6 ms·

The author states that updating "older" products really has no return for Samsung (or other manufacturers), and is actually a form of cannibalization with their

by jerrya 15y ago

The author states that updating "older" products really has no return for Samsung (or other manufacturers), and is actually a form of cannibalization with their new products. That of course is just classic "planned obsolescence", long criticized as wasteful, and injurious to your customers. This is exacerbated by Samsung's (and other manufacturer's) rooting policies. As the author notes, not only will Samsung not maintain products just a few months old, but they make it very difficult for consumers to maintain the products on their own. In this case, rooting a Samsung android product voids the warranty. Are there other industries like this? Where we are okay with a manufacturer never updating, or even fixing the bugs, of a very expensive product just months after they release it? And made worse by accepting that company's actions to make it hard/impossible/unacceptable for third parties to work on it? (Perhaps cars are turning into this model. It used to be that it was not a big deal to take your car to your favorite mechanic, but now I gather, various forms of IP lock-in or just plain expensive required diagnostic tools are creating a barrier for independent mechanics.) I would like to think that supporting older android products for at least two years is profitable. Does supporting the Galaxy S as opposed to forcing purchase of a Galaxy Nexus really result in cannibalization? The answer of course is no, what it does is help you KEEP a customer from going to Apple, or HTC, or Motorola. And that customer when their machine is too old will remember all your frequent updates and understand Samsung, that you take care of your customers, and buy your Galaxy S III. The customer that understands you won't support them will be gone. Just like that.

drivebyacct2 15y ago
>Where we are okay with a manufacturer never updating, or even fixing the bugs, of a very expensive product just months after they release it? And made worse by accepting that company's actions to make it hard/impossible/unacceptable for third parties to work on it? People keep buying them. In droves. I agree with you, but Samsung keeps setting records with phones sold. They seem to either be good enough at the time of sale that people are okay knowing that they may not be bumped up a major revision of Android, or frankly, they probably don't even understand that the SGSII was released for a couple of the carriers mere months before ICS was released. I knew and waited, but they don't. It's also why (frankly) a lot of people still have an outdated idea of what Android is like, because there are so many old builds on "current" phones.
- evilduck 15y ago
  The smartphone market has also been exploding. I'd guess the majority of Android owners haven't made it through their first contract cycle yet (or in the case of tablets, device lifecycle). It'll be more interesting in 3 or 4 years where the trends end up as consumer awareness increases. I did Android for two years, with 1.5 of them spent as an abandoned device owner. I gladly switched to a iPhone 4S. Likewise, I got my wife an iPad2 last summer due to Apple's support history. Galaxy Tab purchasers might be satisfied today with how the device ships, but give it two years. Those still stuck on 2.3 or 3.0 in 2014 when Android 6.x releases some killer features might sing a different tune about their satisfaction with Android and/or Samsung. I'm also still expecting [but not hoping for] a security problem to hit an old version of Android. It's practically bound to happen at some point with millions of pretty capable computers with unique IPs, its too tempting to ignore. Without any support mechanism available the consequences will be worse than they had to be.
nextparadigms 15y ago
If Samsung and the others see the updates as just a zero-ROI cost for them, then they are really short-sighted. They keep scrambling to develop the skins that many say they don't even want, when there is a differentiation solution right in front of them: offering updates to all their phones for a much longer period. Now that's some real differentiation, that even non-techie people will want. Who wouldn't want to go with the company that supports the phones for the longest time?
- kenjackson 15y ago
  That's not really all that differentiable, and it costs money both short and long-term. First, on the differentiation angle, things like length of maintanance are not things that usually sell devices. Especially not since the lifetime of the average device is just a tad longer than two years. Second, it's not as if Samsung can rev every device for free. They have to go through the carrier to test each update and the carriers have finite resources. Therefore Samsung may have to stall the release of a new phone in order to test all of the other phones that exist, including that phone that only sold 10,000 units. And these tests cost the OEMs a pretty penny. At the end of the day the Android model really is kind of broken. Updates are not just some ad hoc thing, but it really needs to be planned. Everything from how many devices each carrier has, the number of devices each manufacturer has, to the update rate, etc... Feature phones didn't really have the update requirement so the Samsung model of a million phones made sense. But now it actually hurts their ability to deliver customer satisfaction. Due to the nature of Android, there will never be a cohesive update strategy. What you see now is what you'll have in the future with Android.
  - jerrya 15y ago
    "That's not really all that differentiable, and it costs money both short and long-term." The classic counter example is Nordstrom. Nordstrom looks at you and figures that if they keep you as a customer, you will spend $100,000 at Nordstrom over the course of your life. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_lifetime_value http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_lifetime_value) Because of that, they will (Snopes says "maybe" http://www.snopes.com/business/consumer/nordstrom.asp http://www.snopes.com/business/consumer/nordstrom.asp) allow you to return tires to Nordstrom that everyone knows you purchased somewhere else, because they aren't losing money so much as they are ensuring their $100,000 of your money. Regardless of the truth of the tire story, Nordstrom is known for having excellent customer care and that helps customer retention and supports their other pricing policies.
quanticle 15y ago
>Where are we okay with a manufacturer never updating or even fixing the bugs of a very expensive product just months after they release it? Pretty much everywhere, actually. If I buy a vacuum cleaner, do I expect updates? If I buy a toaster or a microwave, do I expect updates? If I buy a TV, do I expect updates? People without a technical background classify their phones and computers in the same category as toasters, microwaves and televisions. To them the software that runs on the device is indistinguishable from the device itself. When they see new phones coming out with Ice Cream Sandwich only a couple of months after they purchased their phone, their reaction is not to scream for an update from their carrier. Their reaction is, "Well, darn. I guess I should have waited, so I could have had a better phone." Think I'm wrong? Go ask Joe Random iPhone or Jane Random Android what version of iOS or Android their phones are running. It's the rare breed that'll give you anything more than a blank stare in response.
bonzoesc 15y ago
> (Perhaps cars are turning into this model. It used to be that it was not a big deal to take your car to your favorite mechanic, but now I gather, various forms of IP lock-in or just plain expensive required diagnostic tools are creating a barrier for independent mechanics.) On both cars and phones, this kind of tamper resistance makes support cheaper, and generally better for the average customer. Moving to electronic subsystems in cars means reliability to the point of basically never breaking, at the cost of being able to adjust spark timing or carb tuning with a screwdriver and motivation alone. At the same time, the iPhone 4S (with no jailbreak available) is easier for both Apple and for a company's IT department to support than a rooted Nexus S running "rAv Rom 1.3 Stock 2.3.4 + Additions + JAME BOND 07-Jun-11 New version 1.3".

by jerrya 15y ago

drivebyacct2 15y ago

>Where we are okay with a manufacturer never updating, or even fixing the bugs, of a very expensive product just months after they release it? And made worse by accepting that company's actions to make it hard/impossible/unacceptable for third parties to work on it? People keep buying them. In droves. I agree with you, but Samsung keeps setting records with phones sold. They seem to either be good enough at the time of sale that people are okay knowing that they may not be bumped up a major revision of Android, or frankly, they probably don't even understand that the SGSII was released for a couple of the carriers mere months before ICS was released. I knew and waited, but they don't. It's also why (frankly) a lot of people still have an outdated idea of what Android is like, because there are so many old builds on "current" phones.

evilduck 15y ago
The smartphone market has also been exploding. I'd guess the majority of Android owners haven't made it through their first contract cycle yet (or in the case of tablets, device lifecycle). It'll be more interesting in 3 or 4 years where the trends end up as consumer awareness increases. I did Android for two years, with 1.5 of them spent as an abandoned device owner. I gladly switched to a iPhone 4S. Likewise, I got my wife an iPad2 last summer due to Apple's support history. Galaxy Tab purchasers might be satisfied today with how the device ships, but give it two years. Those still stuck on 2.3 or 3.0 in 2014 when Android 6.x releases some killer features might sing a different tune about their satisfaction with Android and/or Samsung. I'm also still expecting [but not hoping for] a security problem to hit an old version of Android. It's practically bound to happen at some point with millions of pretty capable computers with unique IPs, its too tempting to ignore. Without any support mechanism available the consequences will be worse than they had to be.

nextparadigms 15y ago

If Samsung and the others see the updates as just a zero-ROI cost for them, then they are really short-sighted. They keep scrambling to develop the skins that many say they don't even want, when there is a differentiation solution right in front of them: offering updates to all their phones for a much longer period. Now that's some real differentiation, that even non-techie people will want. Who wouldn't want to go with the company that supports the phones for the longest time?

kenjackson 15y ago
That's not really all that differentiable, and it costs money both short and long-term. First, on the differentiation angle, things like length of maintanance are not things that usually sell devices. Especially not since the lifetime of the average device is just a tad longer than two years. Second, it's not as if Samsung can rev every device for free. They have to go through the carrier to test each update and the carriers have finite resources. Therefore Samsung may have to stall the release of a new phone in order to test all of the other phones that exist, including that phone that only sold 10,000 units. And these tests cost the OEMs a pretty penny. At the end of the day the Android model really is kind of broken. Updates are not just some ad hoc thing, but it really needs to be planned. Everything from how many devices each carrier has, the number of devices each manufacturer has, to the update rate, etc... Feature phones didn't really have the update requirement so the Samsung model of a million phones made sense. But now it actually hurts their ability to deliver customer satisfaction. Due to the nature of Android, there will never be a cohesive update strategy. What you see now is what you'll have in the future with Android.
- jerrya 15y ago
  "That's not really all that differentiable, and it costs money both short and long-term." The classic counter example is Nordstrom. Nordstrom looks at you and figures that if they keep you as a customer, you will spend $100,000 at Nordstrom over the course of your life. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_lifetime_value http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_lifetime_value) Because of that, they will (Snopes says "maybe" http://www.snopes.com/business/consumer/nordstrom.asp http://www.snopes.com/business/consumer/nordstrom.asp) allow you to return tires to Nordstrom that everyone knows you purchased somewhere else, because they aren't losing money so much as they are ensuring their $100,000 of your money. Regardless of the truth of the tire story, Nordstrom is known for having excellent customer care and that helps customer retention and supports their other pricing policies.

quanticle 15y ago

>Where are we okay with a manufacturer never updating or even fixing the bugs of a very expensive product just months after they release it? Pretty much everywhere, actually. If I buy a vacuum cleaner, do I expect updates? If I buy a toaster or a microwave, do I expect updates? If I buy a TV, do I expect updates? People without a technical background classify their phones and computers in the same category as toasters, microwaves and televisions. To them the software that runs on the device is indistinguishable from the device itself. When they see new phones coming out with Ice Cream Sandwich only a couple of months after they purchased their phone, their reaction is not to scream for an update from their carrier. Their reaction is, "Well, darn. I guess I should have waited, so I could have had a better phone." Think I'm wrong? Go ask Joe Random iPhone or Jane Random Android what version of iOS or Android their phones are running. It's the rare breed that'll give you anything more than a blank stare in response.

bonzoesc 15y ago

> (Perhaps cars are turning into this model. It used to be that it was not a big deal to take your car to your favorite mechanic, but now I gather, various forms of IP lock-in or just plain expensive required diagnostic tools are creating a barrier for independent mechanics.) On both cars and phones, this kind of tamper resistance makes support cheaper, and generally better for the average customer. Moving to electronic subsystems in cars means reliability to the point of basically never breaking, at the cost of being able to adjust spark timing or carb tuning with a screwdriver and motivation alone. At the same time, the iPhone 4S (with no jailbreak available) is easier for both Apple and for a company's IT department to support than a rooted Nexus S running "rAv Rom 1.3 Stock 2.3.4 + Additions + JAME BOND 07-Jun-11 New version 1.3".