3 ms·
Where Google has succeeded is to offer a free service (search, maps, email, android/mobile os) that was either initially or after feedback best in class. And t
by asharpe 12y ago
Where Google has succeeded is to offer a free service (search, maps, email, android/mobile os) that was either initially or after feedback best in class. And they successfully monetised those products (not so easy vis Twitter).
However, Glass is different. It requires users to pay up front for the service. This is inherently a different model for Google. Adoption is not free, nor just a click away. It will be interesting to see if/how Google succeeds in getting this right (as it will likely precede other forays into hardware).
Fortunately for Google, they have huge cash flows and plenty of cash and talent lying around, so Glass does not look like it is at risk. Having said that, it may take years before adoption (in whatever form that is) will be accepted.
- hershel 12y agoGoogle glass doesn't look like a risky bet.It seems pretty safe to start with the workplace market and go from there. If a consumer market appears due to all the people playing with glass, google would have decisive advantages: the best "workplace" appstore(and the best device for dual use), a lot of development invested in the product, large developer community , brand and volume. And if a consumer market won't appear, the workplace businesses seems pretty big.
- asharpe 12y agoAgreed - but enterprise sales is a very different market and sales process. It is not the freemium often developer led market that Google has traditional excelled in.