Apple vs. Samsung, and the rise of Windows Phone 8
extremetech.com
extremetech.com
It's been a while since I last saw a piece so replete with failed logic.
Why would phone makers want to give control of the single most relevant differentiator (software) to one company that has more than cozy ties with their former worst enemy? Oh... And the company is competing againt its former PC partners...
I understand not all decisions are based in logic, but only a fool would consider betting the farm on this horse.
Another point: Android is "free" for the carriers and manufacturers.
That's a big difference.
Its not Apple vs MS/Nokia vs Samsung+Motorola+.... as you are claiming. There are myriad of other manufacturers who are making Win8 devices both phone and PCs/tablets.
Also android being free is a myth. It just cost Samsung a billion for making android phone (somewhat indirectly though) also MS has been after a bunch of the android makers for license fees. So what makes it free?
Somewhat? It being Android really had nothing do with what happened to Samsung.
Uhm, yeah.. That's... puhhh... Nokia... HTC... probably some HP and Dell? But how much effort will they put into Win8 devices? Nokia is near-death, HTC is focused on Android, even Dell will have more Android devices then Win8 ones (i guess).
Most likely (and this is another point the article doesn't mention) Microsoft will throw some billions and billions of dollars at the problem to gain traction (as did with the Xbox, the Xbox wouldn't have been a success without Microsoft subsidizing every new xbox) and then we will see if it sticks. It can become a second Zune.. or a success. Right now they don't have much on the plus side.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/29/samsung-windows-pho...
Can you explain why you think WP isn't a differentiator? It is clearly and significantly different visually from the other mobile os's.
I think this is more important to carriers though. They want people to walk in and see 5 or 6 different looking phones to choose from. Hence the love of Android.
There is nothing worse than carrier customisation - it's the worst kind of turd polish.
That lack of differentiation is murderous for OEMs - this alone is a brick wall against OEM adoption. The fact that OEMs have to pay to install this thing onto their phones is also not going to sit well at all, not when the competition is free.
The fact that it's a superior consumer experience won't matter at all.
Microsoft inevitably will have to start building their own devices a la the Lumia series, except they will have to really step up the game a lot more than they have so far. If I were MS I'd eliminate Nokia from the experience branding - their name would be on the box, but every slice of the out-of-box experience needs to scream Microsoft, and it needs to be comprehensively end-to-end. You use the Nokia name to make the sale, but the software should be 100% MS.
And for fuck's sake, they need to get their act together on the marketing front. We've seen precious little marketing for WinPhone, and worse, the little we've seen has been completely flat on its face.
As for windows phone I feel that the new Windows version 8 will in many ways encourage adoption of windows phones as well as force developers in many situations to in all efffect create applications that are not that many clicks away from moving from the desktop to the phone platform, if thats not the case then you can bet Microsoft will make it happen.
Real fun is that it is eventualy getting down to the ability to have a phone handle basic phone stuff and everything else is run in a webbrowser HTML5 style and in that the new Mozilla mobile OS taking that approach will prove very interesting.
That all said the Phone industry has historicaly been a nasty place with regards to money and patents since its very inception http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisha_Gray_and_Alexander_Bell_... is a good read into the early phone history. Nothing realy changed since now has it.
You sound too confident for a person who hasn't ever used a windows phone before. :)
Microsoft's real opportunity in the mobile space will be anchored by tight integration with the PC/Xbox. If a consumer is already running Win8 on their PC and an Xbox in their living room, why wouldn't a Windows Phone be the next logical step?
WP needs a marketing push to get into the minds of consumers, before it will sell in significant numbers.
It's hard to see WinPho (sounds tasty!) gaining due to an Apple patent shakedown. It's just not a very interesting platform; Android has reached critical mass and is well understood. Phone makers are just going to license or work around the damage -- they already do this for other patents.
I do worry that long term the patent system will result in hobbled products shipping in regions where software/UI patents are enforceable and unhobbled versions shipping elsewhere. Hope not, though.
You must have missed all those TV commercials for WP7. I'm not saying there were effective though, they were kind of weird, and I don't think the message was effective.
At any rate, the problem MS is facing is large. WP7 and what I've seen of Win8 is competent and competitive with iOS and Android. But it isn't dramatically better either. Apple has got a lock on "cool", and the products from Samsung and other top end Android makers offer large screens and nearly as good user experience, enough apps, and in addition they tend to be cheaper. The GNex directly from Google is only $350 USD without a contract.
I recommend to MS that rather than fight these guys head-on, that they go after the business and enterprise markets. RIM is weakening, so the time is right. Then expand from there back into the general consumer market.
It's assuming after the verdict (if and when the case is finally adjudicated), Samsung will simply dust itself off and start pumping great phones back into the market that everybody will want - thus giving us more choices as opposed to less choices. Give the current marketplace, I'm not sure optimistic about their chances of survival.
Also, the whole analogy about the Xbox 360 grabbing market share when the PS3 was delayed? It sure didn't last, how could we forget the "red ring of death" syndrome that caused the console to have a 50% or higher failure rate shortly after its release?
What does that have to do with market share?
The platform is actually pretty damn good. I don't get why people are kicking them out.