Comment: For all their nefarious intent, Google are winning with manufacturers right now because Android makes it relatively easy to build competitive touch screen phones with differentiated UIs *today*. Because S60 5.x offers such a weak touch UI with such an uncompetitive web browser experience, Symbian won't be in that position again until late 2010/2011. The manufacturers couldn't just tread water for 18 months building compromised phones. If anything, Nokia drove S60/Symbian OEMs into Google's arms.

Android provokes a perfect storm of UI fragmentation? Look at Satio. Look at the i8910. Manufacturers and operators want this kind of differentiation. It just requires less engineering effort on Android to yield better results. Symbian's focusing on ODMs now? OK, and what do ODMs do? Produce heavily branded UI experiences for operators. Finally, for all that UI fragmentation going on in Android, it's worth noting that Android Market apps and homescreen widgets still work on any Android device, even with HTC's Sense or Moto Blur.

Symbian still has Samsung? Only on paper. Samsung have no Symbian device roadmap to speak of beyond the i8910.

Bottom line: being wide open and virtuous isn't enough, you also need to be competent, competitive, and readily customizable.

Comment: Nokia does a lot of talk. "We're the biggest, we're the best mobile computer and etc"

But until they start to make devices that captures peoples interests and hearts, its all talk.

Comment: I wish all CEOs were that candid about their plans and views of the competition.

I have my pet peeves with Symbian (the biggest one by far being that alarm notifications, both from the calendar and the alarm app, completely disappear after they stop sounding, with no icon of any kind informing you of missed alarms), but I think it's a cracking OS (though not in the shape of S60): fast, stable and maybe the OS with the best multitasking abilities in existence today.

That's why it would be a shame to see Symbian used only in mid- and low-end phones, which is what I have read on the web. I think it deserves better than that.

Regarding the ODMs, I think it's a good call as it can create some healthy competition between them, and I would love to see HTC make a Symbian-based highend phone; *that* would be worth waiting for.

Can't wait to see what SF will announce in the next 12 months.

Comment: [quote=PeanutPinger;443603]For all their nefarious intent, Google are winning with manufacturers right now because Android makes it relatively easy to build competitive touch screen phones with differentiated UIs *today*. Because S60 5.x offers such a weak touch UI with such an uncompetitive web browser experience, Symbian won't be in that position again until late 2010/2011. The manufacturers couldn't just tread water for 18 months building compromised phones. If anything, Nokia drove S60/Symbian OEMs into Google's arms.

Android provokes a perfect storm of UI fragmentation? Look at Satio. Look at the i8910. Manufacturers and operators want this kind of differentiation. It just requires less engineering effort on Android to yield better results. Symbian's focusing on ODMs now? OK, and what do ODMs do? Produce heavily branded UI experiences for operators. Finally, for all that UI fragmentation going on in Android, it's worth noting that Android Market apps and homescreen widgets still work on any Android device, even with HTC's Sense or Moto Blur.

Symbian still has Samsung? Only on paper. Samsung have no Symbian device roadmap to speak of beyond the i8910.

Bottom line: being wide open and virtuous isn't enough, you also need to be competent, competitive, and readily customizable.[/quote]

All that you say is true, but if I walk into a phone shop today, the only devices that really suit my needs are Symbian powered Nokias. The reason for this is that the only advantage the competitors have over Nokia is the user interface over S60, and the use of graphic accelerators to deliver that UI experience. in all other areas, Nokia compete on equal or better terms (that includes cameras). Where Nokia are better, is form factor and value.

All the other manufacturers are making phones about the same price, with the same sort of touch UI, doing the same sort of stuff. Some offer a few irrelevant megapixels here, and and some onscreen gimmicks there, but they are basically all the same sort of thing, with or without qwerty.

Blackberry are still in there with their front side big keypad below the screen. Nokia do one of them too. And Nokia do stuff other people don't do.

And whilst the newcomers are coming in on the new wave started by the iPhone format, they will inveitably pick up some market, Nokia continues to shift millions of units.

Capturing peoples interests and hearts is not a big deal. No phone has my heart, it either suits my needs or doesn't. If it does I'll buy it, use it and replace it when something else comes along. The vast majority of the population are not phone geeks and they don't invest their hearts in small electronic devices.

Comment: Having worked at Doubleclick (googles ad serving engine) I understand better then most the dis-intermediation that google feeds off of. Google views it's users as grist for its mill. Free in google speak equates to a customer who has a lifetime value of between $1,600,000 to $8,000,000 - that is what you are worth to Google. In no way will Google allow anyone to poach that golden egg.

Just as the "last mile" was always the challenge in the communication world. The disconnected user was Googles Achillies heel - in the late 90's they realized that the mobile web would harm the golden egg- thus their benevolence bestowed on the peasants,,, Android, all in the name of gathering and profiling the user in increasingly intrusive ways.

But the apps are FREE! They help me with my life, now they are with me ALL the time, how can this be bad? Is your Android phone giving you $100,000 worth of value per year? It is to Google.

Google have even changed Andriods strategy based on the dumbing down of the smartphone - the iPhone. The single tasking feature phone introduced by Apple was a game changer. BUT NOT IN A POSITIVE FASHION. One of the least sophisticated mobile countries in the world -the United States of America- who's vast population is so technically backwards and incapable of managing a modern smartphone was ripe for a consumer device that was sufficiently simple to use. Using the super model axiom Apple developed a product that was beautiful, yet not intellectually challenging - and just like a super model it can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

All of Apples devices have only one purpose - defeat the evil Microsoft emprire and sell more Mac's. Hence the absolute need to introduce iTunes into your ilife to use the iPhone. Much is written about the iPhone wonderful eco-system. The pundits forget that true smart phones don't need an eco system, they survive and thrive stand alone, connected to the rest of the world via wifi, G3, G4, GX... they provide the user with a converged experience without an umbilical cord.

The iPhone showed Google two things 1) It had lost control of this entire segment of the population to the "notion of less". Less sophistication, less usability, less freedom (ironic for the company who's iconic moment was the "1984" commercial). 2)Americans are stupid enough to actually pay for applications that should be standard kit on an advanced smartphone. (As an aside I realize that over the entire span of my use of Nokia smartphones I have only bought 3 apps - Wayfinder for my 9300, Profimail for my E71{pre Nokia Messaging} and Gravity on the N97. Every thing else has been provided by Nokia at no cost as part of my handset purchase.)

So Google has moved to less free apps, simpler UI, more intrusion into the "open source" code based in it's lessons from Apple. The loss of huge swathes of America to the iPhone and the inability to get traction has turned google into a peditor on the ODM scene. Motorola, Dell, HTC, etc... who no longer have the deep pockets of Apple, Nokia, Microsoft to develop and refine mobile OS's are selling their hardware souls to Google in an attempt to stay relavent as handset makers. All these ODM's will learn, as did IBM,Compaq, HP that people use software not hardware and by turning over the reigns of the user experience to Google they will become increasingly irrelevent.

The mobile as a concept was about freedom and the old cliche is that freedom is not free. Of all the mobile platforms Googles is the worst since they lie about the price that you pay for it's use. Apple at least is open about its blatant consumerist bias and control freak nature. Nokia has shown itself to be the most benevolent - Symbian to open source, Maemo, Betalabs all in the name of a better handset experience.

Comment: Great stuff from Lee, looking forward to SEE09.

Comment: [I]"Having worked at Doubleclick (googles ad serving engine) I understand better then most the dis-intermediation that google feeds off of. Google views it's users as grist for its mill. Free in google speak equates to a customer who has a lifetime value of between $1,600,000 to $8,000,000 - that is what you are worth to Google. In no way will Google allow anyone to poach that golden egg.

Just as the "last mile" was always the challenge in the communication world. The disconnected user was Googles Achillies heel - in the late 90's they realized that the mobile web would harm the golden egg- thus their benevolence bestowed on the peasants,,, Android, all in the name of gathering and profiling the user in increasingly intrusive ways.

But the apps are FREE! They help me with my life, now they are with me ALL the time, how can this be bad? Is your Android phone giving you $100,000 worth of value per year? It is to Google.

Google have even changed Andriods strategy based on the dumbing down of the smartphone - the iPhone. The single tasking feature phone introduced by Apple was a game changer. BUT NOT IN A POSITIVE FASHION. One of the least sophisticated mobile countries in the world -the United States of America- who's vast population is so technically backwards and incapable of managing a modern smartphone was ripe for a consumer device that was sufficiently simple to use. Using the super model axiom Apple developed a product that was beautiful, yet not intellectually challenging - and just like a super model it can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

All of Apples devices have only one purpose - defeat the evil Microsoft emprire and sell more Mac's. Hence the absolute need to introduce iTunes into your ilife to use the iPhone. Much is written about the iPhone wonderful eco-system. The pundits forget that true smart phones don't need an eco system, they survive and thrive stand alone, connected to the rest of the world via wifi, G3, G4, GX... they provide the user with a converged experience without an umbilical cord.

The iPhone showed Google two things 1) It had lost control of this entire segment of the population to the "notion of less". Less sophistication, less usability, less freedom (ironic for the company who's iconic moment was the "1984" commercial). 2)Americans are stupid enough to actually pay for applications that should be standard kit on an advanced smartphone. (As an aside I realize that over the entire span of my use of Nokia smartphones I have only bought 3 apps - Wayfinder for my 9300, Profimail for my E71{pre Nokia Messaging} and Gravity on the N97. Every thing else has been provided by Nokia at no cost as part of my handset purchase.)

So Google has moved to less free apps, simpler UI, more intrusion into the "open source" code based in it's lessons from Apple. The loss of huge swathes of America to the iPhone and the inability to get traction has turned google into a peditor on the ODM scene. Motorola, Dell, HTC, etc... who no longer have the deep pockets of Apple, Nokia, Microsoft to develop and refine mobile OS's are selling their hardware souls to Google in an attempt to stay relavent as handset makers. All these ODM's will learn, as did IBM,Compaq, HP that people use software not hardware and by turning over the reigns of the user experience to Google they will become increasingly irrelevent.

The mobile as a concept was about freedom and the old cliche is that freedom is not free. Of all the mobile platforms Googles is the worst since they lie about the price that you pay for it's use. Apple at least is open about its blatant consumerist bias and control freak nature. Nokia has shown itself to be the most benevolent - Symbian to open source, Maemo, Betalabs all in the name of a better handset experience."[/I]


Awesome post. Very insightful in terms of google. Would like to hear more!

Comment: I have used or tried some of the friends S8000, M8910, Iphone and HTC Hero and i would rate Nokia phones have the best value and features. Most of the people does carried away with the flashy UI. As rightly said by "quagmire" Nokia phones have most of the features and no need to buy apps.
Also working as NodeB tester, i would rate Nokia phones have one of the best RF interface performance and they are the first in the market to have 10Mpbs HSDPA

Comment: [quote=Unregistered;443624]Having worked at Doubleclick (googles ad serving engine) I understand better then most the dis-intermediation that google feeds off of. Google views it's users as grist for its mill. Free in google speak equates to a customer who has a lifetime value of between $1,600,000 to $8,000,000 - that is what you are worth to Google. In no way will Google allow anyone to poach that golden egg.

Just as the "last mile" was always the challenge in the communication world. The disconnected user was Googles Achillies heel - in the late 90's they realized that the mobile web would harm the golden egg- thus their benevolence bestowed on the peasants,,, Android, all in the name of gathering and profiling the user in increasingly intrusive ways.

But the apps are FREE! They help me with my life, now they are with me ALL the time, how can this be bad? Is your Android phone giving you $100,000 worth of value per year? It is to Google.




Google have even changed Andriods strategy based on the dumbing down of the smartphone - the iPhone. The single tasking feature phone introduced by Apple was a game changer. BUT NOT IN A POSITIVE FASHION. One of the least sophisticated mobile countries in the world -the United States of America- who's vast population is so technically backwards and incapable of managing a modern smartphone was ripe for a consumer device that was sufficiently simple to use. Using the super model axiom Apple developed a product that was beautiful, yet not intellectually challenging - and just like a super model it can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

All of Apples devices have only one purpose - defeat the evil Microsoft emprire and sell more Mac's. Hence the absolute need to introduce iTunes into your ilife to use the iPhone. Much is written about the iPhone wonderful eco-system. The pundits forget that true smart phones don't need an eco system, they survive and thrive stand alone, connected to the rest of the world via wifi, G3, G4, GX... they provide the user with a converged experience without an umbilical cord.

The iPhone showed Google two things 1) It had lost control of this entire segment of the population to the "notion of less". Less sophistication, less usability, less freedom (ironic for the company who's iconic moment was the "1984" commercial). 2)Americans are stupid enough to actually pay for applications that should be standard kit on an advanced smartphone. (As an aside I realize that over the entire span of my use of Nokia smartphones I have only bought 3 apps - Wayfinder for my 9300, Profimail for my E71{pre Nokia Messaging} and Gravity on the N97. Every thing else has been provided by Nokia at no cost as part of my handset purchase.)

So Google has moved to less free apps, simpler UI, more intrusion into the "open source" code based in it's lessons from Apple. The loss of huge swathes of America to the iPhone and the inability to get traction has turned google into a peditor on the ODM scene. Motorola, Dell, HTC, etc... who no longer have the deep pockets of Apple, Nokia, Microsoft to develop and refine mobile OS's are selling their hardware souls to Google in an attempt to stay relavent as handset makers. All these ODM's will learn, as did IBM,Compaq, HP that people use software not hardware and by turning over the reigns of the user experience to Google they will become increasingly irrelevent.

The mobile as a concept was about freedom and the old cliche is that freedom is not free. Of all the mobile platforms Googles is the worst since they lie about the price that you pay for it's use. Apple at least is open about its blatant consumerist bias and control freak nature. Nokia has shown itself to be the most benevolent - Symbian to open source, Maemo, Betalabs all in the name of a better handset experience.[/quote]

Brilliant. Just brilliant. Do us a favour . Register and post a lot more please.

Comment: @peanut: this guy has peanuts in his head...he's an android shitter...like so many...these fanboys will eat shit like no other...if a phone its not a nokia then that is no phone...all people now this, only the stupid one don't get it

Comment: [quote=Unregistered;443652]I have used or tried some of the friends S8000, M8910, Iphone and HTC Hero and i would rate Nokia phones have the best value and features. Most of the people does carried away with the flashy UI. As rightly said by "quagmire" Nokia phones have most of the features and no need to buy apps.
Also working as NodeB tester, i would rate Nokia phones have one of the best RF interface performance and they are the first in the market to have 10Mpbs HSDPA[/quote]

That's right. I expects the novelty of flashy ui and the nonsense that is virtual keyboard to fade soon. I see a few iPhone owners also carry a humble pay as u go nokia for backup. It won't be long before small and thin is trendy again. You have to admire the genius of apples marketing though - create a demand for a device ppl don't even need - it's the .iWant generation I guess. Browsing on a mobile is ok but not anywhere near as convenient as doing so in the comfort of my own home with a big screen, real keyboard and a mug of tea in tow. Sorry to the microsoft hatera, the PC remains king of computing loathe it or not.

Create hype for stuff that pol don't actually need. It's the age of the .iWant

Comment: Just watched the video and this is really explosive and riveting stuff. Lee Williams is quite bold to dish it to google given google's support of Symbian.He is right though, Google does infringe on privacy with careless abandon and Apple is probably the greediest company ever.

I think the strategy of targeting ODM's is great. Notice that he mentions Foxconn - these guys make the iPhone. I'm sure they'll be keen to make their own device and will happily embrace Android. They wont be doing Apple's etc donkey work for too long.

Looks like the media is coming round to the value of Symbian and about time too

see this article

[url]http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2009/10/symbian_regaini.html[/url]

Comment: [quote=Unregistered;443657]Just watched the video and this is really explosive and riveting stuff. Lee Williams is quite bold to dish it to google given google's support of Symbian.He is right though, Google does infringe on privacy with careless abandon and Apple is probably the greediest company ever.

I think the strategy of targeting ODM's is great. Notice that he mentions Foxconn - these guys make the iPhone. I'm sure they'll be keen to make their own device and will happily embrace Android. They wont be doing Apple's etc donkey work for too long.

Looks like the media is coming round to the value of Symbian and about time too

see this article

[url]http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/techbeat/archives/2009/10/symbian_regaini.html[/url][/quote]"

oops I meant to say ""happily embrace Symbian"

Comment: I am already thinking that I am not going to live a full and happy life without apps. What will I need to get me through 2010?

In it's heyday Palm, I would guess, had more applications for it's devices than Symbian and Apple put together. The fun was downloading them and having them on your device, only a few more serious ones ever got used for more than 10 minutes.

If 99% of applications are worth having they should already be built into our phones. Apart from games, they have a short shelf life and would constantly need replacing.

Comment: I've just been shopping, I've bought a HTC Tattoo with Android, an iPhone 3GS and an N97. They are all going to be test beds for a service I am developing, because of the massive number of Symbian out there, it cannot be ignored. But here is the rub, I will be buying four or five more Symbian phones to test properly. I will carry one per week and see which is best.

This, by the way, is the joy of below the line expenses.

Comment: If Nokia spent less time on talk and analyst presentations put some of the saved effort into their devices, perhaps disasters like the N97 wouldn't be happening.

I look at the N97 and the Mini (you have to exclude the N900 from any comparison as it's not running Symbian) vs what's coming via Android in the next 2 months (Motorola Droid, HTC Desire, SonyEricsson X10) and there is no comparison. Android 1.5/2.0 seem to address many of the issues with 1.0 and now that battery life is improving, I can't see any competitive advantage for Symbian. The next 2-3 months will also see a slew of Android handsets aimed at the low-middle end, with PAYG options taking the fight to Nokia. With the iPhone competing at the top end and Android competing at all levels, they are about 6 months too late delivering a stable touch friendly UI.

I'm sure future versions of Symbian could be great. But that's little consolation for people using their N97/5800/etc for the last 5 months.

The problem Nokia are going to have going forward over the next 12 months is that many of the early adopters who are the typical customer for their flagship models are "once bitten, twice shy". I know I won't be spending anything North of £200 (SIM free) for a Nokia handset, and will be looking elsewhere for my Smartphones from now on.

Comment: [quote=celios;443746]

I'm sure future versions of Symbian could be great. But that's little consolation for people using their N97/5800/etc for the last 5 months.

[/quote]

I don't really understand why consolation is necessary, as I've been using a 5800 since January and found it to be exceptional. I've played with and tried out alternatives, but none really work better for me. I keep looking, but at the moment there is nothing out there as good.

Even the much lauded phones out there have failed badly on signal strength as well as other fundametally important factors the Nokia always gets right. What use is a phone without a connection?

Comment: [quote=Unregistered;443758]I don't really understand why consolation is necessary, as I've been using a 5800 since January and found it to be exceptional. I've played with and tried out alternatives, but none really work better for me. I keep looking, but at the moment there is nothing out there as good.

Even the much lauded phones out there have failed badly on signal strength as well as other fundametally important factors the Nokia always gets right. What use is a phone without a connection?[/quote]

Indeed the Internet forums are full of self-centred individuals who believe that their requirements are everybodys requirements and if they don't like something then nobody does. Some people will only be happy if Nokia custom-made phones to their personal requirements.

Comment: From the guy who needs to get out more / get a date:

[quote]BUT NOT IN A POSITIVE FASHION. One of the least sophisticated mobile countries in the world -the United States of America- who's vast population is so technically backwards and incapable of managing a modern smartphone[/quote]

Nokia is a bad loser. Don't blame the market for rejecting your lousy user interfaces.

Comment: [quote=Unregistered;443767]From the guy who needs to get out more / get a date:



Nokia is a bad loser. Don't blame the market for rejecting your lousy user interfaces.[/quote]

Nokia is not a loser, it is a winner and still winning.

It's a bad winner though.

Comment: [quote=Unregistered;443695]. But here is the rub, I will be buying four or five more Symbian phones to test properly.

This, by the way, is the joy of below the line expenses.[/quote]

HUH? search for Remote Device Access Services from nokia - you can remotely test many devices virtually.

Comment: [quote=Unregistered;443794]HUH? search for Remote Device Access Services from nokia - you can remotely test many devices virtually.[/quote]

Really? Real time GPS signals and 3G connection quality? Real time location based testing? How do they do that?

Comment: [quote=quagmire;443639

Awesome post. Very insightful in terms of google. Would like to hear more![/quote]

Someone questioned how and android phone is worth $100,000 to google....

Fundamental direct marketing. Yes you may only spend hundreds, or thousands with google checkout in any given year, but the data that you provide google is worth hundreds of thousands. Not only is your data used directly re-targeting you (Reading your e-mails on g-mail and targeting ads), but compliled, abstracted, aggregated that data is sold billions, if not trillions, of times for all those ad impressions. All those blog posts you make. All the sites you search, if google is your home page...every url you type into the address bar is tracked, not to mention the TCP/IP tracking. Grand central / wave transcribes every voicemail that is left... every number you dial, or dials you, gets a reverse append to a terrestrial (postal) address - you think your carrier is the only one who knows your postal address - think again, google now knows. Your wonderful Android phone now can be cell tri-angulate your position, turn on GPS, use Google maps and you become geo-coded.

Even if you have read the license agreement and are o.k. with being an open book to google, everyone who contacts you on your Android phone, sends an e-mail to your g-mail account gets data mined without their permission. You add friends to latitude, book mark places in maps... not only does google understand you better but will link that terrestrial address to a google profile (Remember that Amazon reciept sent to your g-mail account, with your postal address? google read that information).


So if you don't think that your Android phone is worth $100,000 check googles valuation, that doesn't come from people typing in search terms.

Comment: "To wet your appetite" should be "To whet your appetite".

Comment: Hi,Hi,Hi.