4 ms·

I have two problems with analysis like this. First it ignores how early we are in the game. To use the PC Operating System comparison we’re still in the perio

I have two problems with analysis like this. First it ignores how early we are in the game. To use the PC Operating System comparison we’re still in the period where people thought OS/2 and DesqView were viable competitors. Yes Apple and Google are currently the frontrunners but you have some big, successful companies like Microsoft and Nokia who will literally do anything to get a foothold in this market. My second issue here is this analysis ignores the vast number difference between PC shipments and Cellular Phones. Windows really cemented control of the market with Windows ’95 but the year after that only saw about 80 million in total PC shipments. Compare that to the Cellular Phone market which is projected to hit 5 billion this year. It’s much harder to dominate a market of 5 billion and I really don’t see any company controlling 90% of that. In the end I suspect there will be a lot of competition out there with certain platforms becoming more popular in various countries (I suspect the U.S. will stay Apple vs. Google for example).

macrael 16y ago
I agree. I see two other big differences between now and the PC OS battle of old. First, compatibility problems were a much bigger deal 20 years ago than they are today. If you and the person you wanted to share information with weren't both running the same program on the same OS with the same data storage hardware, you couldn't collaborate at all. Today, we have the internet, which has created a lowest common denominator for communication. Everyone can understand HTML. We have Google Docs, email, Twitter. Different OS's can have different client applications but can easily talk to the same services as other devices. This leads to my second, related, difference. Microsoft aggressively sold Windows to businesses first, everyone else second. Many many people had Windows machines at work, so when it came time to get one for their home, they picked the same OS for familiarity and compatibility reasons. I don't see that as being a large factor in the handset market. The phone isn't as important to getting work done as the PC was and is, so people have more latitude in picking what phone they want to use. So, again, I agree. There is room for more mobile OS's in this space than the two we got in the PC space. I hope more device manufactures realize this and try hard to make something compelling. We'll see.
joezydeco 16y ago
The game is not early, it's almost over. Why? Because the O/S is just a hardware abstraction layer now. Android comes right out and says it. Linux is the HAL. Apple is a little more coy about it ("oh, it's OSX underneath"), but then again what's with the renaming the of O/S to iOS4? What does that fortell? All said, it doesn't matter anymore. Android could be ported to OSX tomorrow, and iPhone can run on Linux if it wanted. It's the application layer that matters now. Microsoft and Nokia are scrambling to catch up, but there's either nothing there (Nokia/Meego), or something that's not compelling enough (Windows Phone) for developers to care about.
- ROFISH 16y ago
  Never discount Microsoft, if only for the sole reason that they'll just throw infinite amounts of money just to be relevant. For example: Xbox and Zune.
  - K3G 16y ago
    Having played with their new "Kin" line, I can confidently discount them (unless they make some serious changes in strategy). I was met with a device that made little sense, had no clear organization of tools and apps, and had a HORRID UI. I'm an iOS fan, but I would pick an Android phone over M$'s offering any day.
    - TomOfTTB 16y ago
      But as many have said Microsoft is not targeting Kin at the type of person who would visit HN. It's targeted at the teen market that bought sidekicks in droves and I'm sorry but if you look back at the sidekick it's UI was pretty horrid too (and it's technology was far inferior to boot)
      - joezydeco 16y ago
        The moment you treat teens as inferior customers, you've lost. They're more adept at this stuff than we are, and adopt winning technologies faster. They only adopted Sidekick because it was an easier phone for text messaging than the others. Selling Kin to a generation that's now used to the iPhone and Android is throwing money down a hole.

macrael 16y ago

I agree. I see two other big differences between now and the PC OS battle of old. First, compatibility problems were a much bigger deal 20 years ago than they are today. If you and the person you wanted to share information with weren't both running the same program on the same OS with the same data storage hardware, you couldn't collaborate at all. Today, we have the internet, which has created a lowest common denominator for communication. Everyone can understand HTML. We have Google Docs, email, Twitter. Different OS's can have different client applications but can easily talk to the same services as other devices. This leads to my second, related, difference. Microsoft aggressively sold Windows to businesses first, everyone else second. Many many people had Windows machines at work, so when it came time to get one for their home, they picked the same OS for familiarity and compatibility reasons. I don't see that as being a large factor in the handset market. The phone isn't as important to getting work done as the PC was and is, so people have more latitude in picking what phone they want to use. So, again, I agree. There is room for more mobile OS's in this space than the two we got in the PC space. I hope more device manufactures realize this and try hard to make something compelling. We'll see.

joezydeco 16y ago

The game is not early, it's almost over. Why? Because the O/S is just a hardware abstraction layer now. Android comes right out and says it. Linux is the HAL. Apple is a little more coy about it ("oh, it's OSX underneath"), but then again what's with the renaming the of O/S to iOS4? What does that fortell? All said, it doesn't matter anymore. Android could be ported to OSX tomorrow, and iPhone can run on Linux if it wanted. It's the application layer that matters now. Microsoft and Nokia are scrambling to catch up, but there's either nothing there (Nokia/Meego), or something that's not compelling enough (Windows Phone) for developers to care about.

ROFISH 16y ago
Never discount Microsoft, if only for the sole reason that they'll just throw infinite amounts of money just to be relevant. For example: Xbox and Zune.
- K3G 16y ago
  Having played with their new "Kin" line, I can confidently discount them (unless they make some serious changes in strategy). I was met with a device that made little sense, had no clear organization of tools and apps, and had a HORRID UI. I'm an iOS fan, but I would pick an Android phone over M$'s offering any day.
  - TomOfTTB 16y ago
    But as many have said Microsoft is not targeting Kin at the type of person who would visit HN. It's targeted at the teen market that bought sidekicks in droves and I'm sorry but if you look back at the sidekick it's UI was pretty horrid too (and it's technology was far inferior to boot)
    - joezydeco 16y ago
      The moment you treat teens as inferior customers, you've lost. They're more adept at this stuff than we are, and adopt winning technologies faster. They only adopted Sidekick because it was an easier phone for text messaging than the others. Selling Kin to a generation that's now used to the iPhone and Android is throwing money down a hole.