HTC First to HTC Last

 

Facebook-hoaxImagine if you were Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Facebook, and your product attracted 175 million people on a daily basis.  I don’t know about you, but I would be thinking of other ways to capitalize on this already loyal fan base and try to introduce more products targeted toward their needs without stemming off the confines of what has made Facebook successful.  Hey, what about a cell phone?!

This idea has apparently caught AT&T’s eye when they decided to allow the new Facebook Home software to be integrated in the HTC First cell phone.

Facebook Home is software for your phone that allows Facebook to essentially take over your phone.  This allows users to take advantage of their already established social base on Facebook and communicate with these friends on their cell phone “more conveniently”.  It consists of features such as the cover feed that allows you to glance at your phone for photos and posts, chat heads that allows you to send and receive texts and Facebook messages in one place, allows notifications to be accented on your home screen and an app launcher.

To me, the advantages this product are allowing cell phone users to no longer have to pay a texting fee due to the chat heads feature and from a company point of view it allows Facebook to mass distribute its product without consumers having to buy a cell phone.   However, from a product design standpoint, I don’t think Facebook Home targets the cell phone market very well.  It tries to reinvent the cell phone world too much by focusing the cell phone software design around people instead of apps.  As a consumer would you enjoy having your cell phone constantly flowing with your friend’s pictures and status?htc-first-slide-01

Apparently the majority of Facebook Home users did not enjoy having their phone being constantly engulfed with their friend’s updates when the first month sales reports came back.  “BGR.com says that sources at AT&T indicate that fewer than 15,000 of the phones had been sold by the end of its first month.  By comparison, in the three months of the year AT&T sold 6M smart phones, of which about 1 M were android phones- an average of more than 300,000 per month. “AT&T then cut the original $100 price to $99 cents on-contract. The mistake HTC First made to integrate their product with Facebook home has seemed to have left them with an essentially useless product with a lot of inventory.  Now it is rumored that the HTC First will soon be discontinued and unsold inventory will be returned to HTC.

I would question management’s decisions during the product development stages when designing the product, how they reviewed Facebook Homes design, and most importantly how they tested the market.  If these stages were done efficiently I feel that AT&T could have better understood the consumer demand for the HTC First Facebook phone and could have been more aware of this disaster before it occurred.

As a consumer would the HTC First Facebook phone satisfy you?  How do you feel management could have avoided this disaster?

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/05/13/no-home-for-facebook-at-att-htc-first-to-be-discontinued/
http://www.techhive.com/article/2039633/facebook-slams-brakes-on-htc-firsts-international-plans-following-poor-home-reception.html
http://www.facebook.com/help/558055177560569
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/may/14/facebook-home-app-htc-problems
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57329634-94/facebook-phone-who-would-buy-this-thing/
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/technology/2013/05/htc-one-isnt-saving-htc-facebook-phone/65486/
http://news.softpedia.com/news/175-Million-People-Use-Facebook-Every-Day-133744.shtml

How Will Consumer’s Transparency Influence Google “Glass” Demand?

 

 

Since 1998, Google has had a mission “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”. Over the years many would say this goal has been accomplished. Therefore, it is no surprise that Google has “earned their keep” among internet users and has become the face of many home internet search engines around the world. Now Google is stemming off the confines of their internet browser and will be showing the world an entirely new meaning of their mission with Google Glass. With Glass, there are people who think Google will literally be the face of the world for years to come.

 

In my opinion, the idea behind Google Glass is not as ground-breaking of a product as many have made it out to be. The idea for a wearable recording product has been introduced to the market already through Oakley Video camera glasses X300, and the Go Pro Head Video Camera. Also, we have seen wearable headsets for talking on the phone introduced already with technology such as Bluetooth headsets, etc.

 

However, I think Google’s innovation lies in their ability to incorporate and capitalize on their already previously established products using Glass. With features such as their voice command technology being synced with “Google Translate”, their digital voice assistant (“Google Now “) being incorporated to help keep track of your daily habits, “Google Maps” being the products GPS system, and even the Google search engine being at the consumers disposal to use when seeking information from their Glass device. Also, Glass will be able to meet the modern day needs of the cell phone for consumers with technology that lets you record and take pictures instantly. To me the idea behind the quality function deployment of this product is brilliant because it meets the modern day needs for cell phone consumers, and also meets the needs for Google’s consumers and translates all of this into one “grand-daddy” product.

 

But what do you think about the target design of the product? How do you feel about people wearing a live streaming, recordable device on their face? One parent commented, “As a parent, the thought of Google Glasses being anywhere near a place where my small children exposed themselves in the open like a restroom scares the heck out of me”. I think this parents concern is valid and so does Google.

Google has been working a way to tackle this issue of privacy through releasing their product to Google’s developers, journalists and a few other early adopters to test. While there still hasn’t been any release of       information about Google deciding a technological way to fix this, there have been suggestions of adapting etiquette techniques of when and where to take them off.

 

To me it seems unrealistic that everyone will obey “Glass Etiquette.” Also, adapting etiquette techniques could take away the sense of “freedom” Glass truly offers for consumers. If certain restaurants, bars, coffee shops, etc, don’t allow the device to be worn, it seems owning one would be more of a hassle. Thus, this issue of privacy could dramatically impact the demand for their product and Glass’s competitive advantage in the technological industry.

 

If there were restrictions implemented to where Glass can be use, would you as the consumer feel like the product has met your satisfaction? How will this issue of privacy effect the product life cycle of Glass? Why do you foresee a long product life cycle or a short product life cycle?

 

 

 http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/wear-it-well-time-establish-google-glass-etiquette-6C9780067

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/slideshow/googleglass/Google-Glass-7-cool-features/Google-Glass-7-cool-features/itslideshow/18609271.cms

http://www.zdnet.com/google-glass-privacy-concerns-come-to-the-head-7000014431/

 http://www.google.com/about/company/