6 ms·

Interestingly, this means the only manufacturer-neutral smartphone OS is now Windows Phone 7. iOS is on Apple, Android is on Motorola/Google, Blackberry on RIM,

by kylec 15y ago

Interestingly, this means the only manufacturer-neutral smartphone OS is now Windows Phone 7. iOS is on Apple, Android is on Motorola/Google, Blackberry on RIM, and webOS on HP/Palm. I wonder if this means we'll see an increase in WP7-based phones from HTC, Samsung, and LG...

sinhpham 15y ago
Well, there's Nokia for Win Phone 7 =)
- kylec 15y ago
  True, but it's not as though Microsoft bought Nokia. As crazy as that sounds, though, that would have been less crazy than Google's buying Motorola and how now they've suddenly become a mass-market hardware manufacturer. I really fear that things that Google has historically been bad at (support, etc) will come back to bite them hard.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    > True, but it's not as though Microsoft bought Nokia. At least not yet. But it seems Elop is doing his best to make it easy. Or, at least, cheap.
    - recoiledsnake 15y ago
      How so? I see this bandied about as truth, especially by Linux fans and the anti-MS folk, but he was given charge of a sinking ship and is trying to do the best for the company. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_24/b4232056703101.htm http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_24/b42320567...
      - rbanffy 15y ago
        > trying to do the best for the company. By adopting the mobile OS nobody wants? By burying the one that was actually good (and whose kernel could power an Android device easily)?
        recoiledsnake 15y ago
        >By adopting the mobile OS nobody wants You're dissing an OS that's not even out for a full year, and has MORE customer satisfaction than Android phones. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/wp7-ahead-of-android-and-right-behind-ios-in-customer-satisfaction-survey/13728 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/wp7-ahead-of-android-and-... How is that something that nobody wants? >By burying the one that was actually good (and whose kernel could power an Android device easily) Did you even read the article I linked? Meego/Maemo was not ready on time. Even though the N9 may look okay, there's a lot of things missing that will make it very hard for Nokia to push the OS to devs etc. and have it on enough devices to make a difference in Eurasia. And what advantage will having a kernel that could power an Android device do? It's not as if Android's kernel sucks or something. It's Linux underneath too. I don't get your point. Also, Google told them to take a hike during Nokia's discussions about switching to Android. Anyway what happened to WebOS? It's a decent OS built on Linux but there's no uptake because of lack of a ecosystem and people wondering if it will be around in a few years.
        rbanffy 15y ago
        > and has MORE customer satisfaction than Android phones. Something which is yet to translate into phones sold. > Did you even read the article I linked? Sure. There is only a handful of WP7 devices out there and they are all very high-end. Android phones cover a much broader spectrum - there are low-end Android phones - and the number of disappointed users is going to be much higher. From TFA: "The data might be skewed because of the limited number of Windows Phone 7 users out there" > Meego/Maemo was not ready on time. And we can see the difference now that Nokia is selling devices running WP7. > And what advantage will having a kernel that could power an Android device do? It means it's mostly ready - all hardware is supported by the Linux kernel and the effort to make it run Android is almost nothing. The N9 could have launched with Android. > Anyway what happened to WebOS? It's a fine OS that lacks a significant developer ecosystem. There is a finite number of phone developers and now they are all very busy writing software for iOS and Android. Only a few developers have chosen to target WebOS, which has a smaller user base but very little competition.
  - nextparadigms 15y ago
    After Google's move, I think Microsoft is much more likely to buy Nokia, too. But I think they'll wait to see how Nokia's first WP7 phones go.
    - dennisgorelik 15y ago
      Oh, that's why NOK is +13% today (while GOOG is -2%).
haasted 15y ago
Isn't it questionable whether WP7 will be manufacturer-neutral? The level of cooperation between Nokia and Microsoft remains to be seen, but a possible outcome is that Nokia ends up looking like a subsidiary of Microsoft.
- EiZei 15y ago
  It might become a subsidiary instead of just looking like one, Nokia's stock jumped up over 10% here just now due to the speculation that Microsoft might be eying them especially after this move.
- qeorge 15y ago
  True, and if RIM keeps dropping I wouldn't be surprised to see MS acquire them.
  - jfruh 15y ago
    How would this fit in with a Nokia-WP7 Special Relationship though? Would MS kill off old and new BlackBerry OSes and just use RIM's old sales contacts to sell more WP7 phones or what?
    - qeorge 15y ago
      That's a great question. I would expect MS to maintain the BlackBerry brand, which I think still has some clout in the enterprise. That and MS/RIM have a somewhat long-standing relationship too. As I understand it, BlackBerry is the only way to get end-to-end encryption from an Exchange server to a smartphone, although I'd be surprised if that's not added to WP7. But basically, I think RIM is screwing up so much that they'll be an acquisition target soon, and MS seems like the most likely buyer to me.
      - hollerith 15y ago
        >I would expect MS to maintain the BlackBerry brand, which I think still has some clout in the enterprise. Does MS really need a brand with enterprise clout though? Doesn't the MS brand itself have enough enterprise clout?
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
RexRollman 15y ago
I hadn't really thought about it but your are right. This development gives the rise to the possibility of a "real" Google Phone. If nothing else, this might mean it will be easier to root Motorola phones in the future, as Google seems to see rootability as a feature.
dstein 15y ago
Once Apple's vertical model started working, everyone was jealous.
etaty 15y ago
Samsung has Bada : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bada_%28operating_system%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bada_%28operating_system%29
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  I don't see how Bada is relevant. First, is it available to non-Samsung OEMs? Second, Bada is in the same situation as Symbian/Android is in now, a major h/w manufacturer leading the development, unlike WP7.
nextparadigms 15y ago
WP7 is not exactly neutral anymore after the "special" deal they've made with Nokia, where they give them a lot more liberties than to the other manufacturers.
rbanffy 15y ago
Android is platform neutral in a way no other can aspire to: it's open-source. What Google did was to gain access to Motorola Mobility's patent portfolio in order to defend HTC and Samsung from Apple and Microsoft. Google will own the company, but it will not become Google Mobility - it'll continue to exist as a separate entity. They will probably manufacture the reference implementations. In order to reassure other phone manufacturers, Google will probably improve their code release schedule.
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  >Android is platform neutral in a way no other can aspire to: it's open-source. In practice, is the platform that much different from Windows? Anyone can slap it on any hardware and sell it as Windows and pre-install their own software. In fact, with Windows they don't have to follow the rules OEMs need to follow to bundle things like Maps and Android Marketplace with the phone.
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    > In practice, is the platform that much different from Windows? Sure. OEMs get the full source code. > Anyone can slap it on any hardware and sell it as Windows and pre-install their own software. As long as they pay the license. Android OEMs don't have to. And Windows OEMs can't change Windows itself - they can only slap things on top of it. AFAIK, the only OEM that got permission to customize WP7's interface is Nokia. And we are talking mobile OSs, not desktop ones, BTW.
    - recoiledsnake 15y ago
      Since you said this: >Android is platform neutral in a way no other can aspire to: it's open-source. I was comparing that to other platforms, both desktop and mobile (the difference is largely irrelevant to the argument, isn't it?). With Android, the openness is exploited by the OEMs and carriers to install applications and always running services that CANNOT be uninstalled by the user, unless you root it(not easy for average user, and tough for even geeks because of locked bootloaders). These services and apps take up space and suck down battery. With Apple, you don't get such unremovable crap. With Windows 7, you can somehow uninstall it using tweaks and workarounds. With WP7, nothing can run in the background, and OEMs/carriers get a bigger tile on the main screen that can be removed with a long press and even uninstalled. How is the openness of Android helping here? OEMs HAVE to abide by certain rules to get access to premium Google programs like Maps and to the Android Marketplace(try selling a phone without those). So you say the openness of Android was used to customize the UI? Most people hate the UI customization since it further lags the phone and sucks down battery. >And Windows OEMs can't change Windows itself - they can only slap things on top of it True, but you can install things into the kernel itself and Dell ships a OS X like dock. Do you have any examples of Android customisations that the OEMs made as a result of it being Open Source that improved the user experience that wouldn't be possible with, say desktop Windows?

by kylec 15y ago

sinhpham 15y ago

Well, there's Nokia for Win Phone 7 =)

kylec 15y ago
True, but it's not as though Microsoft bought Nokia. As crazy as that sounds, though, that would have been less crazy than Google's buying Motorola and how now they've suddenly become a mass-market hardware manufacturer. I really fear that things that Google has historically been bad at (support, etc) will come back to bite them hard.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  > True, but it's not as though Microsoft bought Nokia. At least not yet. But it seems Elop is doing his best to make it easy. Or, at least, cheap.
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    How so? I see this bandied about as truth, especially by Linux fans and the anti-MS folk, but he was given charge of a sinking ship and is trying to do the best for the company. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_24/b4232056703101.htm http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_24/b42320567...
    - rbanffy 15y ago
      > trying to do the best for the company. By adopting the mobile OS nobody wants? By burying the one that was actually good (and whose kernel could power an Android device easily)?
      - recoiledsnake 15y ago
        >By adopting the mobile OS nobody wants You're dissing an OS that's not even out for a full year, and has MORE customer satisfaction than Android phones. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/wp7-ahead-of-android-and-right-behind-ios-in-customer-satisfaction-survey/13728 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/wp7-ahead-of-android-and-... How is that something that nobody wants? >By burying the one that was actually good (and whose kernel could power an Android device easily) Did you even read the article I linked? Meego/Maemo was not ready on time. Even though the N9 may look okay, there's a lot of things missing that will make it very hard for Nokia to push the OS to devs etc. and have it on enough devices to make a difference in Eurasia. And what advantage will having a kernel that could power an Android device do? It's not as if Android's kernel sucks or something. It's Linux underneath too. I don't get your point. Also, Google told them to take a hike during Nokia's discussions about switching to Android. Anyway what happened to WebOS? It's a decent OS built on Linux but there's no uptake because of lack of a ecosystem and people wondering if it will be around in a few years.
        rbanffy 15y ago
        > and has MORE customer satisfaction than Android phones. Something which is yet to translate into phones sold. > Did you even read the article I linked? Sure. There is only a handful of WP7 devices out there and they are all very high-end. Android phones cover a much broader spectrum - there are low-end Android phones - and the number of disappointed users is going to be much higher. From TFA: "The data might be skewed because of the limited number of Windows Phone 7 users out there" > Meego/Maemo was not ready on time. And we can see the difference now that Nokia is selling devices running WP7. > And what advantage will having a kernel that could power an Android device do? It means it's mostly ready - all hardware is supported by the Linux kernel and the effort to make it run Android is almost nothing. The N9 could have launched with Android. > Anyway what happened to WebOS? It's a fine OS that lacks a significant developer ecosystem. There is a finite number of phone developers and now they are all very busy writing software for iOS and Android. Only a few developers have chosen to target WebOS, which has a smaller user base but very little competition.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  After Google's move, I think Microsoft is much more likely to buy Nokia, too. But I think they'll wait to see how Nokia's first WP7 phones go.
  - dennisgorelik 15y ago
    Oh, that's why NOK is +13% today (while GOOG is -2%).

haasted 15y ago

Isn't it questionable whether WP7 will be manufacturer-neutral? The level of cooperation between Nokia and Microsoft remains to be seen, but a possible outcome is that Nokia ends up looking like a subsidiary of Microsoft.

EiZei 15y ago
It might become a subsidiary instead of just looking like one, Nokia's stock jumped up over 10% here just now due to the speculation that Microsoft might be eying them especially after this move.
qeorge 15y ago
True, and if RIM keeps dropping I wouldn't be surprised to see MS acquire them.
- jfruh 15y ago
  How would this fit in with a Nokia-WP7 Special Relationship though? Would MS kill off old and new BlackBerry OSes and just use RIM's old sales contacts to sell more WP7 phones or what?
  - qeorge 15y ago
    That's a great question. I would expect MS to maintain the BlackBerry brand, which I think still has some clout in the enterprise. That and MS/RIM have a somewhat long-standing relationship too. As I understand it, BlackBerry is the only way to get end-to-end encryption from an Exchange server to a smartphone, although I'd be surprised if that's not added to WP7. But basically, I think RIM is screwing up so much that they'll be an acquisition target soon, and MS seems like the most likely buyer to me.
    - hollerith 15y ago
      >I would expect MS to maintain the BlackBerry brand, which I think still has some clout in the enterprise. Does MS really need a brand with enterprise clout though? Doesn't the MS brand itself have enough enterprise clout?

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

RexRollman 15y ago

I hadn't really thought about it but your are right. This development gives the rise to the possibility of a "real" Google Phone. If nothing else, this might mean it will be easier to root Motorola phones in the future, as Google seems to see rootability as a feature.

dstein 15y ago

Once Apple's vertical model started working, everyone was jealous.

etaty 15y ago

Samsung has Bada : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bada_%28operating_system%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bada_%28operating_system%29

recoiledsnake 15y ago
I don't see how Bada is relevant. First, is it available to non-Samsung OEMs? Second, Bada is in the same situation as Symbian/Android is in now, a major h/w manufacturer leading the development, unlike WP7.

nextparadigms 15y ago

WP7 is not exactly neutral anymore after the "special" deal they've made with Nokia, where they give them a lot more liberties than to the other manufacturers.

rbanffy 15y ago

Android is platform neutral in a way no other can aspire to: it's open-source. What Google did was to gain access to Motorola Mobility's patent portfolio in order to defend HTC and Samsung from Apple and Microsoft. Google will own the company, but it will not become Google Mobility - it'll continue to exist as a separate entity. They will probably manufacture the reference implementations. In order to reassure other phone manufacturers, Google will probably improve their code release schedule.

recoiledsnake 15y ago
>Android is platform neutral in a way no other can aspire to: it's open-source. In practice, is the platform that much different from Windows? Anyone can slap it on any hardware and sell it as Windows and pre-install their own software. In fact, with Windows they don't have to follow the rules OEMs need to follow to bundle things like Maps and Android Marketplace with the phone.
- rbanffy 15y ago
  > In practice, is the platform that much different from Windows? Sure. OEMs get the full source code. > Anyone can slap it on any hardware and sell it as Windows and pre-install their own software. As long as they pay the license. Android OEMs don't have to. And Windows OEMs can't change Windows itself - they can only slap things on top of it. AFAIK, the only OEM that got permission to customize WP7's interface is Nokia. And we are talking mobile OSs, not desktop ones, BTW.
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    Since you said this: >Android is platform neutral in a way no other can aspire to: it's open-source. I was comparing that to other platforms, both desktop and mobile (the difference is largely irrelevant to the argument, isn't it?). With Android, the openness is exploited by the OEMs and carriers to install applications and always running services that CANNOT be uninstalled by the user, unless you root it(not easy for average user, and tough for even geeks because of locked bootloaders). These services and apps take up space and suck down battery. With Apple, you don't get such unremovable crap. With Windows 7, you can somehow uninstall it using tweaks and workarounds. With WP7, nothing can run in the background, and OEMs/carriers get a bigger tile on the main screen that can be removed with a long press and even uninstalled. How is the openness of Android helping here? OEMs HAVE to abide by certain rules to get access to premium Google programs like Maps and to the Android Marketplace(try selling a phone without those). So you say the openness of Android was used to customize the UI? Most people hate the UI customization since it further lags the phone and sucks down battery. >And Windows OEMs can't change Windows itself - they can only slap things on top of it True, but you can install things into the kernel itself and Dell ships a OS X like dock. Do you have any examples of Android customisations that the OEMs made as a result of it being Open Source that improved the user experience that wouldn't be possible with, say desktop Windows?