Will Nokia Dump Symbian?

[Ed Hansberry]

<a href="http://www.arcchart.com/blueprint/show.asp?id=374&amp;qtabs=99999">http://www.arcchart.com/blueprint/show.asp?id=374&amp;qtabs=99999</a><br /><br /><i>"Nokia’s position as the dominant supplier of Symbian handsets has allowed it to wield effective control over Symbian the company. However, ever since the Finnish giant’s attempt to purchase Psion’s 32% stake was thwarted last year by Symbian’s other shareholders, Nokia’s commitment to the OS appears to have cooled. Since the beginning of the year, Nokia has decided to license ActiveSync directly from Microsoft even though Symbian struck the same deal with Microsoft, and in May, Nokia announced its 770 tablet device running Linux, not Symbian. These developments have led us to speculate whether Nokia might consider dumping Symbian altogether, porting its Series 60 user interface to a Linux platform: a move which would mirror PalmSource’s decision to port its PalmOS to Linux."</i><br /><br />This is a very interesting article that walks you through the recent history of Nokia and Symbian and what Nokia would have to do to wean itself off of the Symbian platform to one that is based on Linux.

[MS Mobiles]

Yes.

[farnold]

What I find quite surprising is this believe in Linux as a safe haven for the future. How can a system that is not backed by a company provide the level of security and guarantee the end user experience required? As a system for people who value the cost of their work at zero $ and are keen to discover how they can change a system - fine. But for the general public...

[Janak Parekh]

How can a system that is not backed by a company provide the level of security and guarantee the end user experience required?
Remember, Linux from their perspective is basically an OS kernel. The rest of the code would be Nokia's to maintain and support. It's hardly a "free" thing.

But for the general public...
From the end-user's perspective, it'd still look and feel like a Series 60 device.

--janak

[guinness]

What I find quite surprising is this believe in Linux as a safe haven for the future. How can a system that is not backed by a company provide the level of security and guarantee the end user experience required? As a system for people who value the cost of their work at zero $ and are keen to discover how they can change a system - fine. But for the general public...

Look at BSD, it's free as well and more secure than Windows will ever be, same with Linux and OSX. Making Linux intuitive and easy to use on phones may be another story.

I like Windows for general tasks, but if I had to rely on it for security purposes, no way.

[farnold]

How can a system that is not backed by a company provide the level of security and guarantee the end user experience required?
Remember, Linux from their perspective is basically an OS kernel. The rest of the code would be Nokia's to maintain and support. It's hardly a "free" thing.
Mate, but a kernal without a thought-through security concept is still like a house without a front-door. Just expecting that NOKIA and others will add that in a reliable way on top of the kernal is like trusting that your neighbours will make sure nobody enters your house.

But for the general public...
From the end-user's perspective, it'd still look and feel like a Series 60 device.
So why Linux kernal then in the first place? Ah, probably because they admit that they cannot write a kernal... what a confession.

Yep, I am quite biased against Linux. For me the believe that someone provides the core component as a free thing is just misleading. There is a very strong commercial interest behind the avoidance of paying i.e. the 12 US$ for Windows CE (I don't know what vendors pay for Symbian). And that is from my persective only ever working over a short period of time to drive down internal costs. Isn't all future oriented invention rather based on the progressive idea to increase revenue instead? Someone is giving up on this, I would say...

[Menneisyys]

If the moving happens at all, it won't happen in the near future - will take some years at least, if at all.

I'm helping a lot of people to get a job in Finland and, therefore, know quite well what is needed. Symbian programmers are by far the most wanted people. Linux? Nope. Almost none.

Much as Linux has also originally been written by a Finn, don't think all Finnish coders/programmers speak Linux as their mother tongue :) They would need a lot of learning too, which won't happen in an hour.

[werty]

So why Linux kernal then in the first place? Ah, probably because they admit that they cannot write a kernal... what a confession.


Actually those Series 40 devices are Nokia only devices.
http://press.nokia.com/PR/200506/998207_5.html

For basic user those models have all the same features...

[Janak Parekh]

Mate, but a kernal without a thought-through security concept is still like a house without a front-door.
I hate to break this to you, but all kernels on the market have had average security track records. Linux's is pretty comparable to others.

Yep, I am quite biased against Linux. For me the believe that someone provides the core component as a free thing is just misleading.
Have you used and/or deployed Linux before reaching this conclusion? I have deployed both Linux and Windows, and the kernels in both are pretty damn stable. The attraction of an open-source solution is customization -- while you can get a XP Embedded or CE kernel, Linux remains attractive due to licensing fees and/or the huge development community that's sprung around the simple fact that they can look at the source.

To me, the attraction of a CE or XP Embedded solution is the "completeness" of the package -- a vendor that wants to get to market quickly buys a solution that works out of the box, a la Windows Mobile. Linux in Smartphones, however, needs far more customization at this point. To some vendors, that's exactly what they want.

You might want to think about this from the opposite perspective before being so conclusive. By being open, Linux is prone to far more security audits from researchers and the like who can easily get their hands on it than a closed-source commercial kernel. Just saying "because it's free" is really missing the point.

Isn't all future oriented invention rather based on the progressive idea to increase revenue instead?
No. And besides, lots of companies are making money on Linux...

--janak

[MyquiH]

So why Linux kernal then in the first place? Ah, probably because they admit that they cannot write a kernal... what a confession.

It's likely not that they can't write a kernel, but that it's a nice leg-up. Linux provides them a free basis for a new OS, which they would basically write from scratch with a Linux distro they choose as a basis for parts of it. However, they would need to write all of the kernel themselves to support their hardware.

My suspicion is that Symbian may not be scaling well as more is asked of it. Phones have merged with PDAs (which is about all Symbian does now), but the immediate future demands that they also incorporate portable gaming systems, music players, etc. It will be a Phone/PDA/PSP/iPod device in less than 2 years. I am wondering if Symbian's rather complex kernel can handle multitasking of this level.

Mike

[twalk]

There are already a few linux kernals for cell phones available (and even in use in shipping products). By using one, Nokia would save about 1/3 the development cost and 9 months dev time.

Still, like the article says, the biggest reason for the switch is to save money. Within a few years, Nokia wants every phone they ship to be a smartphone. Licensing fees for that would be over $250M, which is a LOT of money.

If Nokia does this, it could also indicate a really rough time in the future for WM/SP and PalmOS because of their licensing fees. If Nokia can save $250M+ in the future, that gives them a significant leg up on the competition, and could easily force most of the others to do the same sort of switch.

(Remember, the best solution often doesn't win, it's the cheapest "good enough" solution that usually wins.)

Todd