Windows Phone Thoughts - Daily News, Views, Rants and Raves

Check out the hottest Windows Mobile devices at our Expansys store!


Digital Home Thoughts

Loading feed...

Laptop Thoughts

Loading feed...

Android Thoughts

Loading feed...




Go Back   Thoughts Media Forums > WINDOWS PHONE THOUGHTS > Windows Phone Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-02-2009, 02:01 PM
Ed Hansberry
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Ed Hansberry's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228
Default Closed vs. Open Phone Systems

http://www.fool.com/investing/high-...everything.aspx

The Motley Fool posted an article a few days ago on how Palm could lose everything (haven't they just about done that already?) and what they must do to survive. The main reason I am posting this is the Fool has some research showing that closed systems are crushing open systems in the marketplace. Closed systems are represented by Nokia, Apple and RIM, where the own the operating system and do much if not all of the hardware design. Open systems would include Palm, HTC and Motorola where the software is purchased from a third party, like Microsoft or Google.

This is the exact opposite of the PC world where only Apple owns their own OS. All other PC vendors buy from Microsoft or use a flavor of Linux, and despite all of the media attention on Apple, it is still below 10% of US share, though it is growing, especially in the consumer space.

Years ago when MS got into the phone OS business, they hoped to repeat their desktop success in the mobile device world and to date, aren't even close, while newcomers like Apple and very focused developers like RIM own the top positions. Do you see this trend continuing? What can the open system vendors (MS, HTC, Palm, etc.) do to turn this around? Should MS release their own phone? I know one of the things that really frustrates users is when there is a problem with their Windows Mobile device, Microsoft won't even talk to them. It is the carrier's responsibility to service the consumer, and speaking from experience, in all but the easiest of solutions, the carrier immediately responds with "wipe the devices memory and let's see what that does." That response simply says "I have no clue about this OS we've put on your phone, so just reset it." If MS sold a phone, I suspect they'd be far more inclined to help the user than their OEM partners are.

__________________
text sig
 
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-02-2009, 03:40 PM
Fritzly
Sage
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 740

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry View Post
<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2008/12/30/how-palm-could-lose-everything.aspx' target='_blank'>http://www.fool.com/investing/high-...everything.aspx</a><br /><br /></div><p> Do you see this trend continuing? What can the open system vendors (MS, HTC, Palm, etc.) do to turn this around? Should MS release their own phone? I know one of the things that really frustrates users is when there is a problem with their Windows Mobile device, Microsoft won't even talk to them. </p>
You answered your own question: MS needs to handle directly the OS updates and make them available to customers as they do for the Desktop OS.
What is happening is a classic example of poor industrial planning and, much worse, a denial attitude that does not want to acknowledge the problems in order to avoid criticisms.
 
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-02-2009, 04:20 PM
whydidnt
Pontificator
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,202

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fritzly View Post
You answered your own question: MS needs to handle directly the OS updates and make them available to customers as they do for the Desktop OS.
What is happening is a classic example of poor industrial planning and, much worse, a denial attitude that does not want to acknowledge the problems in order to avoid criticisms.
I don't disagree with this statement, but I think it goes deeper than that. The issue isn't just OS updates. It's that MS can't control the entire user experience the way Apple, Nokia and RIM can. They are dependent on their OEM/Carrier partners to do so, and because of this, the experience is different from one WM device to the next and often less than satisfactory. Too many times the OEMs have released underpowered devices with too little memory to run the OS.

Microsoft's model works in the PC world, because most hardware is generic, and there is a hardware abstraction layer in the OS that enables people to upgrade as necessary, provided a driver is available. This means end users can improve their experience without dependence upon MS, HP, Dell or whoever they bought the PC from. However, with WM, you have very little opportunity to fix things on your own. In my opinion the closed hardware/software model we see from Apple, etc. is superior. It makes it so much easeir for them to make sure everything works, and those things that don't can be addressed directly.

The trade off is in flexibility of the software, but for these devices, the market is speaking, and people are willing to give up software flexibility for an improved overall experience. Microsoft is going to continue hitting it's head against the wall until they wake up and realize that the entire experience needs to be better managed. Either by creating their own "Zune-phone" or implementing much tighter control over hardware/updates/add-ons. If they don't do either the brand will flounder.
 
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-02-2009, 04:21 PM
virain
Philosopher
virain's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 554
Send a message via MSN to virain

Unlike desktop version of MS OS, that is marketed directly to consumer (you can assemble computer yourself without much of a knowledge how it works and spare parts available in any computer store), WM is marketed directly to OEMs. So here's conflict of interests. Consumer wants reliable, responsive, useful and inexpensive device, while manufacturer wants to increase its bottom line selling as much devices as possible and that means keep them more affordable, and solution is to sacrifice performance by using less expansive, hence less powerful and less reliable parts. HTC is a perfect example. Market device on great screen resolution or more powerful processor, but saving money on drivers, memory, or any other auxiliary (headphone jack for example).
In case of mobile devices you can't just go to the store and pick up all the parts you need to assemble your own. I am absolutely against proprietary software running on proprietary hardware (iPhone, Nokia, etc..) So, I believe the problem can be solve by either better control over hardware requirements for OEMs but if MS tighten its grip on them too much OEMs will go for Google Android or something else.
Or releasing WM OS directly to consumer, same way you can buy Vista or XP in any store now. With release of OS to consumer, market will take its natural course. Manufacturers of all the RAMs, ROMs, processors, screens etc.. will release their product directly to consumer (it is good to sell to HTC for $50 but to sell it to regular Joe for $150 is even better), New small "underground" shops that make Mobile devices will grow like mushrooms, some of them will become big and powerful corporations at the end (remember history of Dell), increased competition will leas to cheaper end product and at the end consumer AND MS will be biggest winners.
Yes, you can say that Smartphone is more complicated than your desktop PC, but there are more than enough professional people who CAN build the device, but doesn't have resources. And they could offer them to cunsumer much cheaper than HTC, Asus, Samsung or any other big OEM
__________________
You create your opportunities by asking for them

Last edited by virain; 01-02-2009 at 04:26 PM..
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-02-2009, 10:44 PM
Pony99CA
Swami
Pony99CA's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 4,396
Default Open/Closed or Loosely/Tightly Controlled

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Hansberry View Post
The main reason I am posting this is the Fool has some research showing that closed systems are crushing open systems in the marketplace. Closed systems are represented by Nokia, Apple and RIM, where the own the operating system and do much if not all of the hardware design. Open systems would include Palm, HTC and Motorola where the software is purchased from a third party, like Microsoft or Google.
I don't agree with the Fool's definitions. Open and Closed to me mean the source code, and Windows Mobile isn't "Open" (Android is).

I'd call things Loosely or Tightly Controlled. Apple and RIM tightly control the experience by developing both the hardware and software (I'll leave Nokia out for now because they're moving Symbian to open source). Microsoft loosely controls the experience by developing the software, but only setting minimum requirements on OEMs who develop the hardware. Google may control Android even more loosely (although I don't really know).

I suspect Palm's Nova will be tightly controlled, at least initially. Whether Palm will market the OS to other OEMs remains to be seen.
__________________
Silicon Valley Pocket PC
http://www.svpocketpc.com
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-03-2009, 12:36 AM
hewlpac
Pupil
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 17
Default Phone reliability

It is real simple - People want their phones to work. Microsoft based phones need to be rebooted each day (sometimes more often) to function and that gets real annoying! Closed systems are perceived as more reliable.
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-03-2009, 01:37 AM
Pony99CA
Swami
Pony99CA's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 4,396
Default Selling the OS

Quote:
Originally Posted by virain View Post
Unlike desktop version of MS OS, that is marketed directly to consumer (you can assemble computer yourself without much of a knowledge how it works and spare parts available in any computer store), WM is marketed directly to OEMs. So here's conflict of interests. Consumer wants reliable, responsive, useful and inexpensive device, while manufacturer wants to increase its bottom line selling as much devices as possible and that means keep them more affordable, and solution is to sacrifice performance by using less expansive, hence less powerful and less reliable parts.
But that's also true in the PC world. Microsoft certainly markets Windows to OEMs, and they have the same self-interests as Windows Mobile OEMs.

The fact that a user can buy and install Windows is a difference, but I'm not sure how much that factors in to the equation. Most users don't build their own systems, and I suspect very few upgrade (with both XP and Vista, I think the recommendation has been not to upgrade, but to get the latest if you're buying -- or building -- a new system).

I also don't believe the real issue is generic parts as whydidnt said (PCs can have several different flavors of x86 processors from various chip makers like Intel, AMD, Via, etc.; Windows Mobile devices can have several different flavors of ARM processors from Samsung, Qualcomm, etc.), but limited resources. In older PDAs, maybe there wasn't enough memory to build a robust abstraction layer, so that's why OEMs have to build parts of the OS themselves. Think of it as people programming in Assembler in the bad old days vs. memory-intensive object-oriented frameworks today.

Are we at a point where we can take the next step in making the system less dependent on OEMs and carriers? I don't know, but I certainly hope so.

Steve
__________________
Silicon Valley Pocket PC
http://www.svpocketpc.com
 
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-03-2009, 01:38 AM
Pony99CA
Swami
Pony99CA's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 4,396
Default Reliability

Quote:
Originally Posted by hewlpac View Post
It is real simple - People want their phones to work. Microsoft based phones need to be rebooted each day (sometimes more often) to function and that gets real annoying! Closed systems are perceived as more reliable.
I don't recall having to reboot my Motorola Q every day. Now that I run Sprite Backup, it does get rebooted every day, but it's not any more noticeable than having to unlock the phone each morning (just like if the password timeout expired).

I agree that people want their phones to be reliable, but they should realize that the more the phones become like traditional PCs (including installing unknown software), the less reliable they'll be.

Steve
__________________
Silicon Valley Pocket PC
http://www.svpocketpc.com
 
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-03-2009, 03:14 AM
Ed Hansberry
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Ed Hansberry's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,228

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pony99CA View Post
I don't agree with the Fool's definitions. Open and Closed to me mean the source code, and Windows Mobile isn't "Open" (Android is).
Don't think "open" and "closed" refer to source code only. For example, I think the universe is a closed system, not open. That has nothing to do with the source code of the universe.
__________________
text sig
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-03-2009, 05:08 AM
saurabh0105
Neophyte
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1

I think the bottomline is that, all the OEMs want to increase number of Handsets per user and make money. They dont want to give us the chance of continuing the Hardware with an upgraded softwares. Microsoft is a party to this. Otherwise how in such an Advanced world, microsoft has been unable to find a SOLUTION to a simple task of tweaking its own HOMEGROWN OS to users demands.
Hope sane minds take over that job soon.

Dr. Saurabh Bhardwaj
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:34 PM.