3 ms·
He could have released a “facephone” instead. It’s equally challenging, competes against apple, could use open source Android as a base. Perhaps it was too obvi
by otikik 4y ago
He could have released a “facephone” instead. It’s equally challenging, competes against apple, could use open source Android as a base. Perhaps it was too obvious of a route?
- maneesh 4y agoThis was already tried https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/heres-why-the-facebook-phone-flopped/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/heres-why-the-facebook-phon...
- lotsofpulp 4y agoAn Android skin phone is not trying. Risking billions of dollars and years into R&D like Apple and Google did would be trying.
- pipeline_peak 4y agoConsidering the general public doesn’t know what “Android skin phone” means and they still failed, R&D wouldn’t save them. They’re too late to the race.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoThe general public does know what a phone with a better screen, better battery life, longer lasting build quality, longer lasting software updates, faster processing power and snappier responses, secure operating system (less malware), and better camera quality means though. But all that requires expensive and risky R&D.