Pricing seems about normal for products in this space, even a little low. I'd think that the big question that anyone considering buying this should be asking is around Google's history with hardware support and service. This kind of product will often be expected to be used for 5+ years and the dependency of a non-core service from Google could affect that.
As I'm looking to purchase one of the products in this space, here is a little more comparison info in case anyone else finds it useful. Only Google will sell you one of their devices, everyone else goes through resellers with opaque pricing and unpublished RRPs.
Microsoft Surface Hub 55": 1920x1080 @120Hz, 4th Generation i5, Intel HD 4600, 2x HD cameras. Windows 10 + MS Office
Microsoft Surface Hub 85" 3840x2160 @120Hz, 4th generation i7, NVIDIA Quadro K2200, 2x HD cameras. Windows 10 + MS Office
Cisco Spark Board 55": 4k (4096x2160?) display, unknown hardware and software, 4k camera. Cisco Spark and SIP protocols supported, requires Cisco Collaboration Cloud service.
Cisco Spark Board 70": same as 55"
SMART Board 8055i 55"/8065i 65"/8084i 84": 3840x2160, 4k available. Doesn't seem to have cameras for videoconferencing, comes with SMART Meeting Pro 4.0 software to "collaborate in the 4th dimension", whatever that means.
Google Jamboard 55: 55" 4k (4096x2160?) @60Hz. Unknown hardware, software probably Android? Costs $5000. Requires Google's G-Suite subscription, uses Hangouts and $600/year annual management and support fee. EOL is May 2021
I feel like that fee would really kill the appeal, if I were hunting for something like this. Also, I'm assuming there would be a support fee for each device?
| This kind of product will often be expected to be used for 5+ years and the dependency of a non-core service from Google could affect that.
Is related to this quote:
| I'm sort of confused about the annual management / support fee
To spell it out more, here's an apt passage from Stratechery <https://stratechery.com/2017/wannacry-and-the-power-of-busin...:
| This is exactly what is necessary for good security: vendors need to keep their applications (or in the case of Microsoft, operating systems) updated, and end users need to always be using the latest version. Moreover, pricing software as a service means it is no longer a capital cost with all of the one-time payment assumptions that go with it: rather, it is an ongoing expense that implicitly includes maintenance, whether that be by the vendor or the end user (or, likely, a combination of the two).
Helen of Troy has no fear of Google. None.
Innovation is not a linear convention.
In your warped exegesis of the world, Apple didn't launch the Newton and Microsoft never pushed the Zune.
Imagine this. I want to have a group chat - a la Slack - and 9 team members are able and one is not. Guess that happened? No Wave use.
The point is simple. The history of stupidity, shite customer service and abandoment is there...Google is not - yet? - a world class product company. Innovation is not the issue. Execution is.
i can also see them being pack in as sweeteners like sign up for company/school wide G-Suite here is a few bonus jamboards
software is chromeOS?.
That would be showstopper for any company not already signed up. $5 to $10/month for anyone that might use one of these boards, or remotely connect, even if only once a year?
And they have to sign in with a separate ID if the company isn't generally using G suite?
We use a mix out of all products, but arent G Suite Customers for a variety of reasons. Is the Surface Hub relatively "open" to be used with with Third Party Software?
I'm guessing this originated as a tool for Google's internal teams? The market for it isn't all that big outside of startups (but it exists).
This is a $5,000 whiteboard with an annual SAAS fee.
The real question, is why isn't it free? As in, why can't we just download this from the Play store and use it on whatever we device we already have, like everything else in the G suite?
Microsoft is already moving in this space, not sure about Apple, but I guess there's just a lot of money here.
Because there's already a well-established (presumably high-margin) market for this technology, and it turns out that making money is something that companies like to do.
The price will more than justify itself for any business that understands the utility of a collaborative whiteboard that seamlessly integrates with the tools they they already use. Plus, it's one of those things that you have to experience to fully understand.
The price of something is correlated directly with what people are willing to pay for it. I'm 100% certain companies will pay for this. The value proposition is pretty huge for this sort of tech.
Do you have some comparable products?
It feels as if collaboration tools are made for a type of collaboration that people don't really do. Consider this delightful gem of marketing copy:
"Jamboard breaks down barriers to interactive, visual collaboration across teams everywhere"
Whenever I've engaged in "interactive, visual collaboration," the visual content has been super context-specific. This meant there was usually a purpose-built tool for that kind of collaboration (e.g., wireframe mockups for websites, storyboards for videos).
I was going to ask you for more on this, but found an Ars Technica article with a bit more info: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/12/micro...
"a pen and paper breaks down barriers to interactive, visual collaboration across teams everywhere" feels more truthful
As a consultant, if these were cheaper I'd have no hesitation lending one to each client for the duration of the project. It would make remote meetings way easier.
Personally if I ran a company I'd have a rule to not rely on anything by Google other than their largest core services (Drive, Android, Ads). Their history is just too bad at this point, and this product will almost certainly go the way of glass. I predict it's abandoned within the year.
I'm not saying it's terrible to buy Google products, but maybe wait until it's a success first. There is very little reason to risk being an early adopter of a Google product.
The recent Google Home (not a cheap product) advertising snafu is another recent red flag for buying any Google product.
Edit: Parent originally commented about 'getting over Google Reader being discontinued'.
Plus, many of those had direct replacements that were obvious iterations of their predecessor. Sure, Apple discontinued the iPod Mini, but they released the iPod Nano. Sure, Apple discontinued MobileMe, but they released iCloud.
Google just quietly abandons services and products and if they ever replace anything, they appear to have started from scratch.
Plus, the item in question is not a free service, it's an expensive physical device with a costly subscription service.
Games for Windows
Windows Phone 7
If we want to avoid the conversation, Google needs to put out some clear language around project/product/service EOL and support for everything it introduces.
And you can now add Wunderlist to that long list.
Also the actual product landing page has some info too: https://gsuite.google.com/products/jamboard/
The G Suite (formerly Google Apps) enterprise offering, which this is part of, was part of the core business retained in Google. This is not a wild IoT product, it's a competitive entry in the enterprise collaboration space that G Suite targets.
I still can't buy the latest google phone because I live outside US.
It seems to so natural to integrate google assistant into this thing. I wonder when 'Alexa' for meetings will be good enough to commercialize.
If you've been in countless business meetings whiteboarding, Jamboard is definitely not outrageous.
edit: Oh, it's actually over $6k if you want the rolling stand, which you will.