Kin One and Two review

[zerocool84]

When we first saw the Kin phones, the editors at Engadget (and lots of other folks in the industry) said that price would be the big question when it came to these phones. If they really were destined for the hands of tweens and teens, then they would have to be offered at a price that was attractive to their parents, which means something decidedly below the standard smartphone deal: a device for $100 or $200, plus a pricey data plan. There seemed to be a general sentiment that if Verizon and Microsoft could partner on something that hit a lower price point for the devices coupled with a bargain-rate data package, they just might have a foot in the door, despite the obvious limitations of the device.

Even if that were true -- if a great price could cancel out the faults of these phones (which it can't) -- Microsoft and Verizon have failed there as well. The One and Two are being offered for $49.99 and $99.99 respectively after a $100 mail-in rebate... and they must be coupled with a standard Verizon smartphone plan, which clocks in at $29.99 a month. We were frankly shocked when we heard the pricing schemes (you also need a voice plan, of course, which will set you back another $49.99 monthly). To offer what is clearly so much less than a smartphone with a smartphone data plan is insulting to consumers, and doubly insulting considering who it looks like these phones are aimed at. If you're going to shell out this kind of money each month, it would be foolish to even consider these devices given the much, much better options out there. Even counting out the iPhone or similar devices on other carriers (many of which are rather attractive), just take a look at the offerings on Verizon right now. You could get a Pre Plus -- an immeasurably better phone with much of the social networking integration of the Kin devices -- for $29 coupled with a smartphone and voice plan. Or you could spend a little more upfront and get a BlackBerry Tour 9630, Droid, Incredible, or Droid Eris -- all much, much better phones with excellent social networking options. The list really goes on -- and again, if you were a teenager or young adult with all of these great options laid out before you, the idea of choosing this severely limited device which doesn't do a single thing better than even the most basic Android device is kind of crazy. Microsoft has hinted that it wants to shake up the text-centric featurephone market with Kin, but guess what? You categorically cannot even fathom to do that when you're charging for smartphone data. It's insulting to suggest otherwise.

And that about sums it up -- there are much better choices for much less money on the market, and Microsoft hasn't demonstrated to us why you would choose this phone over those. You could argue that the 720p video recording is a hook, but our results weren't that outstanding, and we don't know anyone who needs HD video on a phone so desperately that they're willing to overlook all of these faults. In the end, we're left with two orphan devices -- phones that feel like they should have been killed before they made it to market, but somehow slipped through. It's clear to us from conversations we've had with Microsoft that there are people at the company with good ideas about what phones should and shouldn't do, but we don't feel the Kin is representative of those ideas. The execution (or lack thereof) on these products makes us legitimately concerned about what the company will do with Windows Phone 7. We can only hope that the similarities between those devices and the Kin handsets don't stretch much further than the "Windows Phone" label, because in our estimation, Kin is one side of the family that needs to be disowned... quickly.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/05/kin-one-and-two-review/

Too expensive for what they are.

 

[Pliablemoose]

The target demographic is going to buy iPhones & Droids and Evos's.

Or rather, their parents are going to buy them.

 

[zerocool84]

The target demographic is going to buy iPhones & Droids and Evos's.

Or rather, their parents are going to buy them.

For the price they want for them you can get those much better phones. Oh well for Microsoft. It looks like they could have had the teen crowd with this but failed.

 

[JS80]

I don't understand why they don't all flock to offer their phones on Sprint...

 

[zerocool84]

I don't understand why they don't all flock to offer their phones on Sprint...

because no one wants to offer a phone on a carrier that is losing customers

 

[EarthwormJim]

What utter failures in phone design and pricing...

 

[Phobic9]

The required $30 data plan for this kills it dead instantly. Sure not everyone wants an actual smartphone but WTF are they thinking?

 

[Tristicus]

I don't understand why they don't all flock to offer their phones on Sprint...

Do you get paid for this?

 

[Narmer]

The phone is on Verizon's network. I saw this a mile away.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I'm not at all surprised. I guess I may have had some high hopes that these phones might convince Verizon to come up with more reasonable tiered data plans, but why would they do that? As long as carriers do all-or-nothing data (with the "nothing" end only applying to the cheapest cheap phones there are), no high-end feature phones or low-end smartphones will be able to succeed.

 

[preslove]

Microsoft can make some terrible ass decisions. $30 data makes these phones stillborn. Why would anyone get these instead of a Droid? They should have just really gimped the browser, or limited it to 2g speeds and charged $10-$15 data. I see incoming freshmen with texting phones all the time & all the data I've seen shows that kids text more than anything else, so there's a market for these phones.

Shit like this makes me suspect that Windows phone 7 will be seriously flawed.

 

[Deeko]

These phones were built by Danger - they're essentially the new version of the Sidekick. Unfortunately for them, while the Sidekick had some unique features in its day, the smartphone world has surpassed them in almost every way.

I think these phones might have had a shot of selling if they'd been paired with $15 data. I doubt that's Microsoft's fault - believe it or not, the phone manufacturer doesn't set the data price. If they're smart, they didn't sign any lengthy exclusive deal with Verizon, and can move these to a cheaper carrier and maybe get a better deal on the data.

I will say that having the Zune HD software + the ability to sync Zune Pass content over the air is a pretty killer feature (and bandwidth-heavy, probably why Verizon still wants $30/mo)...but considering more powerful and feature-laden WP7 devices will be out in a few months, doesn't seem like much of a selling point to me.

edit: Oh, and phones that are designed for teenagers that text/facebook/twitter with the friends.....not having an IM client? That's bizzare.

 

[Deeko]

Gizmodo was a bit more positive: http://gizmodo.com/5531082/microsoft-kin-review-the-best-cellphones-youll-never-buy

But they end it by ripping Verizon for their pricing on the device.

 

[preslove]

These phones were built by Danger - they're essentially the new version of the Sidekick. Unfortunately for them, while the Sidekick had some unique features in its day, the smartphone world has surpassed them in almost every way.

I think these phones might have had a shot of selling if they'd been paired with $15 data. I doubt that's Microsoft's fault - believe it or not, the phone manufacturer doesn't set the data price. If they're smart, they didn't sign any lengthy exclusive deal with Verizon, and can move these to a cheaper carrier and maybe get a better deal on the data.

I will say that having the Zune HD software + the ability to sync Zune Pass content over the air is a pretty killer feature (and bandwidth-heavy, probably why Verizon still wants $30/mo)...but considering more powerful and feature-laden WP7 devices will be out in a few months, doesn't seem like much of a selling point to me.

edit: Oh, and phones that are designed for teenagers that text/facebook/twitter with the friends.....not having an IM client? That's bizzare.

Going with verizon was idiotic. They should have gone GSM with T-Mobile and European providers. I'm pretty confident that T-Mobile would have been much more willing to negotiate on the prices than verizon. Or, maybe start out with GSM on T-Mobile and CDMA on sprint and then extend them to ATT and Verizon after selling some phones and (perhaps) gaining more leverage.

Microsoft's phone division is looking very poorly run. They talked up all their extensive market research and the segments they were targeting, but a simple look at publicly available data shows that they've failed to adequately assess the market:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/05/survey-says-most-teens-dont-have-a-data-plan-almost-all-send/

 

[AstroManLuca]

Going with verizon was idiotic. They should have gone GSM with T-Mobile and European providers. I'm pretty confident that T-Mobile would have been much more willing to negotiate on the prices than verizon. Or, maybe start out with GSM on T-Mobile and CDMA on sprint and then extend them to ATT and Verizon after selling some phones and (perhaps) gaining more leverage.

Microsoft's phone division is looking very poorly run. They talked up all their extensive market research and the segments they were targeting, but a simple look at publicly available data shows that they've failed to adequately assess the market:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/05/survey-says-most-teens-dont-have-a-data-plan-almost-all-send/

Yeah, almost all the other networks would be better than Verizon if you're a heavy texter. T-Mobile costs $10/mo per line for unlimited text messages, or $20 for an entire family plan. AT&T requires a certain minimum monthly charge on top of a voice plan for higher-end phones, but that can be fulfilled by either data OR text plans. And Sprint includes unlimited texting on all their data plans. Verizon charges a lot extra for texting no matter how you slice it, AND you have to pay $30/mo per data line.