Vizzavi’s failure led to Vodafone Live’s (Web 1.0) growth and complacency to Web 2.0 (360). So time will tell what happens to 360 and if its failure creates something new in Vodafone or its actually what customers want (simplicity – all in one place) – too early to tell at the moment.

Maybe they should focus on the 3rd world services where their M-Pesa services is very successful and build on this, rather then competing headlong with internet players. Maybe it’s a good thing they compete headlong with Internet players and learn from this experience, better then do-nothing like a fox in headlights. The key thing is having the ability to come back after a good kicking and learning from it – that builds maturity and character in organisations.

From the customer perspective, we have more choice today with “IP” then before, but at the same time now we have more complexity to deal with as well (was that not what ipod simplified?).

I agree that there’s plenty of features that matter to the geek crowd, that honestly don’t matter to anyone else. My phone can’t play OGG Vorbis, but it hasn’t troubled me for a second. Just like wireless syncing of music never proved to be that big a deal breaker.

Yet I don’t think that article showed that the technically inclined don’t “get” it. I think it more shows that they’re about as capable as everyone else at judging a product purely on a feature list and without hands on experience. Fast forward a few years and there’s plenty of those exact same people who love their little iPods, but only once they’d actually got their hands on one and realised that it was the way it performed its limited features that made it a great product.

So yes, if someone stands up and criticises the Vodafone branding on phones from a purely uninformed standpoint, then I totally agree that history has a great chance of making them look the fool. But if they’ve actually used a BlackBerry and a Nokia Symbian phone, both skinned in the maybe ugly red and grey Vodafone livery, and found that due to fundamental underlying differences in the way the operating system is organised:
1) it’s no easier to find ones way when switching between the two phones
2) it’s harder to find help because the phone is laid out differently to other unbranded Nokias
then it becomes harder to shake off the cynical feeling that it’s more just an attempt to get their branding everywhere, rather than a genuine desire to aid the consumer. And I think that even if someone who is technically inclined points it out, it can still be a valid point.

Either way I did find this post interesting, thanks for putting it up!

I don’t say we should give up. What I’m trying to say that if you, as a product owner, want to put all the buttons on the left hand side – it is up to your usability experts to tell you that the majority of your market are right handed and may find the product difficult to use.

Similarly a TV engineer my rate a TV set poorly because they can’t fiddle with the contrast and gamma – all things usually ignored by a “normal” customer.

Whenever I read technology reviews – especially by self-confessed geeks – I’m reminded of Slashdot’s infamous verdict on the original iPod: No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

Reading that article from eight years ago is hugely insightful. Look at how the non-target-market tore it apart, criticised its failings, and pronounced the death of Apple.

It would be the height of hubris for me to claim that 360 will be the “next iPod” or “iPhone killer” – but something will, one day. And, like everything before it, some people won’t like it.

I totally agree with you that Apple’s design ethos works really well – whether 360 replicates that success isn’t decided by the reviewers; it’s decided by customers.

Thanks for the comment

T
PS – Yes, Normob is an ugly word, but it’s one that Ewan coined (or uses heavily) so I thought it appropriate.

If you work in any kind of technology field you know that 90% of people don’t know what they want until you show it to them. You try and explain how useful something like Sat Nav or a PVR can be, and it’s only when they actually use it that the possibilities become real to them. Sometimes it helps if people who actually understand the benefits of the technology are helping to push it, rather than just leaving it to the “normobs” (a horrible word).

“Apple – bless ‘em – started from an installed iPhone base of zero. Now, every time they make a change to their service offering they have to get it working across 3 devices and millions of customers. And, boy, do those customers howl when anything goes wrong.” – That’s the same philosophy they’ve applied to Mac’s and iPod’s and it still seems to be working out fine for them, mostly because people are a lot more tolerant of change when it looks like the change has been made with some kind of purpose rather than just dreamt up by a disinterested committee.

Sorry, must correct on the Vizzavi -> live! link.

Vizzavi was mostly a web portal with an associated mobile portal but the emphasis was on Web. Vodafone live! was built by the Vizzavi team but owed nothing to the Vizzavi portal apart from learned skills and experience. (Although Vodafone live! would not have existed without the work the Vizzavi mobile team did before hand)