 2009 at 5:43 am