undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjusben13699y ago0 comments

Given that we all know headlines are made for clicking, I think it's pretty clear why this time is very different vs the previous 10 years: "He notes that the company is now managing inventory, building relationships with carriers, sourcing components, making supply chain deals and managing distribution. Google is even making accessories, including cases and cables." This article isn't about the technical approach, it's more about the business/go to market approach.

That's _very_ different to how Google went to market prior. Is this going to materially impact the iPhone? I don't know. But it is different enough that it warrants some sort of "This is a new approach by Google to taking on the iPhone" headline.

0 comments

MBCook9y ago

It's different, but it doesn't mean it's an iPhone killer.

MS started making their own hardware and it certainly helped push the market but the Sufarce never turned into the 'iPad killer' that tons of sites decided to declare it.

It's a new Android phone, Google was heavily involved (more than the Nexus line). That's it. That's not bad, but it doesn't automatically make something an X killer.

jusben1369OP9y ago

Wasn't saying it was an iPhone killer. Actually specifically said I have no idea. More addressing OP's questioning that there was anything of real import in the article.

KirinDave9y ago

> MS started making their own hardware and it certainly helped push the market but the Sufarce never turned into the 'iPad killer' that tons of sites decided to declare it.

The Surface is basically a superior option to the iPad Pro, which all accounts give inferior sales to.

MBCook9y ago

Depends heavily on the task and way you're using it. They both excel at different things.

1 more reply

benologist9y ago

Isn't that what literally every android manufacturer has been doing since day 1?

Google doing it "too" doesn't sound like a game changer.

jusben1369OP9y ago

Well every other manufacturer has looked to Google (largely) for the sw and built the hw. It's this bundling together of the two that's being presented as unique and is different to every other Android manufacturer.

threeseed9y ago

But that's hypothetical. I'm not seeing any features that Google is uniquely placed to offer. And it's not like Android is so antithetical to third party modifications.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsjusben13699y ago0 comments

0 comments

MBCook9y ago

It's different, but it doesn't mean it's an iPhone killer.

MS started making their own hardware and it certainly helped push the market but the Sufarce never turned into the 'iPad killer' that tons of sites decided to declare it.

It's a new Android phone, Google was heavily involved (more than the Nexus line). That's it. That's not bad, but it doesn't automatically make something an X killer.

jusben1369OP9y ago

Wasn't saying it was an iPhone killer. Actually specifically said I have no idea. More addressing OP's questioning that there was anything of real import in the article.

KirinDave9y ago

> MS started making their own hardware and it certainly helped push the market but the Sufarce never turned into the 'iPad killer' that tons of sites decided to declare it.

The Surface is basically a superior option to the iPad Pro, which all accounts give inferior sales to.

MBCook9y ago

Depends heavily on the task and way you're using it. They both excel at different things.

1 more reply

benologist9y ago

Isn't that what literally every android manufacturer has been doing since day 1?

Google doing it "too" doesn't sound like a game changer.

jusben1369OP9y ago

threeseed9y ago

But that's hypothetical. I'm not seeing any features that Google is uniquely placed to offer. And it's not like Android is so antithetical to third party modifications.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse