The article is deeply flawed. Patent protection is important, but differentiation is critical in the eyes of oems. WinMo does not offer differentiation, so that's a non-starter. In addition, 1b is a small price to pay for a free os and market leadership.
He means to the OEMs. They cannot modify it to look differently from other OEMs.
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.
I think what he means is the ability for manufacturers to 'differentiate' their product- that is, add stuff like Sense, or TouchWiz, or MotoBlur. Us techies may hate them, but carriers love them because it means they are selling something other than a generic Android phone that makes them sound interchangable with another manufacturer.
Inevitably I feel that Nokia and Microsoft are each other's only hope for survival in the mobile space.
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.
Honestly, the whole mantra of "differentiation" is a bit tired. Most android "differentiation" is terrible, and I'd rather have vanilla Android over "differentiated" bullshit any day.
I thought the Lumias were pretty well marketed in the USA (I don't have a TV and tend not to look at web ads [though I don't block them] so I could be wrong...).
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.
There was a huge (and costly) marketing campaign for the Lumia 800/900, and that resulted in very few sales. The problem isn't the amount of marketing (as WP and Apple can both attest to), its the product. Average users just aren't interested in Windows Phone, and the Windows name does not inspire user confidence (or desire).
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?
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?
I am surprised of so much wishful thinking for Microsoft, Nokia.. It has been spoken again and again here and there. but at least if WP8 fails too, windows on mobile please die forever; because it you don't offer anything interesting and let the mobile world move forward.
i used 3 generations of windows on my phone; and am sick of this coming again and again. yes microsoft has some leverage due to its desktop monopoly(and office) but it must see that it is impossible on mobile to get any traction despite billions spent on marketing, to nokia etc. msft should better focus on developing software on android and ios; they just can't do it.
One fact is missing from this analysis: windowsphone is being systematically boycotted to death by retailers and carriers. No matter how many battles Samsung loses, windowsphone will never look "gooooooooood", windowsphone will never be the third mobile ecosystem.
He is missing one point: Even if Samsungs marketshare drops, there is a whole army of other manufacturers with Android phones.
Unlike Sony vs MS vs Nintendo this is Apple vs MS/Nokia vs Samsung+Motorola+HTC+LG+Huawei+Sharp+Dell+Asus+Acer+many others. Ok, HTC will most likely produce a WindowsPhone as well.
Another point: Android is "free" for the carriers and manufacturers.
You are missing the same point he is missing and one more :)
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?
are you kidding? Google had the approach where it leaves its hardware partners out in the open unprotected from patents. Microsoft provides patent protection for hardware partners when they develop a device. That is one of the reasons none of the devices got sued. Besides android UI, particularly the original ones are a shameless copy of iOS UI.
"Google had the approach where it leaves its hardware partners out in the open unprotected from patents."
If Samsung didn't want to get sued then they shouldn't have copied Apple. Google sent them an email to that effect so blaming Google is ignoring reality.
"Microsoft provides patent protection for hardware partners when they develop a device. That is one of the reasons none of the devices got sued."
Worthless when the products don't sell.
"Besides android UI, particularly the original ones are a shameless copy of iOS UI."
Which is why none of Samsung's latest products were included in the lawsuit.
Bottom line: Windows Phone doesn't sell and Android does so if you think Samsung is going to stop shipping Android devices you're dreaming.
"There are myriad of other manufacturers who are making Win8 devices both phone and PCs/tablets."
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.
Currently an Android license is more expensive than a WP one.
I have to post this for 50th time on YN - Android is a trademark, Google Play, Google Maps, etc are closed source apps, Samsung, HTC, LG, etc. are all paying license fee per device sold. Amazon and a few others forked the source, but can't market their devices as Android and don't get access to the app store.
If Microsoft is ever compelled to release a list of journalists paid to be favorable to them, I'm quite sure this will be among them.
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.
Until Apple go directly at Android/google, until then there are many fish in the sea.
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.
The biggest misconception I see here is treating WP8 vs. Android vs. Apple as an isolated purchase.
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?
Best thing MS can do is to not alienate developers -- especially the core enterprise devs that help grow their server OS/DB/Office license revenues. After the whole WPF/SL snafu I'm reluctant to support WinRT for WP8. No devs = no apps. No 3rd party apps = failed OS.
40 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 85.7 ms ] threadCan 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.
How them grapes taste?
"There is nothing worse than carrier customisation - it's the worst kind of turd polish."
That's your opinion, skippy. Consumers see that stuff and they like it. Please tone down the arrogance and see other people having opinions.
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.
Do you think the market gives a rat's ass what you think? Consumers like the skins. Deal with it.
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?
You sound too confident for a person who hasn't ever used a windows phone before. :)
The platform is actually pretty damn good. I don't get why people are kicking them out.
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.
If Samsung didn't want to get sued then they shouldn't have copied Apple. Google sent them an email to that effect so blaming Google is ignoring reality.
"Microsoft provides patent protection for hardware partners when they develop a device. That is one of the reasons none of the devices got sued."
Worthless when the products don't sell.
"Besides android UI, particularly the original ones are a shameless copy of iOS UI."
Which is why none of Samsung's latest products were included in the lawsuit.
Bottom line: Windows Phone doesn't sell and Android does so if you think Samsung is going to stop shipping Android devices you're dreaming.
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.
Currently an Android license is more expensive than a WP one.
I have to post this for 50th time on YN - Android is a trademark, Google Play, Google Maps, etc are closed source apps, Samsung, HTC, LG, etc. are all paying license fee per device sold. Amazon and a few others forked the source, but can't market their devices as Android and don't get access to the app store.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/29/samsung-windows-pho...
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.
MS tried everything else before entering the tablet market directly.
If Bill comes back to replace Steve, only a fool would not hedge his bets.
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.
Really? Your feelings are very important so please tell us more.
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?