It's not about the phone, it's about the platform

[mrspeedmaster]

I wouldn't be surprised, Nokia I heard had a lot of "innovations" before the iphone, they just got overshadowed by the iphone's touch screen.

Nokia definitely has a lot of good tech but its latest superphones were laden with major bugs. The interface was cumbersome even by Android standards.
The N95 (the 1st gen iPhone contemporary) had many reliability issues and unfixed bugs that
turned off a lot of people. They had awesome cameras and their tablets where cool but they left it to the community instead of developing it further. Meego had a good chance but the lack of developer management left it to quagmire.

The reason why Apple leapfrog Nokia in the US superphone market was .... The key defining moment was mobile safari. The ability to have pinch-n-zoom multi-touch full web browsing (not using WAP or mobile versions of websites) is what gave the 1st iPhone
the killer app over the other phones at the time. For the 1st time in my life, I was able to use online banking on a phone.


As for facetime, many developers have expressed interest. Skype has been very vocal about adopting it.

 

[Rhonen]

Very true, Apple made the mobile experience more accessible to the customer, and really shook things up with cellphone manufacturers.

Personally, I'm not sold on facetime. I never video-chatted on my PC, I really don't have any desire to do so on my Evo, either. I can see the appeal of it, but it definitely doesn't govern my purchase decisions.

 

[ari-free]

Here's the problem with the niche idea. It's one thing for a Mac to be niche since it's not tied to anyone. However, Apple expects a very high subsidy from AT&T. AT&T pays it because they want more customers and they thought iPhone would give them the edge. Apple might not care about marketshare but surely AT&T does!
But if iPhone doesn't bring AT&T more new customers while Apple just milks the old ones then why would AT&T want to put up with this nonsense anymore? Drop the subsidy and iPhone sinks like a stone.

 

[ari-free]

Facetime is suppose to be an open protocol. That is what was told at WWWDC.
Just like bonjour and webkit, they will open up the protocol for others to use.
It uses standard codecs and protocols in a wrapper. And just like DAAP, you will see Linux distros and apps incorporating it.

It is still something that everyone else will have to adopt in order for it to be useful. If Apple doesn't bring Facetime to Android, Android users will just use something else that also works on iPhone (such as fring or qik).

 

[marefin]

The thing I found to be really funny was that at the iPhone 4 revelation, Jobs made it seem like Facetime is the most amazing to ever happen to the mobile industry and that it was just a purely amazing/creative idea where in fact other mobile companies (Nokia) has had this feature I want to say something like 2-3 years beforehand. And whenever I get into a debate about the iPhone with friends that's one of the first things they like to point out.

 

[Rhonen]

Here's the problem with the niche idea. It's one thing for a Mac to be niche since it's not tied to anyone. However, Apple expects a very high subsidy from AT&T. AT&T pays it because they want more customers and they thought iPhone would give them the edge. Apple might not care about marketshare but surely AT&T does!
But if iPhone doesn't bring AT&T more new customers while Apple just milks the old ones then why would AT&T want to put up with this nonsense anymore? Drop the subsidy and iPhone sinks like a stone.

That is true, I hadn't thought of that. Right now, though, AT&T is enjoying some good profit numbers that is being attributed to all the iphone customers. If, or when, Android proves to bring in enough customers, that tenuous relationship with Apple could falter.

That, or when the exclusivity deal with AT&T ends, Apple goes all out and eases up on the subsidy agreements. In a way, how Apple handles its carrier agreements could matter more to iphone's future success than how much market share Android gets.

 

[mrqs]

I wouldn't be surprised, Nokia I heard had a lot of "innovations" before the iphone, they just got overshadowed by the iphone's touch screen.

nokia overshadowed by the iphone? are you fkn kidding me?
did you happen to look at the link you posted? nokia 33% marketshare, apple 2% / symbian 43%, ios 14%

The reason why Apple leapfrog Nokia in the US superphone market was .... The key defining moment was mobile safari. The ability to have pinch-n-zoom multi-touch full web browsing (not using WAP or mobile versions of websites) is what gave the 1st iPhone

the reason why nokia doesn't compete in the states is the stoneage carrier situation over there, that's it

 

[Rhonen]

nokia overshadowed by the iphone? are you fkn kidding me?
did you happen to look at the link you posted? nokia 33% marketshare, apple 2% / symbian 43%, ios 14%


the reason why nokia doesn't compete in the states is the stoneage carrier situation over there, that's it

I should have clarified, in terms of media coverage, hype (areas Apple excels), the iphone is all you heard about here in the states. Nokia wasn't even in the news, much less most carrier's stores. that is what I meant by overshadowed. The blog I posted addressed this in a previous article, how America, its consumers and tech and financial analysts were all wow'ed by the iphone even though worldwide, Nokia dominated.

I agree, the Carrier system here in the states sucks. I heard abroad, you can buy any phone you want and use it on any carrier. I think that partially has to do with most carriers abroad use GSM. Here in the states, it's 50/50 CDMA/GSM. And the carriers here use contract subsidized phones to make phones more attractive. it's why the iphone, smartphones are only $200 with a 2-year contract. I heard abroad, used phones are a big business, at least more popular than here in the states. As I understand it, there's less, or no, subsidized phones abroad, so new phones are very pricey, making used phones attractive.

 

[ari-free]

nokia overshadowed by the iphone? are you fkn kidding me?
did you happen to look at the link you posted? nokia 33% marketshare, apple 2% / symbian 43%, ios 14%


the reason why nokia doesn't compete in the states is the stoneage carrier situation over there, that's it

ok let's compare the number of developers and apps for iphone or android vs Nokia. All that marketshare and very little mindshare.

 

[jonmorris]

You can have the best product in the world, but never succeed - such is life. We've seen it time and time ago throughout history.

At some point, Nokia will HAVE to give up and write off its losses on Symbian and trying to reinvent the wheel with MeeGo.

Okay, they MIGHT get lucky with one and prove us all wrong - but what an amazing gamble to take. I'd say the odds are stacked against them and I am sure deep down they know this. Their problem is that adopting Android will almost certainly kill off Symbian, and that will cost Nokia loads - but it may well be the better bet in the long run.

I still think Symbian can remain in the lower-end devices, although even these will probably get Android eventually.

Now, the 'global domination' of Android may well be bad in the future, and we should be concerned about all the power that will go to Google - but that's not a reason for Nokia to miss out.

I can remember back in 2000/2001 or thereabouts when Nokia wasn't really big on Bluetooth, and there are other things they were late to do (and arrogant enough to suggest we didn't want - rather like Apple now). Those things helped Ericsson, then Sony Ericsson, really take off with the T68 that opted to support everything available at the time.

Then Nokia went for designs that made their devices hard, even impossible, to use.

Nokia usually bounce back. I think they can this time by at least trying one or two devices with Android.

 

[marefin]

Nokia doesn't have to convert all their phones to Android tho. Look at Samsung and Motorola, they are both in their own rights a big manufacturer of cell phones, period. But their higher end phones (smart phones) run on Android for the most part. Nokia can take the same route as well. Leave the "dumb phones" with Symbian (or Meego) and make some higher end smart phones based with Android OS. Nokia, IMO, is one of THE most innovative companies out there who have made countless numbers of advancements in the mobile industry. And to top it off, they are not only popular around the world (except for the US which seems to be sucked into the Apple Black Hole Syndrome) but they are also simply good phones. Yes I know they've had some issues with some of their higher end phones, but so has other manufacturers of higher end smart phones. And those phones with issues does not overshadow (IMO) the success of their other higher end smart phones.

 

[jonmorris]

If you look around on all the forums, blogs from people in the industry and so on - it seems that EVERYONE is telling Nokia to adopt Android - whether for everything, or just a small section of their portfolio.

I wonder how long they can continue ignoring this feedback from, presumably, a number of people who are actually saying that they want Android because they want a Nokia phone but won't get one until they do.

 

[ari-free]

The problem is that these phone companies don't quite realize that they are now computer companies.

 

[mrspeedmaster]

You guys are ignoring one important fact.. To use an Android phone, you basically need to have a gmail account. Not everyone outside the US has access to the Internet nor do they have Google accts. Moreover, google competes with search engines native to country native ones in Middle East, China, etc... Nokia services everyone OUTSIDE of the US.

Everyone who advocates Nokia adopt Android fails to acknowledge this fact.

If you look around on all the forums, blogs from people in the industry and so on - it seems that EVERYONE is telling Nokia to adopt Android - whether for everything, or just a small section of their portfolio.

I wonder how long they can continue ignoring this feedback from, presumably, a number of people who are actually saying that they want Android because they want a Nokia phone but won't get one until they do.

 

[ari-free]

Moreover, google competes with search engines native to country native ones in Middle East, China, etc... Nokia services everyone OUTSIDE of the US.

Everyone who advocates Nokia adopt Android fails to acknowledge this fact.

that doesn't stop oem's from putting Bing or Baidu as the default search on their android phones.

 

[mrqs]

At some point, Nokia will HAVE to give up and write off its losses on Symbian and trying to reinvent the wheel with MeeGo.

what losses? it's the single most selling smartphone os in the world, how many times does this need to be pointed out?
and wtf is wrong with meego?

nokia aren't idiots, they know moving to android would be a downgrade feature and performance wise - they rather work on improving their lacking ui (with s^4) than wait for google to catch up on the features

by using symbian instead of the much heavier android for the low-mid range, nokia can use lower end hardware, which translates in to better battery life and cheaper production
same goes for meego @ the hi-range

by using both symbian and meego, they get the benefit of qt, which means cross-platform apps for their phones

you guys are criticising the market leader in their strategy - i'm pretty sure they have a better understanding of the situation than you

 

[marefin]

You guys are ignoring one important fact.. To use an Android phone, you basically need to have a gmail account. Not everyone outside the US has access to the Internet nor do they have Google accts. Moreover, google competes with search engines native to country native ones in Middle East, China, etc... Nokia services everyone OUTSIDE of the US.

Everyone who advocates Nokia adopt Android fails to acknowledge this fact.

I think it would safe to assume that MOST people who use high end smart phones have access to the internet. And you can make that Google account through the phone as well. But in countries where Google might be banned poses a different issue tho. Not sure which countries outright ban the use of Google completely in all aspects.

 

[Rhonen]

I think it would safe to assume that MOST people who use high end smart phones have access to the internet. And you can make that Google account through the phone as well. But in countries where Google might be banned poses a different issue tho. Not sure which countries outright ban the use of Google completely in all aspects.

Google has problems in China. That is the single largest market. However, i dont think Android will have a problem. HTC will be releasing Android phones there, they have excellent experience skinning OS im sure they wont have a problem with search or email accounts.

If theyre smart, they will be the internet, market portal, too, aince im sure china will censor them, an oem can step in and be the middleman.

 

[Member203005]

You guys keep talking about marketshare and how important it is. Apple doesn't care about market share in and of itself. They care about revenue share and Apple generates more revenue from the iPhone than HTC and Motorola combined.

If you want to get an understanding of the smartphone climate, it helps to understand this point.

 

[jonmorris]

Absolutely right! Apple is quite happy with being where it is, especially when they've managed to get networks working on their terms and taking a cut of almost everything.

Also, when I said about Nokia cutting its losses earlier - I meant the fact that if they ditch Symbian they'll lose, but win in the long run. They spent a lot of money buying Symbian after all.

Now, given that I used the predecessors to Symbian back in the Psion days (shows my age), namely EPOC and then on to things like the Ericsson R380, I can assure you that I was a huge fan of Symbian. I have supported and recommended Symbian since the first devices back in 2002 - from Nokia and Sony Ericsson, and then others. But, they didn't move on and now they're playing catch up. It's too late I think.

My other love in the 1990s was the Amiga, but that went the same way. It was time to move on. Of course, it didn't have to be like that - but Symbian Foundation has failed. Symbian 3 is a patch up and Symbian 4 is still only trying to mimic what's out now, with its own unique style. It isn't taking things forward.

With MeeGo, I'm still not sure what's going to happen but my gut instinct says it won't do much - even with the car industry supposedly backing it.

 

[mrqs]

they didn't move on and now they're playing catch up. It's too late I think.
[...]
Symbian 3 is a patch up and Symbian 4 is still only trying to mimic what's out now, with its own unique style. It isn't taking things forward.

the way i see it, the only thing symbian has really lacked in is the ui (which they are trying to improve with s^4)
it's the others that are playing catch up when it comes to features - android, ios and webos have taken (and are taking) the user experience forward, but they still can't actually do anything the old symbian doesn't - unlike vice versa

and like i said, nokia would be stupid to drop such a mature native os for a vm running one like android, that can never match symbian in performance

we'll see if they can make s^4 as pretty and intuitive as android for example, but i'm quite sure by the time it comes out, android is still the one doing the catch up if we're talking about technology instead of flashiness

i gotta say tho' that i'm slightly sceptical about how they succeed with making symbian look and feel as good as the competition, but i do have very high hopes for meego - the few tech demos i've seen have been quite impressive

 

[Rhonen]

You guys keep talking about marketshare and how important it is. Apple doesn't care about market share in and of itself. They care about revenue share and Apple generates more revenue from the iPhone than HTC and Motorola combined.

If you want to get an understanding of the smartphone climate, it helps to understand this point.

Absolutely right! Apple is quite happy with being where it is, especially when they've managed to get networks working on their terms and taking a cut of almost everything.

I realize Apple is happy with being a niche player. However, developers, carriers, content providers, and customers care about market share. Look at the PC market. Which platform has the most market share? PC. Which market has the most customers? PC. Which platform has the most developers? PC.

Why do you think Apple conceded and switched to PC parts, the ability to run Windows and MS Office on the Mac?

History looks like it is repeating itself. Android Market share is growing faster than Apple. it's just a matter of time. While Market share doesn't matter to Apple, it matters to everyone else.

 

[jonmorris]

the way i see it, the only thing symbian has really lacked in is the ui (which they are trying to improve with s^4)
it's the others that are playing catch up when it comes to features - android, ios and webos have taken (and are taking) the user experience forward, but they still can't actually do anything the old symbian doesn't - unlike vice versa

Most people don't care about the OS. They see the user interface and how cool/slick the phone is to use, how quick it is, and how good the apps/games are. That's why people bought an iPhone and seem to be over the moon by how cool it is - even if you can show a load of things they CAN'T do.

Apple has got this nailed with a consistent look and feel, which is something Symbian never had (it looks like every part of the phone was developed by different people who never knew the other people and all came together one day to merge what they'd done).

Not even Android has managed to get developers to be consistent, but such is the price of being open. Some will see this as a good thing, and it probably is - once there's enough out there that the end user gets to decide what wins and loses.

Why do you think Apple conceded and switched to PC parts, the ability to run Windows and MS Office on the Mac?

History looks like it is repeating itself. Android Market share is growing faster than Apple. it's just a matter of time. While Market share doesn't matter to Apple, it matters to everyone else.

True. Apple had to do things with the Mac as it has serious competition. Going with Intel was genius - as you now made it easy to run Windows on a Mac, and could now sell nice expensive MacBook's to people who wanted a PC - but the Apple style. With dual booting, people may well then come around to the Mac way of doing things, and in turn buy more Apple products and become another Apple 'disciple'.

They probably figured the iPhone would take over and beat the likes of Symbian and Windows Mobile (and they did - irrespective of whether you could all those Symbian devices Nokia still ships to people who don't know or care that they have a smartphone - a totally different market) and only now, when Android is catching up and will soon overtake and leave them behind, will Apple have to change their strategy.

Knowing Apple, and Apple isn't stupid, they're already well prepared and will do something radical with iOS in the next 18-24 months. They might make it open source, or they might welcome back Adobe and loosen their control on developers (within reason). I still think they should allow Mac users to run iOS applications, which would make perfect sense.

With the power of Google which pretty much controls all of our lives, and Apple's ability to innovate (and they do, if only in the way they can market simple things to the masses), I really look upon Symbian and think that they count for zilch. They may have the market share and trundle along for many more years, but they'll always be below the radar. Just like all those cheap phones for emerging markets that nobody knows about, but keeps Nokia making loads of money.

To most of us (those into technology and innovation), we don't care and see Nokia as insignificant. They'll have to work hard to change our views too.

 

[vbetts]

Why do you think Apple conceded and switched to PC parts, the ability to run Windows and MS Office on the Mac?

PowerPC was going nowhere and is still going nowhere in terms of everyday computing. IBM went along the synthetic road with the cell, where as Intel had just put out the first dual core cpu that was low enough power and tdp for a mobile solution. While there were dual core g5's inside the Power Mac G5, the Imac only had a single core g5 at half the clocked frequency about, and same with the Ibook and Powerbook. G5 used too much power, and put out too much heat.

Symbian is a decent platform and all, but there's no market for it here in the States. As well as there's little to no market for unlocked phones here in the States either. That's one reason why you don't see too many of the major Nokia phones here. Nokia is really putting their hopes in Meego, which I hope goes well. But when Android is improving everyday, and webos an ios4 both are not able to be licensed out like Android is, with no mention of Windows phone 7, kind of just feels like Nokia is digging a huge hole for themselves.

 

[Niir]

Knowing Apple, and Apple isn't stupid, they're already well prepared and will do something radical with iOS in the next 18-24 months. They might make it open source, or they might welcome back Adobe and loosen their control on developers (within reason). I still think they should allow Mac users to run iOS applications, which would make perfect sense.

With the power of Google which pretty much controls all of our lives, and Apple's ability to innovate (and they do, if only in the way they can market simple things to the masses)

Im not so sure, if anything Apple seem to be getting worse with their closed eco-system and strict control. Also they seem to be pushing devices with no real purpose in mind (iPad, Mac mini [silly prices]) and leaning heavily on their ''Magical revolutionary'' and form over function marketing style to sell products.

I wouldnt say Apple innovates in a cutting edge sense of the word. Their style involves marketing older technology and functionality (Video calling > Facetime) to a mass market of technology illiterate people.

I dont see Apple loosening up as you put it, they have trash talked Flash to hell and back and their adoption of HTML5 as an ''open standard'' has been too public.

I can see Apple pulling something along the lines of adding the customization which android has (excluding icon replacement and home replacement) along with some widgets and hyping it with their usual marketing style.

iOS is becoming stale, it always has looked the same and continues to look the same (nice, but the same) some customization and widgets is the easiest way to freshen up iOS for the future.