top technology product failure

Top Technology Product Failures last 20 years

Presented By : Lokesh Singrol

Overview

Why technology product gets failed.

Introduction

Success and failures

Google Wave

Nokia N-Gage

Windows Vista

Microsoft Kin

Google Glass

Google Buzz

How many product are successful in market and how many gets failed in market

Google wave’s failure Reasons and solution for return back in market

Microsoft’s Operating System Vista (OS). Failure reasons and solution

Microsoft Kin’s failure Reasons and solution for return back in market

Google Glass’s failure Reasons and solution for return back in market

Google Buzz’s failure Reasons and solution for return back in market

Conclusion Conclusion of Technologies product failures.

01

02

03

04

05

06

Nokia N-Gage’s failure Reasons and solution for return back in market

Introduction

The customer does not exist. There was no value proposition. The product didn’t work. The path to market was not clear. Inexperienced Project Managers. Inaccurate Cost Estimations. Bad Leadership. Poor Preparation. Inadequate Documentation and Tracking. Little Communication at Every Level of Management Bad timing to launch in market.

Success and Failures of Technology Products

Reason and Solution of Technology failure product

01 02 03 04 05 06

Goog

le W

ave

Nok

ia N

-Gag

e

Win

dow

s Vist

a

Mic

roso

ft Ki

n

Goog

le G

lass

Goog

le B

uzz

Failure products Google wave (2009-2012)

1. Because invites were so damn limited.2. No notification system.3. User interface was not intuitive.4. Basic functionality was not there.5. It was slow.

Reasons :

1 Because invites were so damn limited. It took well over a dozen people inviting each other to get my entire med school class of <190 on there so we could work on review notes together. It should've taken no more than a handful, tops.

2 No notification system. Sure, there was a Firefox plug-in, but this should've been integrated from the beginning. No one has any reason to be logged into wave all the time.

3 User interface was not intuitive.Seriously. I can't count the number of times I had to explain to people how to use it. Also, there are way better ways to show how many people are on a wave than putting 100+ avatars at the top of a wave taking up real estate. A sidebar would've been much more elegant.

4 Basic functionality was not there. Once you added someone to a wave, even if it was on accident, you couldn't remove them. What the heck? Since when does collaboration software fail to have an undo feature?

5 It was slow. Really. Really. Slow. Quota's speed makes Google Wave look like a snail dragging a 10-lb weight.

01 02 03 04 05 06

Goog

le W

ave

Nok

ia N

-Gag

e

Win

dow

s Vist

a

Mic

roso

ft Ki

n

Goog

le G

lass

Goog

le B

uzz

Nokia N-Gage (2003-2010)Failure

products


1. The gaming library for nokia’s device wasn’t quite enough to propel it to the top.

2. The original n-gage wasn’t exactly a looker and the awkward screen layout made things worse.

Reasons :

1 The original N-Gage wasn’t exactly a looker and the awkward screen layout made things worse.There’s a couple of theories related to the N-Gage’s nosedive, but more often than not the same points come up in discussion. The unusual shape, the awkwardly-sized screen, the poor library of games and bad functionality all played a part in the gadgets demise. Users also reported poor battery life from the device.

2 The gaming library for Nokia’s device wasn’t quite enough to propel it to the top.This initial hype over a newer, more functional N-Gage was short-lived, however, and the phone had lost all its market momentum by the end of the year, the same year it was launched to an expectant public. Competition from the PSP and Nintendo’s DS proved too much for Nokia’s second attempt and it began to fade away.

01 02 03 04 05 06

Goog

le W

ave

Nok

ia N

-Gag

e

Win

dow

s Vist

a

Mic

roso

ft Ki

n

Goog

le G

lass

Goog

le B

uzz

Windows Vista (2007-2012)Failure

products

1. It broke too much stuff.2. There wasn't supposed to be a vista.3. Vista is too slow4. Windows XP is too entrenched5. Apple successfully demonized vista

Reasons :


1. It broke too much stuffOne of the big reasons that Windows XP caught on was because it had the hardware, software, and driver compatibility of the Windows 9x line plus the stability and industrial strength of the Windows NT line. The compatibility issue was huge. Having a single, highly-compatible Windows platform simplified the computing experience for users, IT departments, and software and hardware vendors.Microsoft either forgot or disregarded that fact when it released Windows Vista, because, despite a long beta period, a lot of existing software and hardware were not compatible with Vista when it was released in January 2007. Since many important programs and peripherals were unusable in Vista, that made it impossible for a lot of IT departments to adopt it. Many of the incompatibilities were the result of tighter security.After Windows was targeted by a nasty string of viruses, worms, and malware in the early 2000s, Microsoft embarked on the Trustworthy Computing initiative to make its products more secure. One of the results was Windows XP Service Pack 2 (SP2), which won over IT and paved the way for XP to become the world's mostly widely deployed OS.The other big piece of Trustworthy Computing was the even-further-locked-down version of Windows that Microsoft released in Vista. This was definitely the most secure OS that Microsoft had ever released but the price was user-hostile features such as UAC, a far more complicated set of security prompts that accompanied many basic tasks, and a host of software incompatibility issues. In other words, Vista broke a lot of the things that users were used to doing in XP.2. There wasn't supposed to be a VistaIt's easy to forget that when Microsoft launched Windows XP it was actually trying to change its OS business model to move away from shrink-wrapped software and convert customers to software subscribers. That's why it abandoned the naming convention of Windows 95, Windows 98, and Windows 2000, and instead chose Windows XP.The XP stood for "experience" and was part of Microsoft's .NET Web services strategy at the time. The master plan was to get users and businesses to pay a yearly subscription fee for the Windows experience -- XP would essentially be the on-going product name but would include all software upgrades and updates, as long as you paid for your subscription. Of course, it would disable Windows on your PC if you didn't pay. That's why product activation was coupled with Windows XP.

3. Vista is too slowFor years Microsoft has been criticized by developers and IT professionals for "software bloat" -- adding so many changes and features to its programs that the code gets huge and unwieldy. However, this never seemed to have enough of an effect to impact software sales. With Windows Vista, software bloat appears to have finally caught up with Microsoft.Vista has over 50 million lines of code. XP had 35 million when it was released, and since then it has grown to about 40 million. This software bloat has had the effect of slowing down Windows Vista, especially when it's running on anything but the latest and fastest hardware. Even then, the latest version of Windows XP soundly outperforms the latest version of Microsoft Vista. No one wants to use a new computer that is slower than their old one.4. Windows XP is too entrenchedIn 2001, when Windows XP was released, there were about 600 million computers in use worldwide. Over 80% of them were running Windows but it was split between two code bases: Windows 95/98 (65%) and Windows NT/2000 (26%), according to IDC. One of the big goals of Windows XP was to unite the Windows 9x and Windows NT code bases, and it eventually accomplished that.In 2008, there are now over 1.1 billion PCs in use worldwide and over 70% of them are running Windows XP. That means almost 800 million computers are running XP, which makes it the most widely installed operating system of all time. That's a lot of inertia to overcome, especially for IT departments that have consolidated their deployments and applications around Windows XP.And, believe it or not, Windows XP could actually increase its market share over the next couple years. How? Low-cost netbooks and net tops are going to be flooding the market. While these inexpensive machines are powerful enough to provide a solid Internet experience for most users, they don't have enough resources to run Windows Vista, so they all run either Windows XP or Linux. Intel expects this market to explode in the years ahead. (For more on netbooks and net tops, see this fact sheet and this presentation -- both are PDFs from Intel.)5. Apple successfully demonized VistaApple's clever I'm a Mac ads have successfully driven home the perception that Windows Vista is buggy, boring, and difficult to use. After taking two years of merciless pummelling from Apple, Microsoft recently responded with it's I'm a PC campaign in order to defend the honour of Windows. This will likely restore some mojo to the PC and Windows brands overall, but it's too late to save Vista's perception as a dud.

01 02 03 04 05 06

Goog

le W

ave

Nok

ia N

-Gag

e

Win

dow

s Vist

a

Mic

roso

ft Ki

n

Goog

le G

lass

Goog

le B

uzz

Microsoft Kin (2010-1011)Failure

products

1. Fuzzy kin OS creates confusion2. Expensive for an incomplete smartphone3. No apps, no games4. Lack of cool factor


Reasons :

1. FUZZY KIN OS CREATES CONFUSIONMicrosoft has been pouring resources into beefing up Windows Mobile and seems poised to introduce Windows Phone 7 in time for holiday season this year. But in a surprise move, Kin made its debut in April running a flavour of the new operating system.Kin’s OS isn’t exactly Windows 7 Phone but it’s not entirely a new operating system either, Microsoft executives attempted to explain. Call it a fork in the road of Windows Phone 7, they said at launch.Kin had features such as easy sharing and automated backup that didn’t seem part of the announced Windows Phone 7 OS. But that only confused mobile phone enthusiasts. Now Microsoft seems to realize splitting its OS brand could be a problem.Microsoft executive Roz Ho who headed the Kin project, will “oversee” her team’s move into the Windows Phone 7 fold, and then move to another role in the company, says Engaged. 2.EXPENSIVE FOR AN INCOMPLETE SMARTPHONEThe Kin isn’t a smartphone, but it sure had a monthly cell phone plan priced like one.At launch, the palm-sized Kin One — which had a 2.7-inch screen — cost $50 with a two-year Verizon contract, while the Kin Two with its 3.5-inch display cost $100. A few weeks later, Verizon dropped the price on the two phones to $80 and $30 respectively.Sounds cheap right? Not really. The fine print is in the monthly cell phone plan for the device. All Kin phones require a data plan. That means a $70 a month minimum on the bill.For someone flipping burgers at McDonald’s for their summer job, that’s a lot of money to be handing over to a cell phone company.If only Microsoft had offered all those social networking features on the Kin without requiring a data plan, Kin might have had a better shot at survival.

3.NO APPS, NO GAMESThough Kin forced a data plan on its users, they’re not really smartphones.Kin phones have a browser and can access social networking sites through widgets. But Microsoft crippled the overall functionality of the device by not allowing apps or games on the phone.That means users ended up paying for a smartphone but got an amped-up feature phone instead.Consumers, even teens, are smarter than that. Many just gave the Kin a pass.

4.LACK OF COOL FACTORKin made a bold move into an extremely competitive cell phone market. But the devices lacked the cool factor and never really made it clear why a user would want a Kin over a Motorola Clip or a HTC Hero.Microsoft’s marketing of the Kin seemed to make it worse. The company focused on projecting a faux hipster vibe for the product.Kin would be a device that would make it easy to share photos, videos and access social networking feeds, promised Microsoft’s ads.However, almost every smartphone today can do that, and at times better than the Kin. At launch, Kin’s Twitter client, for instance, was half-baked. Users couldn’t view @ replies, search, or post photos. Similarly, Facebook features were limited to showing or posting status updates, though you could post photos.

01 02 03 04 05 06

Goog

le W

ave

Nok

ia N

-Gag

e

Win

dow

s Vist

a

Mic

roso

ft Ki

n

Goog

le G

lass

Goog

le B

uzz

Google Glass (2013-2015)Failure

products


Reasons :1. Safety and Health Concerns.2. Little Progress to bring the Product out of the Beta Stage.3. No Clear Function.4. Privacy concerns and Glass holes.5. It was marketed to the wrong audience.6. It didn't solve a major problem.7. It was very pricy.8. It wasn't easy to buy it for a long period of time.9. Google gave too much attention to the Glass in very early stages.10. Bad Media Coverage.11. It makes people feel uncomfortable.12. It Wasn't cool.13. Poor battery life.

1 It was very pricythe Google glass was very expensive. It cost around 1000-1500$ to get one. With no strong need for the product it didn't gain enough traction. 2 It didn't solve a major problemthe glass didn’t solve a major problem or an important need for the people. While it had cool features those features didn't help people solve an important unsolved problem. Customers didn't figure out why they had to buy a Google glass 3 Privacy concerns and glass holesthe Google glass raised so many privacy concerns. The term glass holes shortly appeared which is a word that describes people who use the Google glass to invade the privacy of others.4 It wasn’t coolpeople buy products to project certain identities to others. People can buy an iPhone to look cool or wealthy. Because the Google glass had a bad reputation it didn't provide people with any attractive reason to wear it. On the contrary people believed it made them look bad.5 Poor battery lifethough it's not a major cause, some people complained about the battery life of the glass and said that it didn't last for long. Google claimed the glass's battery can last for a day but some people reported that it feel short of expectations.6 It makes people feel uncomfortableThe glass makes the wearer of the Glass and the people around him uncomfortable. People keep suspecting that the wearer of the Glass will take pictures or videos of them while the wearer keeps thinking that people are judging him.

Few Reasons

01 02 03 04 05 06

Goog

le W

ave

Nok

ia N

-Gag

e

Win

dow

s Vist

a

Mic

roso

ft Ki

n

Goog

le G

lass

Goog

le B

uzz

Google Buzz (2010-2011)Failure

products


Reasons :

1. It created the social graph using emails2. Privacy concerns3. The social network was a tab in the email4. No compelling reasons to join5. The way it was launched6. Users were forced to join7. Users confusion8. More of the same features9. The service was only tested with employees10. The way people think of email

1 It created the social graph using emailsIn the beginning, Google Buzz created the social graph using email addresses. This was not an effective way to create a social graph since people didn't want to follow everybody they emailed. They later fixed the mistake by only suggesting friends based on email activity.

2 Privacy concernsSome people complained about Privacy issues as Google used the information in their Gmail accounts to construct their social Graphs.

3 The social network was a tab in the emailThe social network was just one of the tabs inside Google's Gmail account. This made it seem less interesting compared to fully fledged social networks like Facebook. See why Facebook succeeded.

4 No compelling reasons to joinJust like Google Plus, Google Buzz never gave people a compelling reason to leave Facebook or the other social networks they are connected to.

5 The way it was launchedGoogle Buzz appeared in people's emails all of sudden. This created an unpleasant experience for many people who either got confused by the service or found it annoying.

6 Users were forced to joinMany people didn't like the fact that they were forced to join a service they never opted for. This was one reason Google Buzz was considered annoying to some people.

7 Users confusionWhen Google Buzz was launched, users got confused about what was public and what wasn't. This led to more privacy concerns and gave the product a bad impression.

8 More of the same featuresGoogle didn't include any new feature that wasn't already present in other social networks. This gave people no reason to stick to Google buzz.

9 The service was only tested with employeesGoogle tested the service internally with its employees without doing external tests. This prevented them from seeing the reaction of people who don't know much about Google or the service.

10 The way people think of emailPeople think of their email account in a certain way. Google Buzz tried to change that image by forcing a strange service to be present inside the email. This resulted in a bad brand image for the product.

Conclusion

Bad impression in market.

Waste of product development money.

Discontinuity from customers.

Waste of product development time.