Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Home Flagship Phone, HTC First, May Be Discontinued

samzenpus posted about a year and a half ago | from the end-of-the-line dept.

Android 192

zacharye writes "The HTC First, or 'Facebook phone' as many prefer to call it, is officially a flop. It certainly wasn't a good sign when AT&T dropped the price of HTC's First to $0.99 just one month after its debut, and now BGR has confirmed that HTC and Facebook's little experiment is nearing its end. BGR has learned from a trusted source that sales of the HTC First have been shockingly bad. So bad, in fact, that AT&T has already decided to discontinue the phone. Our source at AT&T has confirmed that the HTC First, which is the first smartphone to ship with Facebook Home pre-installed, will soon be discontinued and unsold inventory will be returned to HTC. How much unsold inventory is there? We don’t have an exact figure, but things aren’t looking good. According to our source, AT&T sold fewer than 15,000 units nationwide through last week when the phone’s price was slashed to $0.99."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Misread their market. (5, Insightful)

HornWumpus (783565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713727)

They should have charged extra and made them sign up for a waiting list.

Re:Misread their market. (2)

guises (2423402) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714247)

I laughed, but this is sadly true. People seem to love being exploited if it means they'll feel just a little bit special for having the newest thing.

Re:Misread their market. (3, Funny)

crutchy (1949900) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714639)

not everyone's phone gets discontinued so quickly... they should feel special

Old news ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713731)

chop chop editors ..

Unbelievable. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713733)

I thought that the Facebook phone would have been the ultimate iPhone killer. It is, after all, the social media age and Facebook integration should have ensured success.

Re:Unbelievable. (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713771)

its not samsung

the smartphone market is Apple and Samsung control more than 95% of the market. everyone else is table scraps

Re:Unbelievable. (4, Insightful)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713847)

Every phone is already integrated into facebook to a certain degree. If this were the only phone to ever allow you to see or update facebook, then yes it would be a smashing success. However, it is not. Even the marquee feature of the the "facebook home launcher" is available on other phones. There is nothing the phone can do that others can not.

Re:Unbelievable. (1)

crutchy (1949900) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714657)

facebook is already integrated into every phone to a certain degree

ftfy

Re:Unbelievable. (5, Insightful)

WillKemp (1338605) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713959)

Everybody hates Facebook - they only use it because everyone else does and they have to use it to keep in touch.

Use some logic, dude. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714563)

Everybody hates it and everybody uses it? That doesn't make any sense.
You probably hate it because you're anti-social, or socially awkward. Most of the people who really use Facebook, love Facebook.

Re:Use some logic, dude. (2)

crutchy (1949900) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714717)

i think the problem is that the number of people that actively use facebook is grossly overstated by the additional number of users (probably far more) that have merely joined up at some point and then forgot it

i log into facebook maybe once a month, but i'm sure there are plenty of registered users that use it less or not at all

facebook is an ok platform for sharing photos... that's probably about it. eventually something simpler and less commercialized will take over and i'll move to that after the rest of my friends and family migrate.

Re:Use some logic, dude. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714729)

Sure just like everyone who uses Windows just can't wait to run out and buy the newest version every time it is release... oh wait..

Re:Use some logic, dude. (5, Interesting)

citylivin (1250770) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714753)

"Everybody hates it and everybody uses it? That doesn't make any sense."

OIL, Coal, Microsoft Windows, inkjet printers, Fiat Currencies, cable television, pop with glucose/fructose. There are lots of things that people don't like, but merely put up with because they do not have (or perceive to have) a better alternative.

Re:Unbelievable. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714835)

I love Facebook. I especially love the clueless marketeers bumbling about all trying to be the first movers. I've gotten 6 (no shit) free pairs of glasses, 2 cruises, tickets to two different show in the theater, and countless discounts on other crap. All because these fuckwits have no fucking clue how to act in this new digital land some of us have inhabited for decades before they found it.

Re:Unbelievable. (2)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714143)

And they laughed at me when I warned them about buying facebook stock...

so sad (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713775)

Color me surprised. [thenextweb.com]

Here Today, Gone Today (1)

jazman_777 (44742) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713779)

Even the BlinkFeed missed it, it came and went so fast.

Re:Here Today, Gone Today (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714241)

Even the BlinkFeed missed it, it came and went so fast.

Who? I'm sorry, I'm not surgically attached to Internet Blogs...

Facebook is dying (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713801)

Once everyone's pet, mom and grandma jumped on facebook it began its decline. Now its just a marketing platform, not unlike slashdot since its acquisition by dice.
The facebook phone is about as relevant as a FROSTY PISS.

Re:Facebook is dying (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713825)

Does Netcraft confirm it?

Re:Facebook is dying (1)

kernelistic (160323) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714235)

Should we cue in the "Facebook is dying" jokes?

Re:Facebook is dying (1)

vux984 (928602) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714349)

Its not dying. But its no longer cool.

Re:Facebook is dying (1)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714857)

I don't think facebook was ever cool.

Re:Facebook is dying (1)

Kleen13 (1006327) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714593)

Yup. I'm out, and so are more and more people that I know. I'm almost scared by what might replace it.....

Hacking Facebook. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713821)

I see an open market for some new hardware to hack.

Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (5, Interesting)

dcollins (135727) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713829)

The Facebook phone flops like few phones have ever flopped. Zuckerberg's lobbying group is collapsing like few lobbying groups have ever collapsed (http://techcrunch.com/2013/05/12/why-zuckerbergs-lobby-fwd-is-collapsing-like-a-house-of-cards-outside-of-dc/).

Many of us are stuck with Facebook due its powerful networking effects (much like AT&T in the old days). But still the FB brand is renowned as being member-abusive, terrible about privacy, cavalier about interface changes and wiping out settings, etc. Perhaps this is a sign that few people are interested in letting FB expand its grip on their lives.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713949)

I don't have facebook and I network just fine, you know by talking to people and shit. About the only people who ask me about facebook are women, and I just get an "oh" back when I say I don't have one.

So, in conclusion: facebook is for 13 year olds, family, and posers (I went to the bar last night check out how badass I am). None of my family uses it making it a complete waste of time.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714083)

If Facebook actually did anything useful, I'd see the point in signing up. As it is, it's just a way to harvest marketing data without providing anything in return that is actually useful. Its UI is horrible, the function it serves is nonexistent, the company is abusive, and the CEO is hostile.

The emperor has been going full monty for several years now.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714757)

I remember when Facebook first came out. It was a great way to send invites to college parties without having to remember a bunch of number and not worrying about "Responsible" adults finding out about your crazy ass house party. However, that only really lasted until they let just anyone join not just college students so cops could join and the free ride was over. That's about the time I stopped caring about Facebook.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714163)

Thanks so much for the strong data behind your assertion. I can now tell my marketing director to ignore all of our user surveys, because an AC told me that facebook is for 13 year olds family and posers.

Just because you don't do something does not mean that there is no value in it

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714341)

Then again - many of us refuse to do some things because we realize there is no value in it.

I'll admit, I have an account. I go for weeks without signing in. When I do sign in, I just scan over some of the stupid shit my family and acquaintances are doing. Occasionally, I'll sign in to post a petition to kill bankers, or kill pharmaceutical corporate officers, or kill all lawyers and politicians. Oh, Monsanto, too.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714085)

Many of us are stuck with Facebook due its powerful networking effects

I don't understand this. I dropped Facebook over a year ago and have never even been tempted to look back. What's powerful about it? I don't know anyone that gives a flying shit about Facebook. My wife uses it but mostly because her friends are on it. If everyone just stopped going I doubt my wife would even notice or care.

No one is a Facebook fanboy. I don't see people clogging forums saying :Wow Facebook is the bee's knees!" there aren't Facebook vs Google+ flame wars like with iOS and Android.

Facebook is just sorta there. People use it but usually can't tell you why. It's like the fucking AOL of this generation. Tons of people have it, not because they asked for it specifically but because a bunch of assholes bombarded their mailbox with CD's (or preinstalled it on their cell phones).

If Facebook disappeared right now, would people really notice? I guess the brain dead teenagers and young adults may notice but they would have it replaced within hours with something else.

I guess what I'm saying is, Facebook as a brand is worthless. No one gives a shit. Everyone knows Mark Zuckerberg is a fucking douche bag. People only use it to catch up on old high school aquaintences to see how fucked up their lives are now they are adults. There is no value to it and therefor no brand loyalty.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (2, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714311)

What's powerful about it?... My wife uses it but mostly because her friends are on it.

I love when people answer their own questions.

The GP post said Facebook had "powerful networking effects", which means, as explained by the Wikipedia:

In economics and business, a network effect (also called network externality or demand-side economies of scale) is the effect that one user of a good or service has on the value of that product to other people. When network effect is present, the value of a product or service is dependent on the number of others using it.

Facebook is a utility. (0)

xaxa (988988) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714339)

I think you're probably correct about the lack of brand loyalty. Might most people think of Facebook roughly the way they think of email, or the telephone? Everyone has is, except some people who like to say they don't have it, since for some things it's the normal / easiest way to do something. It's just a utility though, and a better utility will replace it when it gets enough momentum.

I guess the brain dead teenagers

Teenagers don't use Facebook (though they have an account). Their parents do (which is why they don't), but it's most popular with the 18-24 and 25-35 groups.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (1)

Threni (635302) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714149)

> But still the FB brand is renowned as being member-abusive, terrible about privacy,
> cavalier about interface changes and wiping out settings, etc. ...on Slashdot, yes. But I doubt more than 0.0001% of its daily user base give a shit about any of those features. Be honest - privacy? It's Facebook - you tell the world what you're up to. "Member-abusive"? Yeah, I saw a Facebook user with a black eye the other day - the things they put up with to use a free website!

People don't need to get a special Facebook phone, because you can use the site of the app on loads of existing phones. It doesn't make any sense.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (4, Insightful)

Nemyst (1383049) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714171)

The way I see it, the facebook brand is in a similiar position to the Windows brand. They're popular in the sense that they're ubiquitous, but not in the sense that they elicit passion. Unlike, for instance, Apple, you won't see "facebook fanboys" who'll defend the site to the death. It's used because just about everyone knows someone on it (as you said, the networking effects), but not because it has any particular strength or marketing genius.

The question you need to ask yourself is that if all of a sudden facebook was replaced by another website fulfilling similar/identical needs, would people care? I think not. If you asked the same for Apple, though, I think a lot of people would cry out at their iDevices being taken away. That, right there, is brand power.

Re:Is Facebook a Toxic Brand? (2)

fermion (181285) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714203)

Except for Kin, and I doubt facebook spent a billion developing the phone. Failed phones are not uncommon. Facebook better spend it capital figuring out how it is going to survive the next five years. If not a phone, then something.

It is not uncommon for lobbying group, particularly new groups with little political expertise, to flop. Even groups that should be politically savvy, such as Freedomworks, which got almost no one elected during the last cycle, can be flops, though well funded as they provide means for the middle class to launder money. The problem with groups such as this, as can also be seen in the Susan G. Komen group, is it is high profile and corporate interests don't want to be associated with high profile groups that do things the customer base may object to. Corporate type do objectionable things low profile.

Facebook is shedding users every quarter in the US (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713831)

A lot of people are dropping Facebook. The key demographic that this phone targeted are the ones leaving in droves.

Re:Facebook is shedding users every quarter in the (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713865)

The key facebook demographic is mostly the LGTBQF crowd and they are more interested in the French Tickler phone.
Fact

let's make the stock price go down. (0)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713837)

let's make the stock price go down.

Re:let's make the stock price go down. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713857)

ok i'll go press the make-facebook-stock-go-down button.

Re:let's make the stock price go down. (2)

Kichigai Mentat (588759) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713957)

I believe it's called the "sell" button in your stock portfolio. Either that or make something bad happen for them.

Re:let's make the stock price go down. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714015)

Well, since I don't own any stocks guess there's only one answer left!

Re:let's make the stock price go down. (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714531)

I believe it's called the "sell" button in your stock portfolio. Either that or make something bad happen for them.

I trust Zuckerburg's ego will do that for me.

Nood android question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713843)

Not an android user, but is it possible to wipe the facebook front end and just add generic android rom to it?

Re:Nood android question (1)

fcmeneg (2736965) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713903)

Yes, but if you install a new rom you will lose your warranty period. But you don't have to do it, you can just install a new launcher (a new start screen).

Re:Nood android question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714003)

Oh noes!

If my CM ROM bricks the phone I'll be out 99 cents?

Oh heavens to Betsy! Whatever shall I do?

Re:Nood android question (1)

raburton (1281780) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714201)

> If my CM ROM bricks the phone I'll be out 99 cents?

I'm assuming 99 cents is just the deposit on a 2 year hire-purchase agreement with mobile service. If you brick your phone you'll still paying for it for the next 2 years and not being able to use the service you are also paying for without forking out the retail price of another phone.

If they really were 99 cents a phone there would be no shortage of people buying them.

Re:Noob Android Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714257)

You would be out $350. Unless you are a sucker and somehow believe that AT&T is giving you the phone for $0.99 out of the goodness of their heart.

Re:Nood android question (1)

Kichigai Mentat (588759) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713941)

Probably, depending on the hardware, the security of the boot-loader lockdown, if HTC was planning to unlock this one, and if the drivers are available.

The light is on but nobody's home (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713845)

HTC - Horrible Taiwanese Crap

Seriously has anyone ever had a positive experience with an HTC?

captcha: cellular

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (3, Informative)

Kichigai Mentat (588759) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713921)

Yes. I loved my HTC s620 (AKA: "Excalibur," and "T-Mobile Dash"). Except for some of the limitations of Windows Mobile it was some really solid hardware. And reviews for the Nexus One, also built by HTC, were stellar, the Tytn II was pretty popular, and people seemed to like the T-Mobile G1. For the longest time there, HTC really did rule the roost. It's only relatively recently, if I remember correctly, that Samsung started to totally dominate, right around the time they launched the Galaxy platform.

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714031)

**T-Mobile** Dash

That's where HTC went wrong. I had 3 HTC phone, and I was happy with all 3. All of them were branded as T-Mobile phones.

I'm sure most HTC phone owners have no idea who HTC is.

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (3, Interesting)

WillKemp (1338605) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714023)

[......] has anyone ever had a positive experience with an HTC?

Yes. I used an HTC Desire for two years and never had any problems with it at all. It was the best phone i'd had up to that point by far.When it came to replacing it, the Galaxy S3 only won out over the One X because it had a replaceable battery and an SD card.

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (3, Insightful)

kwark (512736) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714719)

Coming from the G1 and Desire Z, new HTC phones lack a lot of features:
-no replacable battery
-no trackpad
-no SD
-no keyboard
all these features are missing on any "modern" phone, the trend is to make all buttons disappear at the cost of screen real-estate. So when it was time to get a new phone I went for the one with the biggest screen and most of the disappearing features, I went for Samsung.

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (1)

TheEyes (1686556) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714199)

My HTC Sensation was my first smartphone, so that may bias me a little. I've moved on to a Note 2 now, but I constantly find myself missing features from Sense 3.5, and bewildered by "features" of Touchwiz (MMS messages as slideshows that you can't zoom in on? WTF Samsung, WTF.)

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714559)

I used to roll with a Touch Pro 2, and aside from the horrific memory management that came courtesy of WM6.something, it was an alright device.

LOVED the built in stylus and full keyboard.

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (1)

rta (559125) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714809)

I had a t-mobile g1 and now am using a t-mobile g2. They were both fine. Since all these things are Android the difference is relatively minor. I like Samsung in general as a brand and have been buying their stuff for over a decade, but my tilt currently is that they've currently become the expensive brand. Like Sony was back in the day when they were on top.

That said i don't really understand the phone market. Except for hated Apple who has a decent product lifecycle and longish term support all these manufacturers just pump out and endless stream of nearly identical phones and then abandon them after a few months anyway. Hopefully now that we're at 2-4 cores and ~1gb of ram things will stabilize some.

On the FB specifically (and i am a strong detractor of FB and haven't used it in over a year)... i similarly don't understand why they're bailing so soon. Give the thing a chance. It's not like it's HURTING people or something. For example, relatively few people actually buy the Nexus phones and tablets from Google, but they're still around and serve their purpose.

Re:The light is on but nobody's home (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714811)

HTC Sense is by far the best UI on top of andriod in the market. Their virtual keyboard is far beyond what Samsung or Sony can do. The only downside to the HTCs I've owned are the battery life (due to Sense I guess).

HTC Desire and keyboard weirdness solved (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714935)

yes, i really like my HTC desire Z, but unfortunately the screen broke about a year ago (dropped it on the road) and now I have to be careful that no splinters fall out. It still works good, though.

There was a very bad problem a while ago when an update went wrong and whenever I typed the letters g, s and another one, it would switch me from the SMS app to the browser :-(
I let my annoyance build up by trying to use words without those letters in my SMSes, but eventually I surfed for a solution and found out that some guy or lady with a Chinese name on some forum (yes, [citation needed], found it, it was HERE [androidpit.com] ) gave a clear explanation and solution.

However I was shocked that such an *annoying* bug made it past their quality control.

And HTC should track down "Zhu Lee" from that forum and hire him/her!

Does anybody know? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713871)

Is it normal for a contract between a carrier and an OEM to be structured such that unsold inventory would be sent back to the OEM?

Logistically, that seems like it would be pretty wasteful(especially since there presumably exists an 'Android-base-build' firmware that HTC put together before adding 'Home' on, so they could push that over the internet and convert the units in the field into perfectly servicable stock-Android handsets, in about the time it takes AT&T sales to sell an overpriced case and insurance plan), unless the contract is sufficiently one-sided that HTC was begging AT&T to offer shelf space and accepting all the downside risk in exchange for whatever margin they managed on sales...

Is HTC just too weak to get decent deals? Is it normal for the carrier to not outright buy the phone until they sell it? How does that channel work?

Re:Does anybody know? (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714581)

Is it normal for a contract between a carrier and an OEM to be structured such that unsold inventory would be sent back to the OEM?

Isn't that pretty much how auto dealerships work?

Opinion: more Facebook than HTC fault (1)

Pecisk (688001) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713879)

I really don't see how Facebook can go but down. It's not cool new thing. Everyone capable enough to use it from phone already does it. How many people are there without smartphones and with active Facebook account?

Re:Opinion: more Facebook than HTC fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713977)

is that a real question? is Ubuntu a good flavor?

Re:Opinion: more Facebook than HTC fault (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43713991)

You really are thinking way to intelligently in relation to how equities... We are talking about Wall Street. Facebook has allot of ownership by VCs and Investment funds who were caught off guard when its IPO fell flat. I mean even Goldman owns 1% of the company.

In short.. IMO, FB isnt going to fall very far as long as big players (including market makers) own it (and still have access to the Fed's 0.25% window).

Facebook better learn... (5, Interesting)

nick357 (108909) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713943)

...the ONLY reason they have the number of users that they do is because everyone's friends are on Facebook.

People do not like Facebook. They hate the lack of security, the constant changing of format, the increasingly annoying advertising, etc, etc, etc.

One day (and I believe it will be soon), a viable alternative will appear and their collective mass of users will leave practically overnight.

No one loves Facebook. Its not cool. Its just where everyone is hanging until something better comes along.

Re:Facebook better learn... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714063)

Well, Google+ certainly wasn't the "something better". It has its points, but we certainly didn't see a mass migration. I'm not sure anything else would succeed either.

Part of the problem is there's no easy way to mass-migrate all your friends, photos, comment history etc. from FB to whatever might be its successor. It will have to be not merely a replacement, but something new and really improved.

What I'd like to see (maybe it's out there, I haven't looked) is a social-media aggregating client that will let me read and update FB, G+, LinkedIn, et bloody cetera through a single email-like interface.

Re:Facebook better learn... (3, Interesting)

geek (5680) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714121)

One day (and I believe it will be soon), a viable alternative will appear and their collective mass of users will leave practically overnight.

No one loves Facebook. Its not cool. Its just where everyone is hanging until something better comes along.

I went over to Google+ and have never looked back. All the high school bullshit from 20 years ago that somehow found me on Facebook is now long gone. I honestly hope Facebook stays alive for a while so as to keep all the fuckers I hate from my high school years away from my social networking.

Re:Facebook better learn... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714205)

If high school bullshit found you on Facebook, that is kind of your problem for friending it (and then not un-friending it) in the first place.

Re:Facebook better learn... (1)

quacking duck (607555) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714357)

One thing stopped me using Google+ more when it was the rage a couple years ago: lack of an events calendar.

At the time you needed a separate calendar account and then tie it to Plus. I had zero desire to do this. I logged in recently and IIRC this is no longer required, but it was a huge momentum killer among my circle(s) of friends.

Re:Facebook better learn... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714929)

LMFAO. It's pretty easy to get along with EVERYONE in the sandbox...when you're the only ONE.

Re:Facebook better learn... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714221)

facebook meet myspace, myspace meet facebook.

myspace has its niche market, music and bands... facebook will, too.... businesses spamming comments and begging for 'likes', along with the overweight homebound and unemployed playing farmville.

will the next social network, come on town, it's YOUR time to scam shareholders or get bought out by murdick.

Re:Facebook better learn... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714333)

FB is just a self-updating phone book. It's a tool. Now stop staring at your tools, fbidiots.

Re:Facebook better learn... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714521)

I'm living in a podunk midwestern town at the moment, where it's normal for people in their 20s and 30s not to have a smartphone or even an iPod. Despite never going out besides the gym or groceries, I still managed to overhear a conversation about how the gym owner and another woman hate Facebook and even how the security policies change so often that setting things to private doesn't mean anything.
 
I don't think Facebook comprehend how much reach their dickish behavior has had.

Re:Facebook better learn... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714661)

When you use absolutes like "No one", you're wrong ALL of the time.

Of course a large sub-set of Facebook users like Facebook, you fucking idiot. Search for data on that..
You are just spouting shit to support your reasons to hate it.

You do not like Facebook, YOU hate the percieved lack of security, YOU hate the constant changing of format, etc. etc.
You don't have to be on Facebook just because your friends are there, they all have phones, email, etc. My guess is you only have a few real friends and are jealous of people having a good time on Facebook. If you hate it, leave! Don't just hang out to look cool. You're not really cool. :)

Another anti-socialite bitching about social networks.. It's getting old. GO HOME!

The most pointless phone ever is a flop (4, Insightful)

jandrese (485) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713955)

Can anybody name me a smartphone that doesn't have Facebook integration already? It's hard to build a phone around a killer feature when literally every competitor already has that feature.

Re:The most pointless phone ever is a flop (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714087)

Mine dies not. I have no facebook apps what so ever. So can any phone that you do not install facebook on it.

Re:The most pointless phone ever is a flop (1)

raburton (1281780) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714243)

> Mine does not. I have no facebook apps what so ever.

Ditto. But if you are the type of person that uses facebook and would like to access it on your phone you are type of person who already has a smartphone and does just that, therefore there is one to sell this device too.

Re: The most pointless phone ever is a flop (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714471)

cool story, bro.

GP's point was that all other smartphones CAN integrate with facebook, not that literally everyone with a smartphone actually downloads an available facebook app. obviously, if someone doesn't want to use facebook, they won't download the app.

Never heard of it. Not even on Facebook. (1)

scottbomb (1290580) | about a year and a half ago | (#43713965)

Maybe that's one of the reasons why it flopped?

Re:Never heard of it. Not even on Facebook. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714065)

Maybe that's one of the reasons why it flopped?

I'm betting you also don't own a TV, and you're itching for some excuse to explain this fact in excruciating detail.

Re:Never heard of it. Not even on Facebook. (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714565)

Maybe that's one of the reasons why it flopped?

I'm betting you also don't own a TV, and you're itching for some excuse to explain this fact in excruciating detail.

Well, like me, he may own a TV, but either (a) doesn't watch broadcast TV at all, or (b) timeshifts and doesn't watch the commercials, or some combination of (a) and (b).

I've seen articles on the Facebook phone here, on The Register, and (I think) in Yahoo News, but only as articles, not ever as marketing. I don't even know what the desktop looks like. (Of course, I could google it and find out, but I don't care to do that. The Facebook phone is in my mind in the same class as Windows Phone; something I'd never own and in which I have absolutely no interest.)

So yeah, if they only marketed the device on TV, there are lots of people (more every day) who wouldn't have been in a position to see an advertisement.

Re:Never heard of it. Not even on Facebook. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714077)

Maybe that's one of the reasons why it flopped?

Maybe it never even existed to begin with.

Blame HTC (3, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714081)

There was a translation problem when the order came in,

"We want a smart, flip-phone" got translated to "We want a smart, flopped-phone".

And boy, did HTC deliver!

Re:Blame HTC (4, Informative)

geek (5680) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714147)

The phone is actually very good. The hardware that is. If you stripped out Facebook Home you would basically have stock android on it. At .99 cents on contract thats a damn good buy if Cyanogen Mod supported it.

Promo & Hype vs User Needs (1)

BoRegardless (721219) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714089)

People don't get sucked into a "gadget" when they have real needs. Users want a product with a real answer they can RELY on.

Re:Promo & Hype vs User Needs (2)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714583)

People don't get sucked into a "gadget" when they have real needs. Users want a product with a real answer they can RELY on.

...or if it's from Apple.

$.99? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714119)

If it was really that price it would have sold, the reality was that you needed a contract to get one.

Phillip Phillips said it best..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714135)

Hold on, to your brand new phone
As we roll down this unfamiliar road
And although this carrier is stringing us along
Just know you've got a phone
It's too bad your running home

Settle down, it'll all be clear
Don't pay no mind to the carriers
They fill you with fear
On your screen you can still drag and drop
and the ads they will never stop

Just know you’re not alone
Lots of other people's phones run home

Settle down, wipe the cache clear
your carriers
They fill you with fear
There are plenty of mods all around
If you get lost, help can always be found

Just know you’re not alone
Cause lots of people jailbreak their phones....

Not an OS. (1)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714151)

They might have been better off when sales started taking if they highlighted it's just a launcher on an Android based phone and not a full blown Operating System. The problem was the launcher was optimized to enhance social networking and (from what I hear) wasn't good at working with other Apps.

This is a bad hit for HTC. The specs on the hardware are pretty good, so dumping a re-flash to the feature phone market is going to hurt. I don't think there's been a fail like this snce the MS Kin.

Good riddance... (1)

ndtechnologies (814381) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714161)

This was a stupid idea anyway. I don't know of any smartphone that doesn't have some sort of Facebook integration. It's just too bad that Samsung wasn't the one making these devices. I'd rather see them lose money than HTC.

How long before (1)

randomErr (172078) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714167)

How long before they're offered as TracFone's for $19.95 with 20 minutes free?

Re:How long before (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714619)

How long before they're offered as TracFone's for $19.95 with 20 minutes free?

I think you have something there. The "facebook phone" concept was tailor made for prepaid blister-pack impulse buys displayed near the register.

Not surprising in the least (4, Insightful)

m.dillon (147925) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714179)

Because, really, there was never a 'Facebook' phone in the first place. It was just an annoying app launcher that should never have been bundled with a phone. This also demonstrates the sheer power that the default app launcher has to make or break perfectly fine hardware. Even though the customer can easily replace the launcher, bundling a phone with a messed up launcher basically destroys sales of the phone.

Vendors try to lock people into these sorts of things all the time, it just usually isn't quite so blatant and most people don't even realize that it is happening. Buy a Motorola phone and you get some minor but interesting stuff that is generic but locked into the platform (can't be downloaded and run on other android phones). Same with all vendors, but they have to tread carefully or risk alienating their entire user base. The FB stuff was so in-your-face that even a 5-year-old could turn away from the foul stench.

-Matt

Apple's first foray into cell phones was the ROKR (2)

girlinatrainingbra (2738457) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714899)

Apple's first foray into cell phones was the ROKR [wikipedia.org] made in conjunction with Motorola. It was just a rebadged Motorola E398 with the Apple iTunes music store [wikipedia.org] accessible directly from the phone via licensed Apple software. It launched in September 2005.

Apple severely cut motorola off at the knees by soon announcing the iPhone and discontinuing support of the ROKR in September 2006, with the iTunes software being set up and configured to work with the as yet undisclosed iPhone hardware. So even Apple had a mis-step with Motorola on its first time out on the cell-phone dance floor. Why shouldn't Facebook make a misstep or two? (Not that I condone facebook's existence, the utility of facebook pages, or even any point to checking up on facebook at all. I just have an opinion about 1st generation hardware attempts! ! !)

    It's also like the Zune phone. Just when MS started its advertising blitz with ?uestLove a.k.a. Questlove [wikipedia.org] , the stores started discounting and discontinuing the damn useless phone and music player.

Can't this be unlocked, flashed, and repurposed? (1)

Jonah Hex (651948) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714275)

I've got an older HTC Supersonic and I could go for a 0.99 upgrade as long as I could move it over to my current Sprint account. Why can't this be unlocked and reflashed with a decent version of Android?

Re:Can't this be unlocked, flashed, and repurposed (3, Insightful)

Kyokugenryu (817869) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714367)

This being a GSM AT&T phone might be a big roadblock in you activating it on Sprint's CDMA network

99c without a contract? (1)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714325)

Sure, the price is dropped to less than a dollar, but you'd be paying the phone back twice in the monthly contract fees. Wake me up when the phone is 99 cents without a contract or a lock.

Re:99c without a contract? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43714837)

When that happens I'll buy 5 just to mess around with, because why not it's just 5 bucks. I spent more than that for breakfast this morning.

Will it be supported ? (1)

Alain Williams (2972) | about a year and a half ago | (#43714705)

They might have only sold 15,000 units but for those that bought them it is their 'phone and many of them will be locked into a 2 year contract. So they will want the 'phone supported by HTC & Facebook for at least 2 years, preferably 4 -- OS upgrades, security/bug fixes, etc.

However I suspect that HTC will not bother. I bought an HTC 'phone, I got one OS upgrade and then they refused to do any more. They had my money so why bother to spend money supporting me ? It would not bring them any more income and might result that I might delay buying a new 'phone. Well: they are right on that last point, but as a result of the derisory way that they have treated me I will not buy another HTC 'phone, so (long term) they loose - plonkers.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?