Quote:
Originally Posted by AnemicOak
I think their mistake was trying to copy Amazon. They don't have the content available the way Amazon does, but tried to lock things down more than Amazon did. If B&N had either gotten their content offerings up to snuff or perhaps partnered with providers of other content their stuff wouldn't have felt so locked up. The Play store may have been added too late to make a big difference. With Amazon they've got it set up so that any content you buy from them (books, movies, TV, Music, etc) can be utilized in multiple ways on multiple devices.
|
I see what you're saying, but content was the only thing B&N had to leverage that would be profitable. Their content in books was and still is quite good. Other areas are a different story.
Somebody else mentioned that they couldn't get the Play store initially because the Nook didn't meet Google's requirements at the time. To make it meet those requirements would have meant a more expensive device with slimmer margins on content. I don't know who else they could have partnered with. Nobody had much incentive to put their products on B&N hardware, they were too busy trying to develop their own complete ecosystems with hardware, software, and services. Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and Apple have all done that. B&N was never in a position to take it that far.