digithoughts:

MWC 2012: Microsoft and Nokia et al. need to step up
The MWC in Barcelona 2012 is almost over. Phone vendors are pushing Android devices everywhere. Low-end, high-end, mid-end and experimental phones are all running Android. Except for the Symbian based Nokia 808 with its 41 MP camera sensor. The biggest Windows Phone 7 introductions at the MWC were two budget oriented devices, the Nokia Lumia 610 and the ZTE Orbit. 
There is nothing wrong in going after a wider audience by covering more price points; it’s just that there are no high-end WP7 devices to begin with. Don’t get me wrong, the Nokia Lumia 800 is a nice phone. But so is the even better spec’d iPhone 4 from 2010. Windows Phone 7 devices are lagging behind with relatively low spec’d screens, processing power and lack of front facing cameras (on most phones). High-end WP7 phones barely match mid-end Android or iOS devices. 
In order to succeed, computing platforms need momentum and network effect. Users/buyers attract more developers to push out great apps which attract more buyers which attract more developers etc etc. How do you get that momentum going? Well it’s hard, but the first thing you need is hit products. Hit products such as the iPhone 3G, the HTC Hero (in Europe), the original Motorola Droid (in the US) and the Samsung Galaxy S. Devices that eat their way into the consumer mindshare. It is great to have lower-end devices available as well. As a complement. But it’s the hit products that get the ball rolling. Windows Phone 7 had a late start in the race of modern mobile operating systems and Microsoft and device vendors need to push even harder than the competition in order to catch up. In my mind, the system is almost there; just give a device geek like me a reason to buy into it. 
Graph: Asymco

Windows 8 needs a hit phone, or it’s dead.

digithoughts:

MWC 2012: Microsoft and Nokia et al. need to step up

The MWC in Barcelona 2012 is almost over. Phone vendors are pushing Android devices everywhere. Low-end, high-end, mid-end and experimental phones are all running Android. Except for the Symbian based Nokia 808 with its 41 MP camera sensor. The biggest Windows Phone 7 introductions at the MWC were two budget oriented devices, the Nokia Lumia 610 and the ZTE Orbit. 

There is nothing wrong in going after a wider audience by covering more price points; it’s just that there are no high-end WP7 devices to begin with. Don’t get me wrong, the Nokia Lumia 800 is a nice phone. But so is the even better spec’d iPhone 4 from 2010. Windows Phone 7 devices are lagging behind with relatively low spec’d screens, processing power and lack of front facing cameras (on most phones). High-end WP7 phones barely match mid-end Android or iOS devices. 

In order to succeed, computing platforms need momentum and network effect. Users/buyers attract more developers to push out great apps which attract more buyers which attract more developers etc etc. How do you get that momentum going? Well it’s hard, but the first thing you need is hit products. Hit products such as the iPhone 3G, the HTC Hero (in Europe), the original Motorola Droid (in the US) and the Samsung Galaxy S. Devices that eat their way into the consumer mindshare. It is great to have lower-end devices available as well. As a complement. But it’s the hit products that get the ball rolling. Windows Phone 7 had a late start in the race of modern mobile operating systems and Microsoft and device vendors need to push even harder than the competition in order to catch up. In my mind, the system is almost there; just give a device geek like me a reason to buy into it. 

Graph: Asymco

Windows 8 needs a hit phone, or it’s dead.

The Point Of Social Leverage Is Mobile?

I see that my old friend, Keith Teare, has written a guest post at Techcrunch, making the case that Facebook and Google have inherent ‘structural’ problems in the way they manage information sharing which have become starkly apparent with Google’s new privacy policy and Facebook’s endless privacy issues.

Keith Teare, Google, Facebook, Privacy — And You

There is a big structural problem for both Google and Facebook as they contemplate the product consequences of consumer reactions to their product roadmap. In a centralized platform it is incredibly hard to create easy-to-understand controls that give each user the ability to control, at a granular level, what they share and who with. Grand policy shifts, like that which came out of F8 and which we are now seeing from Google, tend to assume all users are the same and will want the same thing.

In reality, users are more complex. I might want to save a private video to a personal storage space one moment, share something with a select group of friends another moment, and broadcast something to the world five minutes later. The web services infrastructure that both Facebook and Google are based on does not easily permit such fine grained control for users without also imposing serious effort. As we all know, that leads users to stick with the default settings most of the time.

So, despite good intent by the teams at both companies, one-size-fits-all decisions are the norm.

Mobile to the rescue?

Structural problems usually require structural solutions. What it seems consumers are asking for is a world in which we all know what we are sharing and who with — but where we don’t have to do a huge amount of work to achieve that. Google Circles seems to be a nod in this direction as are Facebook’s groups. But neither is really easy enough or sufficiently integrated into the flow of the products to really solve the problem. Both require a huge management overhead.

As I argued earlier this week in “Google, Look Out Behind You!“, the spread of smartphones may be part of the solution here. Hundreds of millions of consumers are now carrying around connected still and video cameras with lists of contacts in the address book, often already organized into meaningful groups. Decentralized decision-making is very easy when there are decentralized software clients under the unique control of each user. The ability to be private one moment, selectively share the next and then publicly broadcast a few minutes later is easy to achieve in this decentralized software architecture. And service providers can never become bad actors — simply because they do not own our information or the full social graph. The cloud becomes a means of delivering messages to the phones and the place where we store our media. But it’s not the place we need to trust to make decisions about what gets shared and who with.

So, Keith broadly paints a picture — users being forced into an oversimplified social architecture by Google and Facebook in which groups (or circles, which are a slightly different take on groups) are the mechanism of sharing — and hints that the problem is intractable for web-based social tools.

The answer is smartphones, he suggests: our personal devices, which we already use in myriad ways to connect with and share with others. He must believe — without saying so explicitly — that the solution lies in observing what we share and with who on our smartphones, and to refine that natural body of information into a bottom-up determination of who’s who in our world.

Imagine a Venn diagram of dozens — or hundreds — of sets of friends, where any friend could be in zero to all the sets, and all the sets are constantly in flux. And without us having to create all the scaffolding for it to work.

Obviously, Teare is not content to wave his hand at this: he’s started a company to actually build the solution:

Keith Teare, Seed and Series A Funding

just.me is a new architecture built on top of the mobile, and particularly the smartphone, ecosystem. It doesn’t take the web as its starting point, it takes the highly personal and ever-present mobile Internet as its starting point. As such it is focused on defining a new consumer software experience, not replacing an existing one. It is also focused on the freedom that comes from placing social tools on a device the consumer fully controls, and not building a big cloud service that owns or acts on the consumers data. We don’t know all of the questions this gives rise to yet, never mind all of the answers. But we are really excited about building on this new ecosystem and learning with users as we go.

I’ve been suggesting that the next wave for social networks is the social operating system — where exactly the problems that Teare is talking about are solved by building social primitives into the foundation of our online experience — but Teare is pushing at a transitional step, based on the mobile device as the logical point of leverage in the transition to the next generation of social tools.

Someday all of our technology will learn to emotionally manipulate us. Your smart phone is already doing it. Your desktop computer has been doing it for years. As your possessions learn to fill your emotional void, your need for the comfort of other humans will continue to decrease. Eventually we’ll be a society of sociopaths. I’m already halfway there.

- Scott Adams

(via alysonsmediadiet:notational)

emergentfutures:

CHART OF THE DAY: Android Is Blowing Everyone Away
Android’s share of the smartphone market is still blowing away all competitors in the U.S. according to new data from comScore. The only company that’s hanging on is Apple, which saw its share of the market tick up ever so slightly.
Full Story: Business Insider

Everything is dead but Apple and Google’s Android. That’s the near future.

emergentfutures:

CHART OF THE DAY: Android Is Blowing Everyone Away

Android’s share of the smartphone market is still blowing away all competitors in the U.S. according to new data from comScore. The only company that’s hanging on is Apple, which saw its share of the market tick up ever so slightly
.

Full Story: Business Insider

Everything is dead but Apple and Google’s Android. That’s the near future.

Why Microsoft should buy RIM: to take on Apple - The Globe and Mail

Fabrice Taylor agrees with my suggestion:

Let’s start with RIM. It pretty much invented the smart phone and had the market all to itself for almost a decade. But it didn’t take Apple long to surpass our technological crown jewel in both sales and consumer appeal. RIM should have had a big lead; instead it’s playing catch-up, with phones and tablets.

And that’s a tough fight. RIM, with a market value of $24-billion (U.S.), is a bantamweight trying to avoid a knockout punch from heavyweight Apple, with its market cap of $320-billion. That’s not a winning proposition, especially when the heavyweight is not only far bigger, but also faster and more nimble.

[…]

Microsoft’s problem is similar to RIM’s. It’s not exactly a hotbed of innovation. When is the last time it invented anything? It spent billions on music players, smart phones, the Xbox and other things, with results ranging from complete failure (in most cases) to questionable success in others (notably Xbox).

None of this really mattered because Microsoft could always rely on its two cash cows – Windows and Office – to churn out profits.

But just as computing moved from the desktop to the laptop, which didn’t hurt Microsoft, it’s now moving from the computer to the smart phone and tablet, which will hurt because Mr. Ballmer’s company has come up short in both areas. The race is over, and Microsoft was never really a contender.

It’s obvious. Just a matter of when.

Nokia’s Dilemma

Buried in a long, long piece about Stephen Elop’s challenges at Nokia, is the following characterization of the balancing act that might undo his efforts:

Georgina Prodhan and Tarmo Virki, Welcome to Nokia, Mr. Elop

Nokia has an enormous number of older, more basic phones in circulation, and it likes to make new features back-compatible for the mass market, taking up valuable research and development time and money.

That presents a dilemma: on the one hand, Nokia needs to focus its efforts more closely on the top end of the market, the high-spending North Americans and the Europeans who have traded their Nokias for iPhones and BlackBerrys; on the other, it is enormously proud of its size and the trust it commands among the 1.2 billion people who use Nokia phones and the more than one million people a day who buy a Nokia — more than its three nearest rivals combined.

Any move to slash the portfolio or take resources away from the bottom end of the market would cut at the heart of what many Nokians believe in and work for. That means that even as he goes after Apple and Google, Elop will have to celebrate and build on the company’s successes elsewhere.

“Nokia needs to Americanize while simultaneously protecting its assets in the rest of the world. An injection of Silicon Valley attitude will play well in the United States, but the company must take care not to unsettle staff in Europe and elsewhere,” says Neil Mawston, analyst at research firm Strategy Analytics.

There’s the nub. Nokia has built its mission around delivering billions of low-cost ‘dumb’ phones to the world market, largely missing the surge in smartphones in the US and elsewhere. These are high cost, full featured micro computers, and Nokia doesn’t have a place at that table.

But this is the future. The world’s masses of, say, five years from now will be using phones that resemble today’s top-of-the-line smartphones, not today’s bottom-of-the-barrel dumbphones. They will have web browsers, GPS, touch screens, streaming video, cameras, and book software: tomorrow’s phones they won’t be used principally for telephone calls.

Unless Nokia wants to wink out of existence, Elop is going to have to make a sudden right turn, and a lot of Nokia’s management team — and the corporate DNA — will have to be jettisoned.

Kevin O’Brien, Nokia’s New Chief Faces Culture of Complacency

A few years before Apple introduced the iPhone, research engineers at Nokia prepared a prototype of an Internet-ready, touch-screen handset with a large display, which they thought could give the company a powerful advantage in the fast-growing smartphone market.

The prototype was demonstrated to business customers at Nokia’s headquarters in Finland as an example of what was in the company’s pipeline, according to a former employee who made the 2004 presentation in Espoo.

But management worried that the product could be a costly flop, said the former employee, Ari Hakkarainen, a manager responsible for marketing on the development team for the Nokia Series 60, then the company’s premium line of smartphones. Nokia did not pursue development, he said.

[…]

His [Elop’s] biggest obstacle, according to Mr. Hakkarainen, as well as two other former employees and industry analysts, may well be Nokia’s stifling bureaucratic culture. In interviews, Mr. Hakkarainen and the other former employees depicted an organization so swollen by its early success that it grew complacent, slow and removed from consumer desires. As a result, they said, Nokia lost the lead in several crucial areas by failing to fast-track its designs for touch screens, software applications and 3-D interfaces.

In 2004, one said, the company rejected an early design for a Nokia online applications store — an innovation that Apple, Nokia and other handset makers adopted three years later. Nokia also did not improve its Symbian operating system, needed to support a more sophisticated smartphone. And though it introduced the industry’s first touch-screen devices in 2003 — the 6108 and 3108 phones, which worked with a stylus — it did not perfect the technology to fingertip precision before Apple did.

Nokia still lacks a convincing response to the iPhone. Last week it announced that software errors would delay shipments of its long-awaited N8 touch-screen phone.

It doesn’t matter if the company was once worth $250B, and sells 1 million crappy phones a day. There must be five companies in China doing that right now. Maybe ten.

It is unclear if Elop’s Nokia can turn on a dime and challenge Apple, Google, Microsoft and RIM.

My advice for Elop would be to acquire RIM, and leverage its brand in the professional world, while expanding its cachet as a texter’s device. But I bet he’s going to get sucked into a Nokia design-from-the-bottom-up approach, though.

Elop Joins Nokia as CEO: Which Way Will He Lead It?

Image representing Stephen Elop as depicted in...
Stephen Elop

So, Nokia finally boosts Kallasvuo and hires its first non-Finnish CEO, Microsoft’s Stephen Elop, which is perhaps a turning point for both companies.

Elop led the Microsoft Business Division which reported $18.6B in sales and $11.8B in operating income. He is just the most recent of senior executives fleeing the sinking Microsoft.

And at Nokia, is he going to try to displace the faltering RIM as the purveyor of choice to business smart phones? Microsoft tried that market, and hasn’t gotten far, but obviously, there are a lot of business people out there across the world with Nokia products ringing in their pockets right now.

Elop does not seem to be the guy to go after Apple or Google for the emerging consumer smartphone market, however. Even the recent acquisition of Dopplr’s Marco Artisaari as SVP of Design does not lead to a team that can really compete on innovation with Apple and Google.

Dan Frommer sums this up a bit aggressively, stating that Elop is not the right guy for the world confronting Nokia. But then again, who would be?

Nokia Makes The Same Mistake Again: Hires A Manager, Not A Product Visionary

The standard criticism we hear about Nokia is that it’s a company overrun with managers, where decisions are always made based on business sense and never made based on product vision.

And it seems like Nokia’s board just hired another CEO who is a seasoned manager, but not a consumer product visionary. So unless Stephen Elop, Nokia’s new boss, has hidden talents, he may represent more of the same for Nokia — which would be a disaster.

Nokia needs someone who can leapfrog Apple’s iPhone and Google’s Android the way they leapfrogged Nokia. Is Elop that guy?

I am not sure that this is the only path for Nokia.

There are still a lot of green fields out there for low-cost phones, as well as a serious competitor for RIM. And Apple and Google’s battlefield for the expensive smartphone market might be a bad place to be, for the next few years.

I wonder if Elop will drop Symbian and try to head out for a new take on a Nokia operating platform? Will he lead a huge reduction in Nokia management ranks? Will he create a new design team, and make sure it’s not based in Finland? Let’s see.

But I thought Elop’s comments about Finland and Canada, his native country, having the Arctic in common were odd. Did he intend that as some sort of cultural sop to Finnish pride?