Microsoft And Motorola -- An Uneasy Partnership?

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=11631' target='_blank'>http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-...ews.pl?id=11631</a><br /><br /></div>Motorola has been making waves in the Windows Mobile community due to their new MPx phone releases. Is this because Motorola genuinely is investing in Microsoft platforms long-term, or are they using Windows Mobile as a stop-gap until their own infrastructure is complete?<br /><br />"Motorola needed Microsoft because its own operating software wasn’t ready and it couldn't afford to miss the market shift to smart phones. Microsoft needed Motorola as a foothold in the wireless market, a key new growth front for the company. The partnership gives Microsoft a chance to dominate wireless software the way it does the personal computer industry. With cell phones morphing into little computers, profits will lie in their software brains, not their wireless guts. If Microsoft captures the market, Schaumburg-based Motorola could be relegated to the low-margin role of assembling smart phones powered by Windows-based operating systems. New Motorola CEO Edward Zander, a veteran of Microsoft archrival Sun Microsystems Inc., knows the risks. He’s betting that Motorola's software will be ready for the mass market before Windows attracts a wireless following, and that he can spin away from Microsoft intact. No other big cell phone maker was willing to take that bet before Motorola."<br /><br />This article strikes me as very speculative. There are significant advantages of adopting a standardized platform, including (but not limited to) application availability. It remains to be seen how Motorola will be able to handle that and answer other concerns using their Linux-based platform.

[Ed@Brighthand]

There are significant advantages of adopting a standardized platform, including (but not limited to) application availability.

Though Motorola will use a proprietary OS based on Linux, its phones will be able to run Java applications, so software won't have to be written specifically for Motorola devices.

But, as you say, there are other advantages to being on the Microsoft bandwagon. For example, it's easier to convince IT managers to buy your products. Still, most smart phones these days are being bought by consumers, not companies, and consumers frequently have no idea what OS their phone uses.

[surur]

I love the MPx because of its innovative form factor, but will buy it because it runs PPCPE, and I can use all my old software and familiar user interface. I have never added software to any mobile phone before, but buy software for my xda2 all the time. I believe O2 or Orange (mobile phone networks in the UK) found that average revenue per user was 2-3 times higher with xda users than from nokia smartphone users. Thats because the platform is much more usefull, and has better network effects (with regard to exploiting our familiarity and experience with windows, Internet Explorer etc)

The fact that the XDA2 is spreading from O2 to all the other networks here in the UK, tells me that those networks want it, an thats because people can actually use then to access the real internet and run up huge GPRS bills.

The mobile phone manufacturers should get back to building the hardware, and making it innovative (like the MPx) and attract us that way, and stop trying to lock is in to their proprietary offering.

Surur

[mangochutneyman]

This article strikes me as very speculative. There are significant advantages of adopting a standardized platform, including (but not limited to) application availability.

Yes of course...but the point is that this standardized platform can very well by Symbian, Linux or even PalmOS! :wink: In fact if you want to choose a platform today based on overall market share and standardization, you would probably choose Symbian. It seems to me your making a presumption of what kind of standardization you want! But hey that's your perspective and it pays you bills. :wink:

Though Motorola will use a proprietary OS based on Linux, its phones will be able to run Java applications, so software won't have to be written specifically for Motorola devices.

Ed is dead on right here. There have been tons of articles written recently speculating on Motorola's strategy and their reasoning behind their Symbian divesture. It should be noted that Motorola hasn't exclusinvely committed to anything!! They still have several Symbian OS phones coming out as well as Linux and of course MS smartphone. The key for Motorola here is developmental time cycles and time to market. The truth is that no one really knows which of these platforms will be the winner in the market...it's way too early to tell. So companies like Motorola, Samsung etc are making sure they hedge their bets in various platforms. However, it is Java that is seen by Moto and others as the real cross-platform developmental standard. What MS should perhaps more worry about is standardization of Java as opposed to .NET...

[Janak Parekh]

Yes of course...but the point is that this standardized platform can very well by Symbian, Linux or even PalmOS! :wink:
I argue that the installbase of Symbian, Windows Mobile, or Palm OS give them a huge leg up. I understand that Motorola's OS will be capable of running Java applications... but let's take a simple example: how many software vendors will support the J2ME MIDP on a large touchscreen device, like the MPx? There are very few out there today. Contrast that with the "big three" and the huge selection of touchscreen devices. I know that the MIDP has a decent userbase on smaller cell phones, but currently that's used for extremely simple applications. In other words, J2ME has a ways to go before it's the de facto choice for smartphones.

Surur's point is also worth noting. On most MIDP implementations today, the installation mechanisms are locked down so that the wireless provider can dictate the terms of software downloads. As a result, most people don't even leverage that capability in their devices. I remain unconvinced that this solution is superior to other approaches.

--janak

[mangochutneyman]

Yes of course...but the point is that this standardized platform can very well by Symbian, Linux or even PalmOS! :wink:
I argue that the installbase of Symbian, Windows Mobile, or Palm OS give them a huge leg up. I understand that Motorola's OS will be capable of running Java applications... but let's take a simple example: how many software vendors will support the J2ME MIDP on a large touchscreen device, like the MPx? There are very few out there today. Contrast that with the "big three" and the huge selection of touchscreen devices.

Actually I think its the other way around. The install base of Windows Mobile, PalmOS is puny compared with the legions of Java devs out there tons of code available code. If you're handset OEM, I think you would want to make sure you supported a developmental platform with the widest penetration...that is Java today in the mobile handset market.


I know that the MIDP has a decent userbase on smaller cell phones, but currently that's used for extremely simple applications. In other words, J2ME has a ways to go before it's the de facto choice for smartphones.

IMO the greatest obstacle for Java is choose which Java? Unlike what evangelists from Sun will say, the truth is that there are many variations of Java today that has precluded it from becoming the de facto many wanted. But that is changing quickly. All symbian handsets support Java today and even PalmOne's Treo line support IBM's Websphere J2ME...


On most MIDP implementations today, the installation mechanisms are locked down so that the wireless provider can dictate the terms of software downloads. As a result, most people don't even leverage that capability in their devices. I remain unconvinced that this solution is superior to other approaches.


Yes that is a problem with many MS smartphones today isn't it? :wink: This is precisely the reasoning PalmSource is using to attarct lisencees, the leveraging of their install base. Moto, on the other hand, believes the OS is inconsquential and that the real application development will depend on Java.

[Janak Parekh]

Actually I think its the other way around. The install base of Windows Mobile, PalmOS is puny compared with the legions of Java devs out there tons of code available code. If you're handset OEM, I think you would want to make sure you supported a developmental platform with the widest penetration...that is Java today in the mobile handset market.
Actually, you come up with the best counterargument to this:

IMO the greatest obstacle for Java is choose which Java?

I'll be surprised to see a full JVM, given its size requirements, on any smartphone. Ergo, the "tons of code available" isn't really practical.

Yes that is a problem with many MS smartphones today isn't it? :wink:
To the best of my knowledge, actually, vendors have provided unlock mechanisms for most of the Smartphone 2002 devices on the market today. I've heard of no such analogue for J2ME solutions, although I'd be glad to be wrong.

--janak

[mangochutneyman]

Actually I think its the other way around. The install base of Windows Mobile, PalmOS is puny compared with the legions of Java devs out there tons of code available code. If you're handset OEM, I think you would want to make sure you supported a developmental platform with the widest penetration...that is Java today in the mobile handset market.
Actually, you come up with the best counterargument to this:

IMO the greatest obstacle for Java is choose which Java?


Well like I said before, I'm not a blind Java devotee as some others may be but I do think Java has big role to play here. Perhaps if others were less devoted to their OS's here, they would see this too. ;) Also, there very large pressure building on Sun by IBM and others to bring some form of Java to opensource further increasing its development as a standard. I have no idea if this will ever come to fruition, but it is a conceivable senario...


I'll be surprised to see a full JVM, given its size requirements, on any smartphone. Ergo, the "tons of code available" isn't really practical.


Agreed. But perhpas I should have qualified that with the large amount of java code present written for the mobile market...



Yes that is a problem with many MS smartphones today isn't it? :wink:
To the best of my knowledge, actually, vendors have provided unlock mechanisms for most of the Smartphone 2002 devices on the market today. I've heard of no such analogue for J2ME solutions, although I'd be glad to be wrong.

--janak

Well the simple fact that unlock mechanisms are even required for many MS smartphones is indicative of the state of affairs. The truth is that most Java enabled GSM/GPRS mobiles today especially in Europe and Asia are neither carrier locked nor vender locked. Thus I don't think an example of an anologue as refer would be of much importance anyway...

[yslee]

Please, the ton of Java stuff out there is meant for phones with tiny screens, all of which are not interfaced with a touchscreen either.

As it is Motorola is hedging its bets; they have Symbian, Linux and MS OS phones on the market. As far as I'm concerned they're hedging their bets until the market decides upon a winner, whether it's something like Java or PPCPE or Symbian or PalmOS.

[Jason Dunn]

However, it is Java that is seen by Moto and others as the real cross-platform developmental standard. What MS should perhaps more worry about is standardization of Java as opposed to .NET...

Everything I've seen in the market indicates, to me, that Java is a failure in the consumer space as far as applications are concerned. Hell, Macromedia Flash is 500% more successful as a cross-platform solution that Java ever was. I hear people talk about Java a lot, but as a consumer, I don't see it, and if I don't see it, there's no revenue model there.

[juni]

So, if you buy one of these Pocket PC phone edition devices and Motorola decides to switch OS you will be totally without any upgrades when MS updates the OS...

[essopremium]

Two things:

First, I would imagine that the Motorola MPx and MPx100 will not be available as projected "in the second half of 2004", and secondly, and the showstopper, will be Motorola's failure to integrate the "hands-free" Bluetooth profile in either device, which will render them useless with any hands-free Bluetooth link automobile, such as the Acura TL, and some BMW's, equipped to handshake seamlessly with a hands-free Bluetooth profile enabled phone, such as the Nokia 3650, and Sony Ericsson T610 and T616. This seems to be less of a platform issue than a deliberate oversight.

This will be a shamelessly cynical marketing ploy designed by Motorola to shoehorn consumers into purchasing a separate proprietary "car-kit" in order to use these otherwise spectacularly featured phones "hands-free".

Many people don't understand, nor do they comprehend the byzantine connotations and structure of the Bluetooth v1.1 profile protocol stack. While many manufacturers of mobile phones that include "Bluetooth" prominently advertise and tout Bluetooth connectivity, what they don't specify is the quantity and specificity of what Bluetooth PROFILES their devices contain.

What this means is, you could purchase a "Bluetooth" phone, expecting to easily transfer data and voice between similarly equipped devices, however, if the phone you buy does not contain the specific Bluetooth PROFILE designed to interface with your particular need, you're completely stranded.

Motorola could easily engineer all of the current Bluetooth profiles that are associated with the technology, but, you read it here first...they won't.

I hope I'm wrong. Either the MPx or the MPx100 engineered with the "hands-free" Bluetooth profile would be the ultimate convergent device. Let's hope that Motorola gets it right.