
Andy Rubin Puts Essential Up for Sale, Cancels Next Phone - coloneltcb
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-24/andy-rubin-s-phone-maker-essential-is-said-to-consider-sale
======
ajiang
Making mass consumer flagship smartphones and going up against Samsung,
Huawei, and Apple is a really tough game, but I'm sure Andy and the team at
Essential knew that. I like that there are people who, in the face of giants,
pick up the stone.

~~~
cc439
It's not like it's hard to carve out a niche now that literally every flagship
phone is functionally identical. There have been so many novel features that
have been tried since the birth of the Android ecosystem that there are bound
to be dozens of useful, now-unique features to choose from that only failed to
be adopted because the phone they debuted on was fatally flawed in other ways.

In my opinion, there are 3 major features that are immediately obvious, yet
always overlooked by OEMs that are such low hanging fruit that I'm constantly
amazed that no manufacturer has put them all together. They aren't even all
that interesting either, the only reason they haven't caught on is that all
the also-ran's have tunnel vision about playing copycat with Samsung and
Apple.

1\. Battery life. Seriously, we could have phones with 4+ days of battery life
if we'd only stopped making them thinner to the point where the rear camera
sticks out, effectively ruining the aesthetic of thinness. We've also
sacrificed the 3.5mm jack in the pursuit of the most anorexic phones
imaginable and all for what? A feeling of awe when we open the box of a new
phone which only lasts 10 seconds before we throw it in a case which makes it
as thick as an OG Motorola Droid?

2\. Stock Android. Stock Android. Stock Android. I will never buy anything but
a phone running stock Android (or maybe a dumbphone once Big Brother Google
pushes me over the edge). Even the most technically illiterate users recognize
that stock Android (whether they know what that means) is vastly superior to
the Samsung Galaxy Whatever they just traded in.

3\. Durability/Ease of Repair. Modern phones have become less fragile in many
ways (waterproofing) but the screens and batteries are still weak points.
Glass can never be made shatter-proof and lithium ion batteries will always
lose a significant amount of charge capacity after being cycled several
hundred times (a fault made worse by fitting a phone with a battery that often
requires 2+ charges a day). So how do you fix this? Easy, just make the
screens and batteries easy to replace like those of older iPhones. This works
directly in conjunction with point #1 as we've been forced to accept bonded
screens and sealed back panels as a result of the thinness wars.

Extra Credit: You know how you can get my money as well as the money of
everyone I know? Bring back the landscape QWERTY keyboard. There hasn't been a
phone since the Droid 2 that could lay claim to being anything more than a
lower midrange design. The first company to do all of the above will make
waves, I promise you.

~~~
shinratdr
> Battery life.

Nobody but technically inclined users care that much about battery life
anymore. For most people, you can throw a rock and hit a phone that has all
day battery life. People are used to charging their phones nightly.

People will take a battery life improvement, but it's not a driver. Many
manufacturers have slapped in giant batteries or included battery modules,
removable back cases that allow for double life batteries. None have caught
on, because really. If I have to charge it once a day or twice if I'm using it
for games all day or something, then what is the difference? Have a charger at
work, a charger at home and a decent phone, and you'll never have a battery
life issue. I don't think I've depleted my iPhone X once and I've owned it
since day one.

> Stock Android

Another thing nobody but techies care about, and even they are mixed. I know
plenty of people who prefer modern TouchWiz, or more likely, simply don't
care. Caring about stock Android really only applies to those who spend most
of their time in the launcher or OS, which isn't most people. For most, their
phone is a gateway to apps, and this goes double for Android phones.

If the primary use of your phone is launching Instagram, Snapchat, WhatsApp,
Gmail & Facebook, then who the hell cares what the launcher interface is? Most
younger and less technical users don't even use the dialer or contacts or
other apps people typically leave stock.

> Durability/Ease of Repair

I can't believe people can actually say this with a straight face. Once again,
the last thing on people's list. It's far and away a nice to have, not
anything that actually influences a purchasing decision for a significant
number of people. For those that it does matter to, they'll just slap it in a
case anyways. It also requires a boatload of design compromises to make things
easier to repair.

> Bring back the landscape QWERTY keyboard

The icing on the cake. I don't know who you know, but seriously, nobody wants
a hardware keyboard. Most people under 30 (y'know, the people who buy new
phones frequently and use them as primary computers) would actually be
significantly slower on a hardware keyboard, regardless of layout.

What you've described is a giant phone, double or triple the size of any other
normal between the massive battery, use of durable materials and durable
slider mechanism. Nobody wants this. You might, and some of your friends
might, but any company that took a run at actually making this phone would
have abysmal sales.

You make a ton of assumptions here, all of which smack of someone who hasn't
spoken to a normal consumer or someone under 30 in a long time. I suggest
hanging around retail for a little bit, because you're in for a rude
awakening.

Things people actually care about in a phone, in rough order:

1\. OS - This is tied for the next two for number one. Nobody gives a shit
about stock Android, but most are pretty set in one camp or the other in
regards to iOS v Android at this point. People do switch though, so its not
the highest priority for all.

2\. Screen Size - Massive consideration. Many want a giant screen, many want a
manageable screen, both are pretty set in their ways.

3\. Camera - I can't count the number of times people have asked me for a
phone recommendation and had this as their number one concern. I put the other
two first because they tend to have those decided before speaking to me, so
they are typically more important. Camera quality, as subjective as that can
be, can really sell a phone.

4\. Design - Gasp! Weight, thickness, materials. Actually really important. It
may not show up on a spec list, but people do make decisions based on this
even if they aren't acutely aware.

5\. Price - For many this is the number one factor, but for many it's not even
on the list so it's hard to know where to place this one in terms of order.

6\. Cool new features - Hugely important, triggers upgrades. The giant OLED
screen & FaceID sold plenty of people on the iPhone X. "What can this phone do
that my phone can't" is a strong driver of upgrades that aren't required due
to a failing/broken phone.

~~~
Jaruzel
> The icing on the cake. I don't know who you know, but seriously, nobody
> wants a hardware keyboard.

Not true. If it were true the Blackberry KeyONE wouldn't have been the
moderate success that it was. Clearly TCL believe that QWERTY phones are
viable as they've just announced the Blackberry Key2.

My better-half has not one, but two, KeyONEs - one for work, and one for
personal use. They are very nice, well built phones with a pretty good spec.
If you type stuff all day, then they are a great option.

~~~
distances
Your experience is anecdotal. So is mine, and I haven't seen a single hardware
keyboard in use -- not a single one, from any manufacturer -- since Nokia N900
was a thing almost ten years ago.

~~~
Jaruzel
It's not actually. What I didn't say, is that my other half works for a large
Law firm. Most of the Partners there (100+) have switched from iPhones to
Blackberry KeyONEs as they can actually work on them because of the proper
keyboards.

At the end of the day, keyboardless and keyboard phones CAN co-exist. I was
just disagreeing that with the point that _no-one_ wants a keyboard phone.

~~~
shinratdr
> I was just disagreeing that with the point that no-one wants a keyboard
> phone.

Perhaps glib. I could have clarified further but "a keyboard phone could carve
out a small but somewhat lucrative niche amongst people who refuse to get used
to software keyboards, people over 30-40, and people who owned devices that
sport hardware keyboards in the past but they are ultimately doomed to
irrelevancy in the long run" is less pithy.

------
martythemaniak
Typing this from an Essential.

I'm pretty sad. I've had four Nexuses, a Galaxy S and an iPhone and this is
probably my favourite. It's camera-problems are well-known, but I really do
think it's the best-designed phone on the market today.

Some high notes:

\- the notch predates the iPhone X and looks even better because it's so
small. The one on the X is so large, they may as well have not bothered.

\- The glass-ceramic-titanium is slippery, but a joy to behold. I love the
heavy, blocky feel and love idly flipping it around in my hand (I guess I
don't need a fidget spinner). The flat sides also have the advantage letting
you leave it straight-up on it's sides (ie for camera shots) while
simultaneously being rounded enough to be easy to hold.

\- flat, unbranded back and general layout is basically what every phone
should have.

\- The module extension system is probably the best of all the ones that have
been tried. I have the 360 camera and it works great.

\- speaking of the camera, I love 360 photos. I kickestarted a failed 360
Camera (Bubl) etc, I used to spend a ton of time making photospheres, their
camera was fantastic. I love taking photos with it and people actually like
looking at them.

\- If they had managed to get rid of the chin and shrank the notch a bit (the
status bar is 2x as tall as regular Android because of it) on their second
phone, it would have been a perfect.

\- Apart form the physical stuff, the updates came fast, the storage was
generous (128GB) and the UI was uncluttered.

I hope they get picked up by someone, they have a lot of good stuff going for
them.

~~~
dbbk
The notch is smaller because it's just a camera lens. The iPhone X basically
has a Kinect in its notch. They're not really directly comparable.

~~~
yathern
Of course you can compare them! They're both phones with a notch! You can also
separately compare their face detection capability. But that doesn't disallow
you from saying one notch is smaller than the other.

~~~
huangc10
I think he meant given that the features are not the same, it's hard to
compare the physical aspects (and more technically, product specifications)
"fairly".

------
telltruth
In my mind, Andy Rubin is likely be one of the most unfortunate tech
personality I'm aware of.

So here is a guy who grows up dreaming about robots. But instead of doing that
he ends up doing startup to make money so he can eventually do robots. He
spends best years of his life building phone OS by walking a fine line to
clone a work of a genius. And a pretty shitty clone at that. But the guy is so
in to robots that he ends up calling this thing "Android" even though its not
android. Thing takes off despite being shitty clone because Microsoft had
become incompetent to his enormous luck. He becomes rich, powerful and
eventually able to demand to get off the shitty clone train to actually do
robotics. He goes to GoogleX with essentially carte blank to make his dreams
_finally_ come true. The guy goes out and buys up every cool robotics startup
out there, spends billions and surrounds himself with some of the best talent
on planet. And then he leaves it all to rott. But still... he is ultra rich,
can do whatever he wants and he still has some of his productive years left.
What does he do? Another phone startup! And again just a clone with minor
tweaks at that.

~~~
deanCommie
Meh. Looking at his Resume
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin#Career_timeline](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Rubin#Career_timeline)),
he started working on Mobile OS's as far back as 1992. Then he hopped from
company to company (founding 2) until the Google Acquisition in 2005, and he
didn't get into Robots until 2013.

You don't spend 21 years working in a domain you don't like.

And you don't quit managing Google's robotics division after LESS THAN A YEAR
to immediately go back to mobile if robots are your lifelong dream. OK, sure,
maybe he didn't like Google's robotics strategy or vision, but he was in a
prime position to change it from the inside, and that takes longer than a
year.

It sounds much more that Robots is a hobby. But his life goal and passion is
Mobile.

Also, discounting his successes as just cloning the work of a genius is silly.
Firstly, he has a credible role in the historical progression, as the Danger
SideKick was a legitimate leader in the field for a few years.

Secondly, Android to iPhone in the 2010's is Windows to Mac in the 1990's.
They democratized the platform to give people the freedom of choice.

~~~
ourcat
Surely a robot needs a 'mobile' OS?

~~~
exikyut
Generally something a cut above the current stereotype of
s̥̙̭͘͠m̡̻̤̭͡a҉̵̯̪̼̘̥̠̞r̢̦͎͉̺̤t͈̯̥̳̮̝̼͢phone quality, I would hope.

------
notatoad
There has been one successful model for new entrants into the smartphone
market, since the iPhone: start with a low-budget phone, and progressively
raise your prices and move to more premium products as you build trust among
consumers and retailers. It's what OnePlus did, it's what google did with
nexus, it's what Xiaomi and Huawei have been doing.

Andy Rubin thinking he could skip this process and just jump in at the top of
the market was pure hubris, and as much as I was hoping to see them succeed,
it's a little bit reassuring that they failed. Success takes hard work, and
essential skipped a lot of that.

~~~
hugs
Were the Google Nexus phones considered low-budget?

~~~
jimmies
I have owned 10+ phones during the last 10 years, and the Nexus phones were
only ones I bought new.

\- Nexus 5 was low cost and amazing for the price. I was able to forgive every
issue it had. And another international friend also asked me to buy it & ship
it to her.

\- The 5X was not low cost, but then it could also be bought cheaply through
the Google Fi "loophole." I know at least one other person IRL who bought it
through the loophole.

~~~
sagethesagesage
What was that loophole, exactly?

~~~
jimmies
Normally the Nexus 5x was $400, but the cost of buying it through the Project
Fi and cancel right away was $250. Now the loophole is with the Moto X4.

------
Ice_cream_suit
Wonder if this has anything to do with it:

"Former Android Head Left Due To Sexual Misconduct Claims"
[https://www.channelnews.com.au/former-android-head-left-
due-...](https://www.channelnews.com.au/former-android-head-left-due-to-
harassment-claims/)

"The woman who filed the complaint reportedly worked in the Android division
run by Rubin, which would make any personal relationship between the two
violate Google policy; the company requires employees to disclose such
relationships so that one of them can be moved to another division. Rubin left
the Android department in March 2013 to lead Google’s efforts in robotics, but
the HR investigation is said to have taken place in 2014. That investigation,
according to The Information, concluded that “Rubin’s behavior was improper
and showed bad judgement.”"
[https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/29/16714264/andy-rubin-
leav...](https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/29/16714264/andy-rubin-leaves-
essential-google-inappropriate-conduct)

------
bhouston
This is sad but forseeable as Essential sold poorly. It was a nice phone but
it can be hard to establish a new brand right now and differentiate oneself.

The only new brand of smartphone in the last four years I can think of is
OnePlus that has had success. OnePlus did this by buying their popularity. By
offering a ton of value initially and then raising the price each generation.

~~~
aphextron
>This is sad but forseeable as Essential sold poorly. It was a nice phone but
it can be hard to establish a new brand right now and differentiate oneself.

I don't think it is, everyone is just too afraid of doing something radically
different. Essential phone was just another generic midrange Android phablet
at a top end flagship price. Until someone completely throws that paradigm
away we will be stuck with the bloated nonsense that smartphones have become.
I would give ANYTHING for a 5" phone with capacitive touch e-ink display,
3000mAh battery, and a barebones BSD based OS that did nothing but call, text,
take pictures, gps, and text-based web browsing.

~~~
FractalLP
Glad to know others exist that just want a basic device that will last a week
without charging without massive bloat and apps I don't care about.

~~~
icebraining
You can get one for <$30, they're called featurephones. The rebooted Nokia
3310 claims one month of (stand by) battery life.

~~~
FractalLP
Aggh, sorry...I meant to be agreeing more with the parent comment I replied
to. I want all that plus an e-ink screen running freeBSD and some very basic
browsing. I don't think old Nokia dumb phones had that.

------
realworldview
> and its Android software is nearly identical to the stock version running on
> Google’s Pixel phones, giving it another unique sales proposition.

Is it just me?

~~~
gomox
Very few Android phones are not full of crappy manufacturer apps. Nexus,
Pixel, OnePlus and apparently, Essential are the few exceptions.

So maybe not unique in the literal sense, but a differentiator anyway.

~~~
dejv
Also Nokia falls into this camp. Bought Nokia 6 for my wife and it seems to be
working very nicely.

------
Shelnutt2
I bought the PH-1, and have been very happy with it. Their commitment to
releasing source code, supporting no bloat, and stock google android (not
stock aosp but close enough) made it a real winner in my book. I was looking
forward to the PH-2 so I could push my relatives toward it for their upgrade
cycles.

With Amazon going full force on the Alexa hardware (1st and 3rd party) but
their only attempt at a phone a failure, I wonder if they will try to pickup
Essential and go for a Essential Fire Phone-2?

~~~
bspn
While I love my PH-1 and want the concept to continue, I can't help but feel
that this would be a disaster. Amazon would almost surely ruin the stock
Android experience by forcing its ugly bloatware on you to ensure that you
consume Amazon content and services.

------
Analemma_
I said this in another thread about the Essential Phone, but I'll say it
again: their strategy was 100% bass-ackwards. You can't come in at the high
end of the market: that's where the big dogs live with huge advertising
budgets, carrier buy-in, and solid R&D for great cameras. You can't compete
with that starting from scratch.

You have to be like OnePlus and the other Chinese manufacturers: start by
offering a good phone at a good price that undercuts Apple and Samsung's
stupidly expensive flagships, then gradually work your way up-market. That
kind of disruption strategy is the only way to break into smartphones.

~~~
josh2600
This misunderstands the problem...

Carriers are the main distribution channel for phones. You can’t compete with
carrier distro.

~~~
Analemma_
I said that in my comment? Carriers control visibility for big, flagship
phones, but the Chinese manufacturers still manage to sell decently by
marketing their cheaper phones directly to consumers. That's the kind of
strategy Essential should have emulated, until they got big enough to start
cutting deals with carriers.

~~~
unexpected
again, I don't see how you can draw a comparison between cheap Chinese
manufacturers and an SV backed startup. Can you imagine the VC pitch for that?
"We want to raise capital so we can make low-margin phones and that Chinese
manufacturers can easily undercut".

Chinese manufacturers have more capital and have easier ways to monetize than
a small startup. For that matter, Name a Cheap Chinese manufacturer that has
been able to break through in the US market? No chinese phone manufacturer has
more than 8% of the market in the US.

Essential took their shot at trying to make a value-chain leap. They failed.
That's okay. Life moves on, their engineers will be okay, and they'll get more
opportunities in the future - but at least they took their shot.

------
staunch
This company was founded on the myth that the original Android OS was an
important part of the history of smartphones. And that Andy Rubin was somehow
an important innovator. His arrogant rant on the Essential homepage explains
why they failed better than anything else could.

The version of Android that Google bought was just another crappy blackberry
clone that would have likely gone no where.

It became Google's cover story for their effort to clone the iPhone because
its in their legal interest to claim that Android was an independent effort
that just happened to become an iOS-like operating system over time.

But history proves otherwise. The original Android was a crappy Blackberry
clone:
[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/HT...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/HTC_HT722G700375_20080211.jpg/800px-
HTC_HT722G700375_20080211.jpg)

And the Android phone they released over a year after the iPhone was was a
half-Blackberry half-iPhone clone monstrosity:
[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/HT...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/HTC_Dream_Orange_FR.jpeg/1920px-
HTC_Dream_Orange_FR.jpeg)

From Wikipedia:

 _An early prototype had a close resemblance to a BlackBerry phone, with no
touchscreen and a physical QWERTY keyboard, but the arrival of 2007 's Apple
iPhone meant that Android "had to go back to the drawing board". Google later
changed its Android specification documents to state that "Touchscreens will
be supported", although "the Product was designed with the presence of
discrete physical buttons as an assumption, therefore a touchscreen cannot
completely replace physical buttons". By 2008, both Nokia and BlackBerry
announced touch-based smartphones to rival the iPhone 3G, and Android's focus
eventually switched to just touchscreens. The first commercially available
smartphone running Android was the HTC Dream, also known as T-Mobile G1,
announced on September 23, 2008._

~~~
jhall1468
> His arrogant rant on the Essential homepage explains why they failed better
> than anything else could.

Pretty sure it was the fact that Samsung is the primary supplier for the
majority of parts so they always end up making money. But sure, the homepage
is totally why millions of people didn't buy the phone.

~~~
staunch
I claimed that his rant explains why they failed, not that the rant itself is
why they failed.

I think his rant says a lot about how he views his role, company, and product.
He seems conflicted about starting the company at all, dismissive of his
coworkers, delusional about his role in history, and confused about what makes
people want products. And yes, the fact that the product's homepage features
him above the product itself is also a very bad sign.

------
ggg9990
If Microsoft couldn’t force their way into the phone market late, no way a
startup was going to.

~~~
jacquesm
Microsoft cut-and-run, they could have just stuck to it like they did with the
Xbox and in the long term it probably would have worked out for them. But
their initial models were rushed to market and their Nokia strategy didn't
make much sense.

~~~
jklinger410
They also tried to bring their Video Game UI to the phone after a phone UI had
already been established. Then it felt dirty for them to dial back to generic
android.

They could have been successful if they wanted to just make a phone, but they
wanted to make the phone on their terms.

~~~
nine_k
Interestingly, the UI was among the most praised features of windows phones,
and still has a number of fans.

~~~
lagadu
Windows Phone refugee here: going back to Android was a massive step back in
user experience, It's been over 2 years and I'm still angry at Microsoft for
dropping the ball on WP.

------
wootie512
I really liked the Essential phone and it's message. It hit the sweet spot for
me running vanilla Android and being at the mid tier price point.

The no branding focus really went against the big brands and convinced me the
company had the right goals in mind.

Unfortunately I had no reason to buy a new phone, as mine is working fine. I
planned on buying the next Essential phone.

------
dingo_bat
Their phone was literally set up for failure. It had nothing new to offer over
any of the established players, initial price was among the flagships, it had
a broken camera, no headphone jack, buggy software. Basically inferior in
every way and priced the same as Samsung's S8.

~~~
trumped
It is directly unlockable for easy rooting and modding, unlike most phones...
that's a big plus. (there's only the Pixel, OnePlus and maybe only 1 or 2
others like that)

~~~
dingo_bat
Ok that does sound valuable. But maybe too much of a niche. Most people are
fine with the OS apple/Samsung ship with the phone.

------
abhiminator
Really disappointing to hear. I was super excited last year when Essential
announced their foray into the smartphone hardware business -- always exciting
to see new entrants, especially one founded by Andy Rubin nonetheless.

Also worth noting is that Essential phone (v1.0; 2017) was the first device to
include a notch around the front camera -- a revolutionary feature and a head-
turner at the time, with other big players following suite down the year. [0]

I'd personally be pleased if Essential gets credit at least for making top
centered notches on smartphone devices mainstream; would now be interesting to
see how they approach their AOSP-based OS given the abrupt end to their
'hardware manufacturer' ambitions.

As many others have already pointed out, Essential's (relative) failure shows
how saturated and competitive smartphone hardware industry has become -- with
barriers of entry being unimaginably high -- for even a multiple VC funded
startup.

[0] [https://mashable.com/2017/05/30/essential-phone-android-
andy...](https://mashable.com/2017/05/30/essential-phone-android-andy-rubin/)

~~~
telltruth
_I 'd personally be pleased if Essential gets credit at least for making top
centered notches on smartphone devices mainstream_

What?

Notch is a boneheaded design compromise, not an achievement!

------
owaislone
I never got the hype around the Essential phone. Apart from the specs, what
sets it apart from other flagship devices. I've been using a Pixel2 for last
few months and it has been quite good so far. How does the Essential phone
compare to Pixel/Pixel2?

~~~
sebleon
Exactly, no clear differentiator. There's a number of online interviews where
even the founders couldn't clearly articulate what was novel.

~~~
fabrice_d
I think their idea was to establish a consumer brand recognized as high
quality, and then expand in other spaces. But entering the Home market these
days will be hard, facing Google/Amazon/Apple.

~~~
dingo_bat
To establish a new brand, you must offer something new. Essential phone had
nothing new and had a number of drawbacks compared to its peers. Oh and it was
priced like Samsung's new flagships.

------
efficax
I had never even heard of this phone until now, and I think I would've bought
it over the Pixel 2. Think I'm the target audience, but word never reached me.
Maybe they just whiffed on marketing.

~~~
on_and_off
That's interesting, why would you prefer this phone over the pixel 2 ?

~~~
miranda_rights
Also not OP, but not having a headphone jack is a non-starter for me. In a
tie-breaker, I'd prefer a smaller company over a larger company too.

~~~
laurex
I ended up with a OnePlus 5, which was cheaper, and IMO more attractive than
the Essential, which photographed well, but had a very 80s bling-y aesthetic
IRL.

------
forkLding
I think aside from the Essential product itself, the smartphone market is
basically at a mature stage now just like the laptop market, so for a new
product to successfully enter the market, it would need a lot more money to be
wasted for marketing and production just to compete with the giants.

Mature market, smartphone users still growing but not as fast as before:
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/201182/forecast-of-
smart...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/201182/forecast-of-smartphone-
users-in-the-us/)

Microsoft apparently had ~1 billion dollar loss in first year in North America
region while promoting and selling the Windows Surface which illustrates the
difficulty in selling in a competitive mature market with high stakes.

Microsoft makes loss when selling Surfaces:
[https://www.computerworld.com/article/2476544/tablets/with--...](https://www.computerworld.com/article/2476544/tablets/with
--1-7-billion-in-surface-losses--is-it-time-for-microsoft-to-pull-the-
plug-.html)

Also noteworthy, reputedly global smartphone sales in Q4-2017 sees downturn:
[https://www.ft.com/content/6ef7e850-17e6-11e8-9376-4a6390add...](https://www.ft.com/content/6ef7e850-17e6-11e8-9376-4a6390addb44)

------
scarface74
You can't make money selling Android phones in today's market. Chinese phone
makers eke out small profits and Samsung makes most of its money as a
component manufacturer. The average selling cost of a Samsung phone is $227
([https://www.androidauthority.com/price-gap-samsung-apple-
sma...](https://www.androidauthority.com/price-gap-samsung-apple-
smartphones-769772/))

~~~
pjmlp
Personally anything over $300 is a no-go for me, a phone is not worth more
than a general purpose computer.

~~~
wilsonnb
A phone is a general purpose computer, and most people pay more than $300 for
their laptop or desktop anyways.

~~~
pjmlp
A phone is a special purpose computer.

For it to be general, I should be allowed to do everything I can do with a PC,
without any kind of constraints or workarounds.

Exactly because most people pay more than $300 for an unconstrained device,
there is little value to pay more than that for a constrained device.

~~~
wilsonnb
Are you talking about a "dumb" phone? That I would agree is a special purpose
computer.

A smartphone is definitely a general purpose computer, though. The definition
of a general purpose computer isn't "a computer that can do anything a typical
PC can".

A proper definition would be something like "Any computer-based device that
accepts different applications". It's a differentiator between things like
microwaves, which are technically computers, and
smartphones/laptops/PCs/tablets.

~~~
pjmlp
So how do I run Android Studio on my general purpose phone, without
workarounds like connecting to a VM in the cloud, while looking at an usable
screen?

Mobile OSes are special purpose, constrained to their phone + apps, developed
by on external devices.

~~~
wilsonnb
You don't run Android Studio on your phone. Being able to run Android Studio
isn't the definition of a general purpose computer.

Being able to develop software for a device on that device also isn't the
definition of a general purpose computer.

A general purpose computer is one that can be easily made to run different
programs. Again, it's a differentiation between devices like microwaves and
ovens that are _technically_ computers, but aren't _used_ like computers by
the general public.

~~~
pjmlp
So my car, TV and fridge use general purpose conputers from your point of
view, thanks Android Car, Android TV and Android Things.

I guess I will prepare that accounting document with a Bluetooth keyboard
paired with my fridge.

------
j0e1
I was really looking forward to the PH-2. For me their USP was that the phone
had no logo and that they sold them as being non-affiliated with any big corp
software-though that may not be entirely true, it did raise my hopes of
replacing the software with something more 'open' and just benefit from good
hardware (easier said than done).

I think this a sign I move to a dumb phone.

------
heurist
They launched around the same time as the Pixel 2, with similar price and
slightly worse hardware. It was unfortunate timing.

------
shmerl
I'm more interested in Librem 5. They aren't trying to beat everyone, they are
addressing specific market.

~~~
flukus
I wonder if purism would have the cash to buy Essential? It would give them a
nice head start on getting android apps working with their phone.

~~~
shmerl
How exactly would it benefit them though? They are working now on their
hardware and their own Linux UI (for some reason they weren't satisfied with
existing options like Plasma Mobile).

Full supported OpenGL and Vulkan implementation for i.MX 8M would speed things
up for them a lot.

Another good thing would be someone implementing a browser based on Servo
working on that GPU. But that again requires better OpenGL / Vulkan support
for i.MX 8M (and possibly Vulkan for WebRender).

I don't think Essential would help with any of that.

------
laurex
I tried to buy an Essential phone when it launched and it was probably the
worst product rollout experience I've experienced. The company made promise
after vaguely hedged promise and kept pushing back delivery, even after
payment. Like, for months. People don't buy phones because they will need them
in a few months, in my experience. Several top execs in the company left
during the rollout. They breached data privacy by releasing very private user
data (like people's driver's licences). Their customer service went offline
for a while. And then when the phone finally arrived, it was super
underwhelming. Poor camera and heavy as a brick. So lucky I was able to return
it.

------
robot
I don't think it was just me who thought this was a really bad idea from the
start. Iphone launched at a time when there were no decent phones with
capabilities it added. In presence of polished iphone 7s and other android
phones what does this device really add?

------
JumpCrisscross
Is there a disconnect between the Silicon Valley elite and the population,
when it comes to hardware and privacy? I feel, more and more, that my stance
is anachronistic.

~~~
thanatos_dem
In which direction? Apple is the “elite” or “luxury” brand and also one of the
few to take privacy dead seriously.

I think the general population is more happy to give up privacy for cool
features built using their data than you may think (unless I’m reading your
comment backwards. It is phrased rather ambiguously)

------
chejazi
I bought this phone and the 360 camera and I can say that so far I have
thoroughly enjoyed owning both and would do it again. I came from the Apple
ecosystem, too.

------
Nokinside
You have to learn to walk before you run. You also need to make profits.

HMD Global (Nokia smartphones) started with low-end phones and is slowly
building better and better phones. They sold 10 million smartphones in 2017.

Their first high-level model is promising but far from perfect. It does not
matter because they are not going out of business if it flops. Next iteration
will be better, one following that will be better yet.

------
gwbas1c
Is it just me, or how come I never heard of this phone?

------
pavlov
The company raised money at a $1.2 billion USD valuation in August 2017:
[https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/8/14/16142772/a...](https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/8/14/16142772/andy-
rubin-essential-phone-valuation-billion-dollars-unicorn-value)

"Fail fast" seems to apply.

------
whitepoplar
If any prospective phone startup founders are reading, here's what I want:

1) A utility phone (i.e. maps, weather, camera, sms--leave all the extra
features nobody uses out).

2) Good ergonomics, fits my hand, small.

3) Battery that lasts for at least 2-3 days.

4) No notifications possible apart from phone and sms.

5) Well-made and well-designed, like an iPhone.

Assuming it's very well done, I'd pay as much for it as an iPhone.

------
purism4thewin
No headphone jack, no removable battery, no sd card. Any one of those is a
deal-breaker for me.

~~~
monetus
Mind if I get your opinion on the librem 5?

------
msmith10101
Makes sense. Hardware/software overall is monopoly-determined. If you are
looking for an exit or a business model in the startup world you have to do
something unique. This whole scheme was dead in the water, IMO.

~~~
prklmn
I think this company is very emblematic of the tech bubble. Someone with a
name and not much more is able to raise a staggering $330m with nearly nothing
to show for it down the line, and 95% of people paying attention could have
predicted it was going to be a flop.

------
aviv
This was built to be sold to Amazon. The plan didn't pan out.

~~~
john_moscow
I somehow got a hunch that the recent overfunding trend made startups as
inefficient as large companies are, so there's not much incentive left for
acquisitions if you can simply copy it in-house for much less.

~~~
dman
If a company prematurely captures their upside by raising an excessive amount
of capital they create a scenario for new employees where they participate in
the upside only after the desired (10x) multiple is realised on the prior
raise.

~~~
john_moscow
Except if a company is inefficient, the founders may find a way to get what
they want without waiting for that 10x to realize. I'm not sure though why the
investors are seemingly OK with that.

------
sengork
From the mobile marketplace ecosystem point of view this isn't good for the
consumer. That being said the entry barrier is quite high for anyone, even
essential...

------
zamland
I think it's the cost structure. If they were based in China like Xiaomi, you
could see it monetizing differently and have another type of product.

------
kappi
This is the problem when startups are founded based only on the founders name.
Foolish idea shouldn't have got a penny of investment.

------
_Codemonkeyism
"The startup, part of Rubin’s incubator Playground Global, has raised about
$300 million from several investors [...]"

------
jiveturkey
hate to say it, but yeah, saw that one coming. is it me, or does $100MM seem
like too small an R&D budget for a halo phone?

------
hardwaresofton
After watching FirefoxOS fail I don't think I can put faith in another
interesting-looking mobile OS/phone again.

~~~
ReverseCold
I actually think Firefox OS would be a lot more viable if they tried to make
it today. A lot of things are webapps or JavaScript apps, so app support might
have been less of an issue.

There's also blockchain which exploded, leading to a lot more developers with
good funding willing to work on and/or donate to efforts like FirefoxOS.

Hardware support, on the other hand...

~~~
hardwaresofton
It's really too bad they didn't stick with it.

Mozilla is exactly the company I most trust to guide the software that is
going on my phone, and the browser I use. I'm not sure they would make it
today even if they tried, the management and the goals of the project were
what drove it into the ground IMO. They might have done better if they focused
on the high margin cell phone market -- grab the blackberry and privacy
conscious market who have money to blow.

At least we got a faster/better FF out of it -- then again so many sites are
chrome optimized (and don't necessarily even test FF) that I'm a little
worried.

Android is open source but doesn't feel like it in practice (especially if you
buy a vendor build)... And it's surprisingly hard to find a vendor that will
just give you a phone that can be easily wiped to put stock android on.

------
LarryDarrell
Looks like I'll soon have a replacement for my Nextbit Robin I bought last
year for $100.

------
afterburner
Wish the first one had had an OLED screen, but I guess that's impossible to
get.

------
m3kw9
What was he think man? Maybe he saw how easy XiaoMi made it look and wanted a
piece

------
glemmaPaul
What about Amazon picking this company ? Seems interesting for their Fire line

------
sqldba
Predictable from Day 0.

------
thelastidiot
That was written all along. What a waste of time and money.

------
mihaela
That was expected.

------
xHopen
It was a piece of crap.

------
kkotak
And yet again, the masses are infatuated with the royal wedding/funeral.

------
_bxg1
:(

------
uramoty
be excited.

------
kirillzubovsky
I wonder if Essential is just not a very popular smartphone, or if
Samsung/Apple colluded to pressure suppliers in making it 100x hard for E to
get anything done. Either is equally probable.

~~~
sebleon
It was not popular, they had dismal number of orders when they launched.

I’m curious what suggested that suppliers caused problems - one of their
investors was actually Foxconn.

