What Happened to Microsoft's Low-Cost Peabody Smartphone Reference Design?

[Kris Kumar]

The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/09/ms_sub-300_pda_phone/) is reporting that Microsoft is on a look-out for a manufacturer that can produce a low cost, sub-$300, Windows Mobile device. :-) And earlier in the year, we all heard about the Microsoft's Peabody platform. (http://smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7618)

http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/images/ms_peabody.jpg

Makes me wonder as to what happened to the reference design that was revealed to the press in February 2005? Is the sub-$300 PDA-phone that The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/09/ms_sub-300_pda_phone) is talking about the same as the Peabody? Or is it a Pocket PC Phone Edition device? Do you think it is a cool idea, given that the number of manufacturers supporting the Windows Mobile platform is growing? Shouldn't Microsoft try to convince someone like HTC, Motorola, HP or Dell to produce low cost devices? And what happened to the reference design, is any manufacturer using it? Share your thoughts with us.

[Darius Wey]

Is the sub-$300 PDA-phone that The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/09/ms_sub-300_pda_phone) is talking about the same as the Peabody? Or is it a Pocket PC Phone Edition device?

It appears The Register pulled information from DigiTimes who seem certain that it is a Pocket PC Phone Edition in question. Half the manufacturers listed in DigiTimes' article don't deal with Smartphones at this stage, though I would certainly love to see this 'budget device' idea extend to the Smartphone platform.

One of the reasons why Nokia, Motorola, Sony-Ericsson, Samsung, etc. are so successful is because they can and already produce low-cost phones targeting the 'budget' mobile market. That allows any Joe User to snap one up without having to mortgage the house. There is nothing Windows Mobile-related at the moment which can do that because everything (especially phone-enabled devices) is so expensive. :( If Microsoft can work with manufacturers to produce these low-cost devices, then they'll definitely have the potential to snatch a bit more of the market share. It's one thing to say "we'll try" and another thing to say "we'll do". I hope Microsoft takes the latter approach as I strongly believe that it can be done within the next couple of years.

As for the Peabody, it's a nice idea, but let's now focus on getting it out of the labs and into the hands of the consumers.

[Stinger]

There is nothing Windows Mobile-related at the moment which can do that because everything (especially phone-enabled devices) is so expensive

I would disagree with that statement actually, in the UK at least.

The Orange C550 retails for £129 on Pay-As-You-Go. That's actually a lot less than the most popular phones in the UK at the moment like the Sony Ericsson W800i, Nokia N70 and Samsung D600. Even an XDA mini Pocket PC is only £50 more than the above three phones.

Perhaps it's different in the rest of the world, but the cost of Smartphones isn't an issue in the UK. Instead the main reasons why they don't sell so well is due to style and brand power (http://www.smartphonethoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=62170&sid=b3c7a205dfbf1bc5bce13e94ca8af9bb).

I guess this move is more aimed at developing markets though.

[Kris Kumar]

The Orange C550 retails for £129 on Pay-As-You-Go. That's actually a lot less than the most popular phones in the UK at the moment like the Sony Ericsson W800i, Nokia N70 and Samsung D600. Even an XDA mini Pocket PC is only £50 more than the above three phones.


I agree. Even in US, we can get the Smartphones for less than $300 "thru the carriers with a service contract." But that doesn't mean the manufacturing cost or the retail price of the Smartphone is less than $300.

I believe Microsoft would like to have Smartphones or "PDA-phones" retail for less than $300. :) Which means if you wanted to buy the Smartphone without a contract or service plan, it would cost you less than $300. And with the contract it would cost even less. ;-)

And I agree. Bulk of this low cost initiative is driven by developing markets.

[Kris Kumar]

It appears The Register pulled information from DigiTimes who seem certain that it is a Pocket PC Phone Edition in question.

:( :cry:

But doesn't it seem odd. Since Pocket PC Phone Edition devices would cost more (compared to Smartphones) because of larger screens and touch screen. Wouldn't it make sense to get the Smartphone prices lowered. And then take it to the next step. :? It almost seems like Microsoft wants to skip the normal evolution process.

One of the reasons why Nokia, Motorola, Sony-Ericsson, Samsung, etc. are so successful is because they can and already produce low-cost phones targeting the 'budget' mobile market.

Microsoft should talk to HTC. With all the re-branding. And re-use of the same form-factor. I am sure HTC is now able to offer lower prices. But we haven't seen that lower costs being transferred into the hands of the consumer. i-mate still offers its SP5 series for approx. $450. :-(

As for the Peabody, it's a nice idea, but let's now focus on getting it out of the labs and into the hands of the consumers.

Amen to that.

I am annoyed that it has been almost a year now. And they haven't been able to market it to any carrier or manufacturer. :evil:

Looks like Microsoft is focused on just Xbox 360. :evil:

[Rocco Augusto]

the peabody is ugly as sin. is it really so hard to make a nice low cost phone that looks good? obviously not since the nokia 3120 is still a hot little number that has been around for YEARS. sure its not a smart phone but its low cost and sleek and pretty so people love it.

i dont know why microsoft just doesnt produce this phone themselves. i mean how much money do they have? theyre a multi billion dollar company im sure they can easily buy all the material needed to build this phone in such a huge quantity that the price of the phone would not be that much to manufacture. similar to what apple did with the flash memory in the nano ;)

microsoft needs to stop messing around and get on the ball. i mean if they actually took some time a developed a nice looking low cost WM phone and produced it themselves they could marktet it in a way where they could sell it in retail locations such as circuit city, best buy or comp usa as an unlocked low cost GSM phone. just stick your sim card in it and go.

heck they can even go one step above that a produce a nice decent priced WM phone with built in flash based memory that is unlocked and sold in electronic store locations that could be marketed as the iPod killer. they could even use marketing techniques like:

"why deal with limitaions on where you can download your music from"

"music, video, internet... we do a lot more than just look pretty"

"cingular, tmobile, the us, europe. we really dont care. the microsoft iPod killer. because only listening to music is lame."

"you could be limited to 100 songs... but who likes being limited"

"the iPod is white because we scared the poo out of it. the microsoft iPod killer"

there are so many things microsoft could do if they just stopped fooling around and did a little thinking outside the box :P

[Mike Temporale]

"the iPod is white because we scared the poo out of it. the microsoft iPod killer"


:rotfl:

[Mike Temporale]

i dont know why microsoft just doesnt produce this phone themselves. i mean how much money do they have? theyre a multi billion dollar company im sure they can easily buy all the material needed to build this phone in such a huge quantity that the price of the phone would not be that much to manufacture.

Do you really think this is a good idea? I've had this discussion with a lot of different people, including some people within Microsoft. I don't think it's a good move. Microsoft has a bad rep with the public for making things that crash - software or hardware. Whether it's true or not (I think not), the public still sees the MS name and thinks "crash" and "buggy". Do you think people would buy unlocked phones on the shelves of Best Buy with Microsoft's name stamped on it? I think they need to work on updating their image before they take this step.

[Kris Kumar]

i dont know why microsoft just doesnt produce this phone themselves. i mean how much money do they have? theyre a multi billion dollar company im sure they can easily buy all the material needed to build this phone in such a huge quantity that the price of the phone would not be that much to manufacture.

Do you really think this is a good idea?

To build up on what Mike said. I also believe that Microsoft shouldn't do it by themselves. And I think I know why they are not doing it.

First of all cell phones are sold thru carriers. They don't have any relationships with the carriers. Plus not being able to control what the end user gets and being on the carriers' whims and crankiness, is not something Microsoft wants to deal with.

Then the second problem, which I think is a bigger problem. If they manufacture the phones themselves, they will be painting themselves into the corner. Microsoft is trying to achieve what they did with desktops. They dont manufacturer the hardware. The rest of the planet does it. They get easy revenue.

If they manufacture cell phones themselves, then Motorola, Samsung, HTC and future partners would not be interested in partnering.

How many Smartphones can Microsoft sell on its own?
How many carriers can Microsoft convince on its own?

If they manufacture the cell phones themselves, then they definitely will be limiting their future in the cell phone market.

[Kris Kumar]

the peabody is ugly as sin.

Agreed. :lol: I am sure Microsoft knows it too. I believe this is a prototype. The body shell will change shape and form depending on who adopts the prototype. ;-)

[Rebecca]

the peabody is ugly as sin.

Agreed. :lol: I am sure Microsoft knows it too. I believe this is a prototype. The body shell will change shape and form depending on who adopts the prototype. ;-)

At least it does not has a hump!

BTW first Hump messege!

[Kris Kumar]

At least it does not has a hump!

BTW first Hump messege!

I believe you meant it is not a HumpPhone. :lol:

Well it's a prototype, let's hope that the future manufacturer will not think of putting a hump to improve reception. ;)

[sojourner753]

i dont know why microsoft just doesnt produce this phone themselves. i mean how much money do they have? theyre a multi billion dollar company im sure they can easily buy all the material needed to build this phone in such a huge quantity that the price of the phone would not be that much to manufacture. similar to what apple did with the flash memory in the nano ;)



Microsoft probably wont enter into competition with its other OEMs because that could jeopardize the market. Windows Mobile is their platform and they want other companies to build on it.

Sure, MS could build and sell Peabody, but it would only push other OEMs out of the market. Microsoft doesn't know how to reign themselves in. They would surely crush their partners.

[Rocco Augusto]

i agree with all post about why microsft hasnt produced any hardware themselves. at the same time though i believe that this could be the perfect avenue to change their image into something more solid and respectable in the consumer market. the WM os is very stable and relable. maybe producing the phones themselves is jumping the gun a little but look at apple. they created the iPod but not only that they created a niche to go with it. You can listen to music on the go... and buy it from us too. you know what? that whole stance worked for them. it was a gamble and it paid off incredibly. you can do all that and more with windows mobile and microsoft is just letting this oppurtunity slide right by them.

they have this powerhouse of an operating system/phone that from my experience is very stable (when was the alst time your phone BSOD'd?) that can do just about everything you could want to do on the go and they don't even let anyone know they have it. when i show people windows mobile phones at work the first thing i hear is "what!?!? that runs windows!? thats crazy"

maybe microsoft should drop a couple hundred million on a nice huge WM smartphone push. forget the PPC, thats to complicated for the average user, not to mention big, but a nice series of commercial/print advertisments that are just there to inform people of the product. let everyone know that "hey, you can use our devices to take your music on the go and at the same time watch movies too!"

i understand microsoft just makes the OS and some software and its the carriers job to promote the phone or the company that branded the phones job to promote the phone. why would it be microsofts job, they don't promote windows for pc's very often and windows is huge... well windows mobiles isnt running on 80% of the worlds phones, windows mobiles isnt a household name. maybe its time microsoft makes windows mobile a household name dont you think?

maybe if we saw smartphones in more prime time sitcoms like the razor then the devices would take off. microsoft has to do something, anything. i can understand where theyre coming from now, the devices have sold only 300 and something thousand in like a year or two, nowhere near what other devices are doing, its not extremely profitable. well of course it isn't, you havent told anyone about it!

if they just do something (cant stress that enough ;)) to get the word out who knows, one day you might be able to walk into the store and get a free smartphone with a two year activation. the potential is there they just have to reach out, grab it and run with it

[Mike Temporale]

Funny that you mention advertising. That subject just came up at the recent Mobius conference. The best comment was when it was pointed out that there are lots of Windows XP ads floating around and that OS is how old? And there are next to no Windows Mobile ads and that OS is less than a year old. :?

[Kris Kumar]

if they just do something (cant stress that enough ;)) to get the word out who knows...

That something can be "Intel Inside" style marketing or advertising. ;-)

That advertising campaign really helped build the Intel brand awareness. Microsoft should have something like "Powered by Windows Mobile" campaign. :-) I know they have done it in the print medium. But they need to do it the mainstream media like TV.

[Kris Kumar]

Funny that you mention advertising. That subject just came up at the recent Mobius conference. The best comment was when it was pointed out that there are lots of Windows XP ads floating around and that OS is how old? And there are next to no Windows Mobile ads and that OS is less than a year old. :?

Hmm..good to know that you MVPs do bug the Microsofties with such issues. 8)

[Darius Wey]

There is nothing Windows Mobile-related at the moment which can do that because everything (especially phone-enabled devices) is so expensive

I would disagree with that statement actually, in the UK at least.

You're very lucky. I'd be hard-pressed finding a deal like that in Australia. Either that or I haven't been looking hard enough.

[Darius Wey]

But doesn't it seem odd. Since Pocket PC Phone Edition devices would cost more (compared to Smartphones) because of larger screens and touch screen. Wouldn't it make sense to get the Smartphone prices lowered. And then take it to the next step. :? It almost seems like Microsoft wants to skip the normal evolution process.

It does seem odd. Perhaps Microsoft will push the manufacturers to produce Smartphones too. I won't deny that Pocket PC Phones are starting to give way to Smartphones. Take this (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=43474) for example. Otherwise, by the time Microsoft is serious about creating budget devices, the Pocket PC and Smartphone platforms might be close to merging, so we need not be worrying about one platform progressing while the other regressing.

If they manufacture the phones themselves, they will be painting themselves into the corner.

Right. The 'jack of all trades' principle never works. Microsoft should do what they do best and focus on improving the Windows Mobile platform. The hardware should be left to third-parties.

Looks like Microsoft is focused on just Xbox 360. :evil:

Well, I have nothing against that. :mrgreen: I'm counting down the days until I have one in my hands.

[Darius Wey]

That advertising campaign really helped build the Intel brand awareness. Microsoft should have something like "Powered by Windows Mobile" campaign. :-) I know they have done it in the print medium. But they need to do it the mainstream media like TV.

And not just in North America. They need to make an advertising campaign global to increase public awareness. I can't wait for the day when I pull out my Pocket PC Phone in public and a neighbouring stranger says, "Oooh, a Pocket PC Phone", rather than "Ooooh, is that a Palm-pad Pilot thingy-ma-jig?"... oh, brother.

[Kris Kumar]

...rather than "Ooooh, is that a Palm-pad Pilot thingy-ma-jig?"... oh, brother.

I hate it, when someone says that to me. :evil:

[Sven Johannsen]

Hmm..good to know that you MVPs do bug the Microsofties with such issues. 8)

If you only knew. Passionate about the platform we are, yes men and fan boys, uh-uh :wink:

[Rocco Augusto]

mike, you need to put in a good word for me and get me MVP status so i can go whine to all the microsoft people until we get some commercials ;)

[Rebecca]

At least it does not has a hump!

BTW first Hump messege!

I believe you meant it is not a HumpPhone. :lol:

Well it's a prototype, let's hope that the future manufacturer will not think of putting a hump to improve reception. ;)


Hey Kris, I have a trademark on the word Humpphone!

Now you will have to pay me royalties for using it. :wink:

I will aslo put a trademark on QuasimodoPhone.

[Rebecca]

MVPS:

Could you also tell Microsoft to ask companies to be a bit more concerned about device phisical appearence? This has been the principal selling point for Motorola, SE, and Nokia.

About MS manufacturing a phone. I don't think so. Remember all that Palm went thrugh when they were making both the OS and Devices. Device mannufacturers will acuse them of unfair practices.

By the way with the Xbox 360 microsoft has gained more negative press on hardware and crashing (check out engadget and cnet, there is even a lawsuit). Microsoft should concentrate on what they do best, excellent OS.

[Darius Wey]

By the way with the Xbox 360 microsoft has gained more negative press on hardware and crashing (check out engadget and cnet, there is even a lawsuit). Microsoft should concentrate on what they do best, excellent OS.

I think consoles are a different story. Almost all consoles have some sort of issue on initial launch, so I'm willing to bet on similar negative press being seen once the PS3 and Revolution have been released.

The problem with media is that it only takes ONE person and his/her woes to generate a huge story, often clouding the positive aspects of the hardware in question. Look at how many people had power supply issues - only a minute percentage of all users. The disc-scratching issue then? Well, Microsoft stated in black and white not to change the orientation of the unit while it is active. It isn't really their fault if people fail to follow instructions and create a huge story about it. But at the end of the day, what can you do? The whole world seems bent on bashing Microsoft. :(

For what it is, I believe the Xbox 360 is a masterpiece of design and functionality and Microsoft should be commended on that. Now if they could work with manufacturers to achieve a similar result both software-wise and hardware-wise, then the outlook for Windows Mobile can only go on up.

[Rocco Augusto]

MVPS:

Could you also tell Microsoft to ask companies to be a bit more concerned about device phisical appearence?...

you know just because its ugly it still might be pretty on the inside. i saw beauty and the beast, i know whats up :D

[Kris Kumar]

Hey Kris, I have a trademark on the word Humpphone!

Now you will have to pay me royalties for using it. :wink:

Oops! I even used it for the front page post. But I did give you credit. ;-) Am I okay? Or do I have to pay royalty. :?

Since I am using the trademarked term for our Web site. I will let Mike and Jason deal with you regarding the handling of royalty. :lol: :wink: