Slashdot Mirror
Nokia's N-Gage - Savaged By Online Opinion
Thanks to CNN for their column discussing how the Internet has changed the way 'bad' products are viewed, with reference to Nokia's N-Gage 'mobile game deck'. The columnist argues: "Ten years ago you might have quietly withdrawn [an 'awkward' product] from store shelves", but times have changed: "The Internet provides an instant, widespread referendum on products... And the Net crowd, for obvious reasons, tends to eye high-tech products. But the things that do get interest, usually negative, watch out." He then gives the immensely popular, N-Gage-related Side Talkin' site as an example of this backlash, quoting a Nokia spokesman as saying of the site: "It's better to have some reaction than no reaction at all."
Imagin a beowulf cluster of Ngages.... it....would.....suck
-You're wasting your time. Alfador only likes me.
Think back a few decades about some of the crap you may have bought. Then think about - had you been able to read instant online opinion about the gadget - you may not have purchased the product.
Virtual Boy? NeoGeo? Would VHS have lost to Betamax?
How long until Nokia unleashes the evil lawyer bots to stop any critism against their product or company. I mean it wouldn't be the first time.
Link 1
Link 2
I say; crap is crap is crap! Nokia is not a failure of marketing! Nokia is crap...
"In the meantime, corporate chiefs can take heart that the Internet memory is mercifully short. Anyone remember an early Internet celeb called The Turkish Stud? Thought not, but "I Kiss You!!!" anyway." I, err, remember that. And I bet a lot of people here do to. Short memory?
Boy, Nokia higher-ups must be glad that the editors decided to post that story here then!
Obligatory Ctrl+Alt+Del Link :)
Link 1
lol, thanks!
The internet sure as hell didn't help, but it didn't single-handedly destroy the N-Gage. All the online presence did was magnify the customer response. It's easy to express yourself in a public forum, and it's easy for Nokia to listen in.
Nokia should have *ASKED THEIR TARGET AUDIENCE* about it and taken their opinions seriously. Besides the game loading problem and the sideways talking: it uses an anti-widescreen format and has useless features (3D hardware is useless on a portable - games can't really be designed effectively for it). It also just looks dorky (look at the sexy Gameboy SP) and is a game machine from a company who has never published a game before. I could have told them just from looking at the "life-size" pictures that appeared in a few magazines.
I think the Internet has only changed the time it takes for bad products to be viewed as 'bad.'
"Back in the day" people might have bought lousy products initially, but after The Word eventually got out, people didn't continue buying them. Staying with the topic of videogames, the Sega Saturn didn't need the Internet to die. Nor did Virtual Boy (dear god, it didn't need help to die...)
There have been topics in the past about how text messaging and cellphones are killing opening weekends for movies because the 'bad word' gets around faster. It's causing bad movies to be known for their badness earlier but, eventually, people will learn products aren't good.
Even in the days before the 'net.
-Trillian
Ok, speaking of sidetalkin', am I the only guy fascinated by the one hot chick in the whole lineup? Guys?
I don't know what everyone's bitching about. EVERYONE'S going to own a N-gage in like a year...
...when the price drops to like twenty dollars.
Before seeing the pictures of "Side Talking" on one of the sites in the article, I thought the N-gage concept was OK. I didn't realize how stupid the phone portion of the device was! I stand thoroughly corrected... it's hard to describe how shocked I am that a product like that could come to market - someone please tell me there is a standard hands free headset at least!
... that it does make you look like a dork.
Because of course to be 12 years old makes you somehow completely "stoopid" and unable to have a valuable opinion about the aesthetics of a gadget.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Yes.
The long answer: thers is none.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
In fact, we're witnessing a defining moment in history that is indeed changing, and will continue to change, corporate markets forever.
Never before has this been possible. An individual, at virtually zero cost, can now express their opinion about the acts of a corporation or their products. Prior to the explosion of the internet, the only "people" with a voice loud enough to be heard by the buying public were those that had enough financial backing to fund such a publication. That included a very short list of a) corporations, such as the one that is selling the product in question, and b) large media organizations, which are also corporations. The problem is that "a" is clearly and understandably biased -- as their only responsibility is to profit off of their own product. Unfortunately, so is "b", as the very economic viability of traditional media is co-dependent on the health of a commercial marketplace, and the advertizing dollars that support it, thus implying an inherent and unavoidable conflict of interest. While there remained the possibility that a subscriber-based review publication could remain bias-free, that only acts in the interest of those that are able and willing to pay for the unbiased report -- i.e., a small enough minority that it does not protect the general population.
But here we have an environment in which a very minimially funded voice (i.e., a private individual) can easily make themselves heard to those who want to listen. Thus the tens of millions of advertising dollars invested by the product manufacturer can be trumped by pennies invested by the masses.
In the end, what does this mean? It means that the corporation will be forced to adjust to a new market. Period. Sure, there will be court battles regarding free speach vs. trademarks and ip claims, etc., etc. But ultimately, the corporations that adjust fastest, rather than those fighting the customer, will sell more products and thus grow healthier and stronger than those that do not adjust. And those healthier corporations will be marketing products that are driven directly by consumer desires. This is a good thing for the consumer, is it not? Can you think of a counterexample, where the ultimate needs of the masses were better known by the corporation than the masses themselves?
Note that I am not saying that there are not situations in which small, informed bodies can actually make better decisions for the majority than the majority itself. However, should those decisions not be relegated to a democratically elected body -- i.e., government?
Of course, the trend of free, instantanious information dissemination across a broad spectrum of the internet tends to democracize corporations over time, thus further blurring the lines between the corporation and the government itself. A parallel, of course, being drawn with the advent of inexpensive publishing via the printing presses that drove the governments themselves toward democracy.
And, like the risk of the democracy, the needs of the few can be lost in the desires of the many. So as corporations function more like a democratic government in the age of self-publishing, we can learn from the problems inherent in such governance when looking to the future problems we will face with corporations.
Every single article about the N-Gage has the same fucking links to Penny Arcade. Enough already - everyone has seen the fucking comic. Just stop posting already asshole.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
the cluetrain effect.
Go then. There are other worlds than these.
Hey, we flushed out the one loser that bought an N-Gag!
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
Weren't people about twenty/thirty years ago saying that only nerds used computers, later followed by social outcasts on the internet? Weren't video games 'just for kids' less than twenty years ago?
Twenty years from now, talking to all-in-one-watch-sized-PDA-GPS-positioner cell phones hybrids will be considered "dorky", using anything slower than a 1 GB/s to connect to the internet will be considered "old school", and kids who play play with Gi-Joe toys will be marked as "the next kid to snap and shootup the school."
First of all, of course I did not buy an N-Gage. Second of all, you forgot an 'e.' Third of all, use Slashdot's search function to look for all stories involving Nokia's N-Gage. Those Penny Arcade links have been posted plenty of times before. Why do you think you needed to post them again? I realize you may be new here so I'll cut you some slack. There's no need to link to those same Penny Arcade comics in every story about the N-Gage. Everytime there's a story about an XBox game, do you post a link to the Penny Arcade comic where they make light of the size of the original XBox controller? Come on, use your fucking head moron.
It was a joke.
First of all, of course I did not buy an N-Gage.
Of course.
Second of all, you forgot an 'e.'
That was another joke.
Third of all, use Slashdot's search function to look for all stories involving Nokia's N-Gage. Those Penny Arcade links have been posted plenty of times before. Why do you think you needed to post them again?
I didn't post them, sahrss did.
I realize you may be new here so I'll cut you some slack.
Cut me slack how exactly? You didn't cut me any slack. You flamed me (as an AC) blaming me for something I DID NOT DO, and then added me to your foes list. Jesus, dude, if that's cutting me slack, then what's being harsh - slicing my throat from ear to ear?
There's no need to link to those same Penny Arcade comics in every story about the N-Gage. Everytime there's a story about an XBox game, do you post a link to the Penny Arcade comic where they make light of the size of the original XBox controller?
Once again, I DIDN'T POST THEM.
Come on, use your fucking head moron.
Maybe you should before blaming people for things they didn't do.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
You are encouraging the posting of mentioned links and therefore are just as guilty. My statements stand.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
By that logic, so are you.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
If I say, don't post these links. That is not encouraging people to post the links. If you defend the person who posts the links, that is encouraging someone to post the links. Honestly, you must be really stupid.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
You don't understand human nature very well, then.
You're an idiot if you think that follows from my statement. Are you a woman?
That is completely sexist and very insulting. Perhaps we should explore why you are such a misogynist, hmm?
If I say, don't post these links. That is not encouraging people to post the links.
Not true. It also doesn't help the situation. You just end up looking like a whiney brat. Ahh, but you're new here aren't you?
If you defend the person who posts the links, that is encouraging someone to post the links.
Get it through your head: I wasn't defending them. It was a fucking joke.
Really man, you need to seek professional help. You are completely insane.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
Thanks for playing but you lose.
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
Only this account is new. I've been reading /. since 1998.
Thanks for playing but you lose.
No, dipshit. You lose.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
Although, no need for foul language!