No, it has nothing to do with the old ‘M$’. It has nothing to do with open source vs. commercial software either. My hope does not even have anything to do with my “disinterest” in WP7 right now.

The reason really is much more simple, and pragmatic, than that: whenever Microsoft has been the leader in any market they have all but stopped to innovate. Just to give a couple of examples, look no further than what happened after Microsoft came out victorious from the browser war between Internet Explorer and Netscape. They virtually stopped developing their browser and it was not until Firefox and later Chrome began to gain popularity that Microsoft finally put some effort into improving their browser again. And then of course there is the example of Windows Mobile: after Palm committed suicide by refusing to improve their hardware and software in their devices Microsoft had a window (no pun intended) of opportunity of 2-3 years to get a stronghold of the smartphone market. But instead, seemingly true to their modus operandi, they simply seemed happy that their largest competitor was out of the game and basically put their mobile OS in the drawer to collect dust. And look just how long it took Microsoft to react after that – even Steve Ballmer admitted they were late to the party.

Now I’m not saying that the other players would be any better if any of them became market leaders (just look at Nokia how complacent they became!). On the contrary, if I had to make a bet I would say that they would likely behave in the same way. But that is a supposition – with Microsoft it is a fact. They have proved that on more than one occasion.

Having said that, I really don’t expect either Microsoft nor any of the other players to become so dominant in the smartphone space that they can afford to just sit back and relax. But if one of them were to become the leader then, again, I sincerely hope that it will be Microsoft’s lot to be the chaser.

OK, just for the record: I am completely and utterly unimpressed by Windows Phone 7, and that is putting it gently. I would be hard pressed to even classify it as a smartphone right now, what with the lack of multitasking.

I stated this before on some other site but I will repeat it here again: I would never, with a clean conscience, recommend a WP7 phone in its current incarnation to anyone I know. And I have tried it enough to know. I think that the live tiles are plain boring and very limited compared to widgets, and the Metro UI is appalling – it looks as if the design team came to a complete stop in the middle of the wireframe stage of the design process (wiki).

One of the sacred UI rules on a small screen is to take maximum advantage of the limited screen by displaying the maximum amount of useful information, but instead WP7 have these huge headers in most apps, with a font size that seems to be targeted at the visually impaired. But apparently the Windows Phone 7 team thought that was more important than always displaying the top status bar. How is that good usability?

And while I am at it: I have all but stopped reading comments on WP7 sites as the posters (=WP7 users) sound like they are in a state of as much denial and defensive regarding their platform as your typical iPhone user was, circa 2007, and I have little patience for that.

And for those who have not had the chance to make up their own minds yet, and if you actually are still in doubt about Windows Phone 7, have look at this and this video review of a couple of HTC phones.

Will I be able to look past Metro UI once Mango arrives? That remains to be seen.

Nokia has said that they will have some kind of VIP relationship with Microsoft, and as a result be able to tweak the OS and add their own exclusive features to the platform. That whole argument strikes me as odd for a couple of reasons.

1) Nokia looked for an OS outside the company in part because they supposedly wanted to be able to leave the OS development to someone else so that they could focus on other things they do better, such as hardware; unless adding Nokia’s own “flavor” to WP7 means simple tweaks like some exclusive live tiles or some skinning, it seems as if doing major changes/improvements to the platform (such as adding USB mass storage capability) would require much more of an effort on Nokia’s part and thus contradicting their stated goal.

Now it is fair to argue that adding a certain feature will probably take a significantly less effort than developing a complete OS, so there is nothing odd with that (if Nokia’s tweaks in fact will go that deep into WP7).

2) But assuming that Nokia actually will be allowed add significant, deep level features to the OS that they will not need to share with the other WP7 manufacturers, what is more difficult to grasp is why those other manufacturers (e.g. Samsung, HTC, LG) would want to continue to produce WP7 phones at all given that they would be in a permanent and default disadvantage against Nokia; for them it would be like being in an abusive relationship. I do not see any reason, no incentive, for them to license and manufacture WP7 phones under those conditions. For anyone wanting to buy a WP7 phone, and for the sellers, it would be a no-brainer: Nokia would be the brand to buy and recommend just for those added and exclusive features.

So again, why would the rest of the WP7 manufacturers bother at all with WP7 under that scenario? Obviously they wouldn’t.

And that could explain why both Microsoft and Nokia keep repeating that the other manufacturers are important in the WP ‘ecosystem’, i.e. it could be a false reassurance so that they stay in the game until Nokia starts producing their phones so that WP7 sales don’t stall completely in the meantime. It could also explain HTC’s recent announcement to wind down their WP7 efforts.

Tomi Ahonen has written an interesting post over at his blog – it is very long but relevant for anyone who is truly interested in smartphones, so much that it prompted me, after a looong break from posting (and after having moved to and back from abroad in the meantime), to start posting again and write about my own view of Elop’s decision to go with WP7.

Overall I agree with Tomi, though think that maybe he underestimates the perception of who are the market leaders. Also, one thing is units sold (where Nokia is still the undisputed champion), but another matter is the profit made regardless of the number units sold which (where Apple reigns), and I don’t think he gave that distinction any attention; at the end of the day, it is the profit that matters.

But one of my main issues with with Elop’s decision to go 100% with WP7, which he based on the term ‘ecosystem’ which he constantly keeps throwing around, is that I believe the idea of an ‘ecosystem’, and which obviously stems from Apple’s attempt to create one (i.e. “the walled garden“) is vastly overrated. It’s a buzzword, a fad, that will disappear.

Let me explain. On your PC you don’t have an ‘ecosystem’ nor does anyone think in those terms. What you do have is a platform (=OS) and all you want is simply the tools (=apps) that will allow you to do what you want/need, whether it be the browser or dedicated programs.

Why do people think that it is a good idea to treat smartphones any differently, and even more so when smartphones are becoming more like PCs? Why would I want to be tied to any ‘ecosystem’ to have access to and download my tools (=apps), or upload files, or participate in a social network?

What Apple got right, besides from the UI/usability, was the appstore, i.e. a simple way of finding and downloading the tools/apps that you want or need. But that is it. (Note that an appstore is not the same as an ‘ecosystem’).

Now some people make the case that people want to have a seamless experience on their phone, and that inevitably requires an ‘ecosystem’. But that is not true nor the solution, or at least not the ideal solution. What they *should* be focusing on instead is to create a solid API so that the app developers can provide that experience (if the platform creators haven’t already, that is).

Nokia had the clout to bring that open platform, with superior hardware, to the masses (probably in the shape of MeeGo) but, as Tomi notes, they failed miserably with the execution. But that doesn’t mean the idea was wrong.

So even though Elop is absolutely right about that drastic changes are needed in Nokia (especially note the last paragraph in the link), the solution is not to copy the other players, but rather to drastically change the organization in order to quickly get Nokia to execute on that broader, greater vision that goes beyond ‘ecosystems’ (think what Google did on the PC). Now that doesn’t happen overnight obviously and in the meantime they would have needed to do a lot of firefighting which could very well have included adopting WP7 or Android in some way, but certainly not to the extent and fashion that Elop executed it; e.g. imagine Nokia doing their very best to create the best speced Android phone on the market (aka. a Samsung G2 but with a better camera, perhaps a keyboard, etc.); Samsung will be selling millions of their high-end G2, with high profit margins, so why wouldn’t Nokia do equally well or better while they get their act together?

© 2011 MobileInfoPlanet Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha