Google Tablet: A very good thing done the right way

Google Tablet: A very good thing done the right way

Summary: Google may be producing and selling its own tablet if rumors are accurate. Let's hope it does it the right way to give it a chance to succeed.


Android tablets have failed to set the world on fire by anybody's reckoning, and the word that Google is looking to step directly into the fray is good. According to those "close to the arrangement" Google intends to sell Google-branded tablets directly to consumers via an online store.

Critics are reminded of Google's failed attempt to sell Nexus One smartphones the same way, and expect the tablet venture to have the same result. That is a real possibility, but if Google does this the right way it could breathe life into the flailing Android tablet space.

The rumors circulating indicate Google will partner with ASUS and Samsung to produce tablets with the Google brand. Heavy price subsidization is being thrown out as a mechanism to help move tablets in an iPad dominated market. This sounds like the avenue Google might take for this effort, but it likely won't work if so.

What Google needs to do is step up to the plate and fully leverage its buyout of Motorola Mobility. Forget simply rebranding tablets made by other companies and develop a genuine Google Tablet in house after the merger is complete.

Google should sit down in internal meetings with the proper resources at Motorola and jointly design a real Google Tablet that can compete in the market. Google services, including the Google Play market, should be tightly integrated into the tablet at every level. Don't worry about competing with partners tablet offerings, they aren't selling in numbers anyway according to the partners.

See also: Forget the iPad, Android tablet makers better fear the Kindle Fire

Motorola and Google could build a Google Tablet that is a direct competitor to the Amazon Kindle Fire, and no matter how you look at it this is the real competition for Google. Build a tablet that looks and operates in a way that facilitates using (and buying) Google services and products. Mainstream consumers are not buying tablets based on whiz-bang features, that has already been proven. They are buying Kindle Fires by the millions to get a simple user experience for buying and consuming content from Amazon.

The Google Tablet doesn't need to compete with the high-end Android tablets on the market currently. It needs to have a rock-solid interface with trouble-free integration with everything Google. It should be offered at a competitive price, and that means competitive with the Kindle Fire. While that likely means selling it at a loss as Amazon is believed to be doing, the Google/ Motorola effort should be able to scale to keep that loss to a minimum.

It comes down to what Google really is trying to do here. Simply selling rebranded tablets at a big loss is not going to prove anything, and probably won't advance the Android OS in the tablet space. However if they really want a viable Google Tablet to have a legitimate chance in the market, they better produce one. Once the Motorola merger is completed later this year, Google will have an advantage controlling the entire tablet process that so far only Apple enjoys. That's the key to the Google Tablet.

Related news:

Topics: Android, Google, Hardware, Laptops, Mobility, Tablets

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • They also have to fix their...

    ...Write once, run anywhere mindset.

    It's not working. You end up with mediocre apps that work on both platforms but inevitably are just so-so. I can see where they are coming from, it's a perfect "technological" solution. Unfortunately it is both a UI and experiential nightmare.
  • I don't see it that way at all....

    Say I'm an android OEM. I'm fighting not only my fellow android OEM's, RIM, Windows, and of course Apple but now I have to face Google with Moto Mobility on the phone end of things, and now Google will be making a tablet in a market I as an android OEM have been struggling to put a dent into!?! I will say this for MS the ONE advantage it has over Google is that MS does not make hardware to compete against it's own clients.

    Pagan jim
    James Quinn
    • So you're saying competition is bad?

      Wrong tree to bark on because you're not OEM. As a customer you should be glad because this means they will either compete for better price, quality, or features.

      A clear example is how Apple is lagging behind in innovation and started copying Android features and still manage to charge premium. Just like good old Microsoft doing in 90s-00s this shows how no competition can done to big companies.
      • Yeah I remember the results of said...

        PC companies dying in numbers too large to count now a days. In the process leaving thousands upon thousands of customers without support and or warranties of any use. Companies that did not actually die but went through terrible spurts of pain and lack of quality builds and terrible customer service until they managed to straighten their ship (Dell anyone). Lets not forget the volumes of blankware bundles on PC's over the years in order to scrape together some profit beyond the razor thing margins. Good times.... good times.

        As for Apple copying Android why? Apple has it's plans in place and likely knew when it would add features to devices and it's iOS long before Android even existed. Regardless of the timing however Apple does things in it's own time and follows it's own star. The so called competition hasn't hurt Apple in the least since Apple is making money hands over fist for each and every i device it sells both in profit margin and after sales monies from say iTunes and such. Market share means so very in this game after all Apple sales of it's devices are growing and unlike it's so called competition it makes healthy amounts of money with each and every sale.

        Pagan jim
        James Quinn
      • Defined Competition

        If your definition involves cannabalizing your market even if it is by emphasizing the attractiveness of a competitor, is ludicrous and self defeating.
    • Really?

      Playsforsure to Zune ring any bells?
    • Everyone complains Android does it wrong.

      So think of a Google tablet as an example to other OEMs on how to do it right.
      If its a success, we can expect to see others follow the example.
      I don't really see a low-priced Google tablet ($200) as competition for any of the other big players out there - more like competition for the "tabletized" ereaders like the Nook Tablet and the Kindle Fire.
    • Android Wishes It Was IOS

      i have to agree with samic. ipad copy features from android? i don't see that. ipad's tight, super-intiutive gui blows away android's sloppiness. There's nothing on android worth imitating.
    • What do you call Microsoft's relationship to Nokia?

      There's little incentive for anybody other than Nokia to be in the Windows Phone business.

      I think that both Google and Microsoft realized that their IHVs were unable to produce a compelling product. In a desperate move, they are going to produce it themselves. Or, they'll see why it was so hard to do.
  • Apple crippled the iPad....

    Amazon semi-crippled the Kindle Fire!
    Will Google also cripple their tablet?
    (By cripple, I mean lock you in to stuff you don't want or need, and lock you OUT of what you DO want or need!)
    ....oh, and Samsung's price model leaves them out in the cold!
    • What is this "stuff" that I do need that I am not getting

      with the iPad? Let me give you a hint I am not you so you actually don't know but the way you worded your statement seems you claim to know. So I'm giving you a chance to show me the extent of your knowledge as to my needs:) Go for it!

      Pagan jim
      James Quinn
      • We are aware of your...

        love of everything Apple. By the way, I've done everything you've been able to do on a computer at a small fraction of the cost that you've paid to Apple. Their profit margins are a little too massive... I don't like to be ripped off. Enjoy.
      • @kris_stapley

        Their profit margin is irrelevant to the value of the product. Is it being ripped off when their tablet is on-par with every other comparable tablet? What am I missing on my iPad 2?
        Michael Alan Goff
      • We are aware of your...

        love of everything Microsoft. By the way, I've done everything you've been able to do on a computer at a small fraction of the cost that you've paid to Microsoft. Their profit margins are a little too massive... I don't like to be ripped off. Enjoy.
      • are you serious?

        I listed a bunch of stuff in the past and you, along with the other sheep on this forum, basically told me I was making shit up!

        No, the iPad isn't as effected as these limitations from the iPhone but they are there too.
      • Your rant still did not tell me the stuff I'm missing:)


        Pagan jim
        James Quinn
      • You've mentioned stuff YOU are missing...

        Peter Perry
        Which I suspect for YOU is true. That means nothing to my needs/wants don't you see? This is so very simple your needs/wants meant what again to me? And based on this simple and obvious fact you can speak for me how?

        Pagan jim
        James Quinn
      • @Peter Perry: Because you often make stuff up all the time.

        From claiming Gingerbread has 70% market share adoption to claiming the iPhone does not have a direct to voice mail button, much of what you say is simply wrong.
  • Google Tablet: A very good thing done the right way

    Two problems with this, 1. Its a tablet. 2. Its Google. Google has not launched anything that was successful other than search.
    Loverock Davidson-
    • man

      Where do you get your weed man? It must be really good stuff!