Samsung, smartphones and Indian scene.

The thing that provoked me into writing this piece is an article in Android Police and its corresponding discussion on Google Plus, where I posted my view on how Samsung declined to release the Galaxy Nexus in India and how Galaxy S3, which it touted as a better alternative to the Nexus device is overpriced and not exactly what many of us Android enthusiasts would want.
People replied that I was 'bitching'(sic) about the cost and that all un-subsidized phones cost high when released. Personally I feel I might be off-topic or that I failed at making myself clear. Hence this post. This comes from someone who is frustrated by the way Mobile companies in general, and Samsung in particular, treats Indian consumers.

Let me elaborate my point:

HTC Nexus One was released very late and very limited in India and even then it wasn't the same that was released in US. They said that India that time wasn't smartphone friendly. But then since January 2010, times have changed. A lot of smart-phones have come and gone. Some have been very successful and some others not. In general smartphones have been very well received by the consumers and have been promoted by service providers. But the one type of smartphones which have not been sold to Indian consumers have been the Nexus devices.
As stated above hardly anyone was able to buy Nexus One. And that was not because people were not able to buy them, but because they just weren't available much. The next Nexus, i.e. Nexus S was also initially not released in India. But was then a stripped down version of it was sold, again, a very limited release. My friend tried getting one for himself but couldn't. It went out of stock.

Then came the turn of the latest and greatest  Nexus yet, The Samsung Galaxy Nexus. It was supposed to release in January. Then March. And finally, as mentioned above, it was never released.
I have a small theory as to why these companies are reluctant to widely release these Nexus devices in India. Its because they don't want the Indian consumers to 'taste' the pure stock Android experience. They fear that if the consumers get used to Nexus then they won't return to their crappy skins. This theory makes these companies complete ass-holes and morons, because they are limiting the choice of their consumers and thrusting those crappy skins compulsorily down our throat.
 

About the price:

While declining to release the G-Nexus, Samsung reasoned that instead, it will release the Galaxy S3 in India. And they lived up to that promise. Releasing the GS3 on 31st May 2012 at a cost of Rs 43,000 ($770). Had they used a Super AMOLED plus HD display and went with a ceramic cover that cost might still seem good. But not with plastic. Hell No!
Now let me put this into perspective, Samsung Galaxy S3 is the second most costliest phone ever to be sold in India. The first, of-course, being the Iphone 4S. Its definitely the costliest Android. And Android is supposed to be free.
India is a volume market. Companies have always sold products at lesser profit and compensated that by high volumes. Nokia did it. Blackberry is doing it. Samsung used to do it but with SGS3 it seems has changed its strategy. Apple on the other hand went elite, thus making profit on those very few devices they sold in India. But then its Apple, it can get away with anything.
Let me be fare, GS3 was the most awaited phone in a long time because S2 and S before that were huge success. They were definitely the most selling Android phone the world over.
Even in India they sold a lot of them. I have seen a lot of people many of them being my friends, using them, in the trains, in the malls, everywhere.
But their perception was still that they are second-best to the Iphones. Mind you, it was just a popular perception. And they were a great deal for people. They got a phone which was better than Iphone at a lower cost than the Iphone. It was their USP.
But with GS3 being priced as much as Iphone, I think it has lost it. Its still is better than Iphone IMO, but not cost-worthy. The clientèle which Apple catered to throughout the Iphone releases were the people who would never buy anything beyond Apple devices. No matter how much they cost they would buy themselves a Apple. Samsung, no matter what it thinks of itself, does not have that kind of following. The people who would purchase Samsung products might as well go with something else if it provides them with the same functionality at that price-point.
I am not implying that those who go for cheaper Androids instead of Iphones are cheap people. But instead they are more informed consumers who know how their money will be better spent. I think this time around their research will lead them to the HTC OneX. Which I feel will be a fitting punishment by the consumers to Samsung for behaving in the most high-handed manner.


In conclusion I might be wrong. SGS3 would still might sell gazillions of these devices and make immense profit from them but something might change forever this time around. Samsung might not be same old company we consumers would go to find a product which suited our needs, likes and dislikes at a price-point we were comfortable with. It would have become another Apple!

Indian Cricket at a critical juncture.

This is a very critical time for the Indian Cricket. Why am I saying this? Its because the sport is changing. There is a shift happening in the sport from the classic, which relied on skill of a player, to modern, which relies on physical prowess of a player. This change is not sudden. Its gradual, but has become pronounced in the past  year. 

A lot of factors are responsible for this. I'll enumerate and describe all of them in this blog-post. And in the coming weeks I'll write more detailed blog-posts on these topics:

Advent of T20:

This is but natural. One would say I am stating the obvious. And yes may be I am. But, as I said earlier the effects of T20 on ODIs and Tests are materializing only now. It took about 5 years for that to happen. Runs are being scored at a faster rate. Fielding has become better. Bowling also has more variety. Fast bowlers try to bowl 6 different balls in an over. This comes from T20. Batsmen are prone to play more shots. They often get out in the process. The players who used to dig-in and slug it out by defending a lot and playing only the bad balls are waning. The retirement of Rahul Dravid and success of Virat Kohli is a case in point. Dravid came from the old school of batting where they played for hours at the run-rate of 3 per over. Not Kohli and the likes of him in other teams. They like to play even the good balls for runs. That also makes them vulnerable but they can't seem to help it. 

Fast bowlers throw in the occasional slower ball quite often now. Even reverse swing seems a thing of the past now. I don't know how successful they are with it. Anyways they were never so successful in sub-continental pitches as they were in England, SA and Down Under. 

Spinners don't attack anymore. Its been a long time since I saw a spinner flight the ball and beat the batsman with the turn. They are more content in not giving run and expect the batsmen to commit a mistake to get a wicket. And the batsmen too are more than willing help the spinners in this. They often get stifled for runs and then end up hitting one in the air. 

But it is the fielding where one sees the maximum impact of T20. Also it is the only aspect where the impact has been 100% positive. They run faster, dive harder and more accurate with their throws. No complains here.

Retirement of the old guard:

I grew up watching Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar, VVS Laxman, Virendar Sehwag, Saurav Ganguly. Of all these Viru was the odd man out. He was way ahead of his time you can say. Always the dasher. Others were typical Test players. They were equally successful in ODIs. Who would doubt that given that Sachin, Saurav and Rahul are highest run scorers in ODI. But when they played in Tests they were much more cautious. They had to be. They put immense value on their wicket. And that is what made them successful in Test cricket. I don't see that happening with the youngsters except for Kohli. I really hope the best for Rohit Sharma. I feel he has the potential of becoming a good Test batsman. But that urge should come from within.

The greatest lament of all cricket fans in India has always been the lack of genuine fast bowler. There were Javagal Srinath and Venkatesh Prasad but they weren't as fast as their contemporaries like Courtney Walsh, Glenn McGrath, Curtley Ambrose but they were, at-least, not very slow. And they had Anil Kumble for company. Now, I see the likes of Irfan Pathan, Praveen Kumar, Vinay Kumar and I feel like crying. While rest of the world is producing faster bowler like Dale Styne, Ryan Harris, Lonwabo Tsotsobe, Stuart Broad, India has gone backwards! I bet that Dale Styne bowled as fast as Irfan Pathan when he was a teenager! 

Again, fielding seems to be the only aspect where India seems to be doing better than before.

General apathy from the younger generation:

This is the biggest problem of them all. My 13 yr old cousin doesn't 'love' cricket. And sadly none of his friends seems to 'love' it either. And he belongs to a family where every male member has only loved cricket!

I feel sad at this state of the sport. I love football, tennis, hockey, swimming and athletics too but none of them inspires the kind of passion that cricket generates. I'd like to be an optimist and believe that there are other kids out there who love cricket as much as I do and want to be cricketers as much as I did when I was a kid. I'll stick to that.

I'll write more about my feelings about the condition of Cricket in India in more detail in coming posts. 

Till then Good Bye!