4 ms·

I worked as Nokia's UK and Ireland technical support, both tier 1 and 2, and you are entirely wrong. Almost no users, including people buying smartphones, have

I worked as Nokia's UK and Ireland technical support, both tier 1 and 2, and you are entirely wrong. Almost no users, including people buying smartphones, have any idea what a phone operating system is. Most users, including people buying smartphones, struggle to tell you what their computer operating system is. Phones, including smartphones, are not sold like computers. Lots of people buy smartphones because they have the best cameras, or because they're the 'top end' phone, or because 'they want a blackberry' and can't tell a Nokia E61 from a BlackBerry device. Also, at least in the UK, there's a lot of smartphones - including Android devices - being marketed at the general consumer market. There's not really any phones sold to 'technical' people - the distinction you want to make is 'consumer' versus 'business'. Windows Mobile and BlackBerry are 'business' (traditionally). The iPhone is 'consumer', albeit high-end. Android phones tend to be consumer-focussed, competing against the iPhone. There's a few Android phones that are priced to the mid- and low-end of the market, and there's a lot of Nokia S60 smartphones in this range. (A lot more than Android or iOS, actually. Nokia are still the #1 smartphone manufacturer.) Most people buying these devices are 'non-technical' and if they understand the difference between 'Android 1.5' and 'Android 2.1', they just don't care.

enjo 16y ago
I'll just +1 this. I spent several years at a major app developer (ya, there were third party apps before the iPhone!) and my experience matches up exactly.
wvenable 16y ago
This idea that everyone is an idiot and nothing matters is somewhat depressing. There is no point in designing anything for intelligent people -- there aren't enough of them to matter. People, in general, aren't discriminating at all. It sounds like if you put two items in identical shiny cases, they'll just pick them at random. Putting any effort into making one item better (rather than shinier) is simply wasted. I can't argue with your evidence -- the fact that Nokia still manages to sell smartphones at all proves nobody is looking too deeply.
- semanticist 16y ago
  That's the thing: Nokia's smartphones are smartPHONEs, not PDAs with a cellular modem. The current smartphone obsession is being largely driven by American-style smartphones, which are mostly terrible at being phones. Nokia screw up when they try to copy this style of device and forget that their strength is excellent telephony devices. Which, despite the trendiness of mobile browsing and 'apps', is what most people want from their mobile phone. That's why Nokia still own the market, because their devices appeal to people who primarily want to make phone calls from their phone. iOS, Android, WebOS, and Windows Mobile will never crack that market.
  - wvenable 16y ago
    Blackberry managed to crack into the mobile market by offering devices that didn't do telephony at all. The "current smartphone obsession" as you call it has been developing for a decade now. People who primarily want to make phone calls from their phone is a dwindling market. For business, on demand email is significantly more important. For teens, texting ability is much more important (my daughter never calls anyone). There's a cultural shift in the works here. Telephony isn't that difficult and all "american-style" smartphones do a perfectly adequate job. If you can make calls and answer calls, it's a phone. Most people don't need anything more than that. I don't see what more Nokia can offer on that point but they lots of room to screw everything else up.
    - semanticist 16y ago
      Really, you're totally wrong. :o) I think you're confusing what 'people who read HN' want with 'what the majority want'. It happens really commonly in tech-literate circles. I'll grant you that texting is important, but that revolution happened a decade ago with the Nokia 3310. You don't need a smartphone for that. The calling experience on most smartphones is horrific. On my iPhone I need to find an icon and tap it before I can even start dialling. Once I do get through to someone, the signal reception is weak - and this is an iPhone 3G on a UK network. Pick up a Nokia S60 smartphone. There's number buttons on the front of them (except their weak attempts at touchscreen phones). You push them. The signal quality is rock-solid. These are things that normal people don't even think about until they dismiss an iPhone or Android smartphone as 'too fiddly'.

enjo 16y ago

I'll just +1 this. I spent several years at a major app developer (ya, there were third party apps before the iPhone!) and my experience matches up exactly.

wvenable 16y ago

This idea that everyone is an idiot and nothing matters is somewhat depressing. There is no point in designing anything for intelligent people -- there aren't enough of them to matter. People, in general, aren't discriminating at all. It sounds like if you put two items in identical shiny cases, they'll just pick them at random. Putting any effort into making one item better (rather than shinier) is simply wasted. I can't argue with your evidence -- the fact that Nokia still manages to sell smartphones at all proves nobody is looking too deeply.

semanticist 16y ago
That's the thing: Nokia's smartphones are smartPHONEs, not PDAs with a cellular modem. The current smartphone obsession is being largely driven by American-style smartphones, which are mostly terrible at being phones. Nokia screw up when they try to copy this style of device and forget that their strength is excellent telephony devices. Which, despite the trendiness of mobile browsing and 'apps', is what most people want from their mobile phone. That's why Nokia still own the market, because their devices appeal to people who primarily want to make phone calls from their phone. iOS, Android, WebOS, and Windows Mobile will never crack that market.
- wvenable 16y ago
  Blackberry managed to crack into the mobile market by offering devices that didn't do telephony at all. The "current smartphone obsession" as you call it has been developing for a decade now. People who primarily want to make phone calls from their phone is a dwindling market. For business, on demand email is significantly more important. For teens, texting ability is much more important (my daughter never calls anyone). There's a cultural shift in the works here. Telephony isn't that difficult and all "american-style" smartphones do a perfectly adequate job. If you can make calls and answer calls, it's a phone. Most people don't need anything more than that. I don't see what more Nokia can offer on that point but they lots of room to screw everything else up.
  - semanticist 16y ago
    Really, you're totally wrong. :o) I think you're confusing what 'people who read HN' want with 'what the majority want'. It happens really commonly in tech-literate circles. I'll grant you that texting is important, but that revolution happened a decade ago with the Nokia 3310. You don't need a smartphone for that. The calling experience on most smartphones is horrific. On my iPhone I need to find an icon and tap it before I can even start dialling. Once I do get through to someone, the signal reception is weak - and this is an iPhone 3G on a UK network. Pick up a Nokia S60 smartphone. There's number buttons on the front of them (except their weak attempts at touchscreen phones). You push them. The signal quality is rock-solid. These are things that normal people don't even think about until they dismiss an iPhone or Android smartphone as 'too fiddly'.