In this posting, I’d like to review some approaches for choosing the answer to the following question:
- Which mobile software platform will have the leading position worldwide in 2012?
In more detail, the question asks: Which mobile software platform will power the devices and applications that will generate, around 2012:
- The most profits
- The most network traffic
- The most innovation
- The biggest buzz
- The largest popular acclaim…?
For some people, it’s a bit of occasional fun to debate answers to this question.
For other people, this question doesn’t count as ‘fun’; on the contrary, it’s very serious. These people have to weigh up major investment decisions. Should they be significantly investing, now, in acquiring skills and resources and expertise in mobile operating system A? Or should they invest instead in mobile operating system B, or C, or…? That’s what’s on the minds of many senior managers and strategists in handset vendors, network operators, silicon manufacturers, solutions providers, and professional services companies around the world.
The reason it’s a serious question, for people in such positions, is that it can take a considerable amount of time before there’s a substantial payback from an investment in a mobile operating system.
An initial investment phase – to grow a team, to carry out research and familiarisation projects, to develop incremental IP (Intellectual Property), to build tangible connections with partner companies, and so on – is typically followed by one or more additional investment phases – to improve internal processes, to deepen expertise, to debug and optimise solutions, to re-factor an in-house platform, to find new preferred partner companies, to build a range of product variants, and so on. Product development teams may need to be kept together for longer than initially expected:
- Because of delays in the platform software release schedule;
- Because of delays in operator approval or compliance certification of a product;
- And/or because a product originally envisaged turns out to be just another “me too” offering in a crowded marketplace, needing more differentiation before it can appeal to customers.
Underlying all these potential delays is the pervasive complexity of mobile technology and the hyper competitiveness of the mobile marketplace.
Of course, each provider of mobile operating systems platforms wants to reduce the amount of investment required from users of the platform. For example, the Symbian Foundation has a series of initiatives to make it easier for developers, manufacturers, and service providers to speedily create and bring to market high-quality Symbian-powered solutions. As these initiatives bear fruit, it will reduce the investment required to be a major player in the Symbian world. However, let’s be clear: as one set of issues is simplified, new sets of issues are arising all the time. That’s the nature of the fast-changing mobile market. New breakthroughs keep injecting fresh complications for companies who seek leading positions in the smart mobile device space: new technologies, new protocols, new UI paradigms, new dominant use cases, new market expectations, new competitive pressures…
Incidentally, if it turns out to be easy to create smart mobile solutions, there will be thousands of companies who create these solutions. From one viewpoint, that’s a great outcome. But if thousands of companies are all creating very similar solutions, there’s little scope for these companies to stand out from the crowd, and to reliably generate profits. So any company that does want to stand out from the crowd, with a fair chance of significant (ongoing) profits from mobile, must be prepared for a period of upfront investment:
- Navigating the learning curve for the latest mobile technologies;
- Understanding how the mobile industry works in practice (rather than just in theory);
- Acquiring and retaining dedicated technical specialists and product engineers;
- Developing, testing, and refining add-on technology;
- Building probably not just one but several generations of solution.
This takes me back to the original question:
- Which mobile software platform will have the leading position, worldwide, in 2012?
It’s a question that is frequently covered by press, analysts, and bloggers. No wonder: there’s a lot of money riding on the outcome. A company that bets right will be well placed to reap substantial rewards, as the operating system is found at the heart of ever more valuable families of mobile devices. A company that bets wrong risks being sidelined by history. The question deserves a serious answer.
Anecdotal evidence
The first approach to answering this question is to collect and share anecdotes and reviews. Person X has a great experience with Device D (built from software platform P). Person Y has a poor experience with Device E (built from software platform Q). But Reviewer Z liked Device E, and hated Device D. And so on. The blogosphere and twitterverse are full of such anecdotes.
Not to be left out of this exchange of anecdotes, let me offer two of my own.
First, consider the Nokia E71 – which I find to be a very fine mobile phone for my own usage purposes. It has a UI which includes numerous small nice enhancements from predecessor Nokia products such as the E61 and E61i. The E71 has become like an extension of my right arm, as I one-handedly manoeuvre through different application displays while I make my way through the streets and railways of London or the corridors and stairways of the Symbian offices. Email, web, twitter, maps, camera… – all are just a few thumb presses away. I’ve experimented switching to different phones, but none (so far) has the ease of utility and the power of functionality that the E71 delivers, so I keep reverting to it.
I’m not alone in liking this phone. A couple of days ago, ITProPortal published an article: “Nokia E71 Review : A Near Perfect QWERTY Smartphone?“ Here’a an excerpt:
The phone – which was released last year – has received a number of accolades from experts inlcuding the Editors and Readers’ Choice from Cnet.co.uk, Phone of the Year and the Best Smartphone at the 2008 Mobile Choice Consumer Awards and WIRED Magazine’s 2008 Best of Test.
The first thing you notice about it is how different it is from the run of the mill Nokia family, even when compared to the more expensive Nokia N series family. The E71’s chassis has more metal parts than any other phones I’ve used before and this, combined with its classy chrome finish, means that it looks much posher than its price would lead you to believe.
…we feel that the E71 is an excellent all rounder that’s available at a great price.
Second, consider the Nokia N86. Like the E71, the N86 is Symbian-powered. Over the weekend, I assisted a close friend in picking a new phone from a local Carphone Warehouse (an independent mobile phone retailer). The N86 turned out to be a real joy – full of features that brought a smile to my friend’s face. I was asked to help setup the email – the process turned out to be a doddle. (I thought to myself, “Oh, that finished quickly, I wonder what the next step is”, but it turned out that no further configuration was needed.) Best of all, no fewer than two different operators competed to win this contract – both saying that the N86 was a great phone for mobile Internet usage, and they would offer a special low-cost flat-fee deal, providing unlimited data usage.
As reviewer Rafe Blandford recently remarked:
The fact remains that the N86 is a very impressive, even desirable device. As the latest evolution in Nokia’s dual slider form factor (and as a true multimedia powerhouse) it has something of a ‘classic’ feel, but it also benefits greatly from the maturity of a device with ancestry…
If you’re looking for a consumer-focussed, non-touchscreen smartphone, then I think the N86 is a very strong contender and is, arguably, the best device that money can buy.
And in terms of “buzz” – as measured by clicks from webpage readers onto product details – it’s noteworthy that three out of the top four smartphones, in July 2009, are Nokia devices running Symbian OS – according to data just released by Brighthand: the E63, the 5800 Xpress Music, and the E71. With the N97 and E75 also in the top ten, it’s a pretty impressive showing for the Symbian platform!
Trend analysis
Individual reviews and anecdotes can be suggestive, but cannot be decisive, to answer the question of which mobile software platform will have the leading position worldwide in 2012. Given any review that favours (say) the Symbian platform, someone can point to another review that finds fault in that platform.
This brings us to the second approach to answer this question – the approach of trend analysis. A trend analyst seeks to aggregate individual observations and pieces of market data, and then make projections into the future. For example, someone might reason as follows:
- Nokia smartphone market share has historically been large, but is presently falling;
- Apple iPhone and Google Android market share has historically been small, but is presently rising;
- Therefore, other things being equal, Apple iPhone and Google Android will in due course overtake Nokia.
Essentially this kind of thinking can be found in the recent BusinessWeek piece by Olga Kharif and Andy Reinhardt, “Nokia: Outsmarted on Smartphones“. To quote:
Is Nokia losing its mojo? The Finnish company has been the largest mobile-phone maker in the world for more than a decade, and it remains a financial juggernaut with $70 billion (€49.6 billion) in revenue. But Nokia is losing ground in the fast-growing and lucrative smartphone business. Apple, Research In Motion, and companies such as HTC that use Google’s Android operating system have come on strong, creating a serious challenge for the industry leader. “Apple has (created) a superior user experience; Android is also gaining a lot of traction,” says Jari Honko, an analyst at eQ Bank in Helsinki. “Yes, Nokia is in trouble in smartphones.”
Nokia is unlikely to lose its top spot in mobile phones. But it could see revenues and profits suffer if Apple takes over as the largest player in smartphones, which some analysts believe could happen. Generator Research, a British consulting firm, forecasts that Nokia’s share of smartphones will slide from about 40% now to 20% by 2013, while Apple climbs into the top spot. “If Nokia gets dispositioned in the segment and Apple starts calling the shots—which is what’s happening now—you are going to start seeing [a larger] impact in three to four years,” says Andrew Sheehy, co-founder of Generator…
But the problem with this type of analysis is that you need to presume that “other things will be equal” – that trends will continue without disruption, and that the future will be a simple projection of the past. That’s a dangerous assumption.
One example: there used to be a trend that manufacturers of desktop computers generally over-reached themselves and failed when trying to enter the top-of-range mobile phone market. It used to be the case that these manufacturers under-estimated how difficult it is to create successful top-of-range mobile phones. Being aware of this trend, many in the phone industry expected Apple to come unstruck on entering the phone market with the iPhone. Famously, Ed Colligan, Palm CEO at the time, gave voice to this prediction, in remarks to the San Jose Mercury News in November 2006:
Responding to questions from New York Times correspondent John Markoff at a Churchill Club breakfast gathering Thursday morning, Colligan laughed off the idea that any company – including the wildly popular Apple Computer – could easily win customers in the finicky smart-phone sector.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.”
That prediction made a kind of sense from a trend analysis point of view, but fell foul of the steps Apple was taking to disrupt the trends.
Another example (which, as it happens, shows Palm management in better light): the fortunes of Palm in the mobile device space seemed for several years to be on the decline. A trend analysis prediction would count them out of playing any significant role several years into the future. However, by unveiling a significantly altered mobile operating system platform – WebOS – earlier this year, Palm have improved their chances of bucking that trend.
Similarly, many trend analyses of the prospects for Symbian platform future success under-estimate the potential importance of no less than three significant transformations within the Symbian platform. Each of these transformations will mean that the future will not be a simple projection of the past, and they refute the suggestion that “other things will be equal“.
Three transformations
The first transformation is that application development on Symbian devices will change from one software system – called S60 Avkon – to another one, called Qt Orbit. S60 Avkon has the reputation of being difficult for developers to learn. Qt has a very different heritage and is well liked by large numbers of software developers – many coming from far outside the existing Symbian world. Orbit is an extension library for Qt, which contains more than 50 UI elements freshly tailored for contemporary mobile user experience, and which will provide a replacement for the existing “Avkon” UI element set.
The second transformation is to change to a new UI model, called “DirectUI“. To quote from the Development Proposal for DirectUI (available from the Symbian Developer Network):
Direct UI is about redesigning S60 applications to follow a new paradigm, to clearly modernize them and to have technology transition to use Orbit and Qt.
Redesigning applications means that application priorities and placement on UI are considered carefully and most important functionalities are brought to be the most visible ones. Idea is that it should be faster to access content and to choose related essential functionalities quickly.
Deeper reasoning behind redesign is that existing applications are based on device UI style defined decade ago. Since that competition landscape has changed and evolution on top of existing applications is not enough but more aggressive step is needed.
Having Direct UI paradigm in applications is vital due to the fact that it has quickly become de-facto in the marketplace. Direct UI paradigm with couple of sentences is: Touch the screen and that particular function is activated, no double-clicking (click to choose, then click to confirm) allowed on Direct UI. There also no visible focus available unless object is touched. Then “focus” appears as confirmation that touch event took place and execution has started.
Applications are rewritten using Orbit widgets and Qt APIs to replace old applications written with Avkon. Orbit and Qt are being used because of wide existing developer base (~300 000 3rd party developers), its suitability for different platforms, good existing tooling and simplicity of development making development faster than in current S60 environment.
Each of the first two transformations are far-reaching and highly trend-disruptive, but the third transformation is potentially the most significant of the three. It’s the adoption of open source for the entire Symbian platform – including operating system, tools, middleware, UI frameworks, and applications. The intent of this transformation is to bring into existence a much improved “innovation engine” for Symbian platform software. This engine can accept input from a much larger and wider group of contributors than before. The benefit will be both quantitative and qualitative:
- The absolute number of contributors will grow considerably;
- The types of ideas these contributors will consider and provide will be far beyond those that would be entertained inside the corporate mindset of any one company (no matter how open-minded the culture there).
All three of these transformations will take time to come to fruition. That increases the difficulty in forecasting their impact. Is there anywhere to turn for greater certainty?
Capability analysis
To recap: individual anecodes and reviews can be suggestive, but not decisive, in predicting the future success of various mobile software platforms. Trend analysis suffers from limitations too. Both these methods of forecasting can be caught out by the creation of new innovation engines – by the emergence of new or significantly improved models for developing software.
In fact, I don’t believe there is any infallible forecasting method for the mobile space. Anyone who speaks with utter conviction about the future outcome is speaking more from faith than from reason. There are so many little things that could happen, which are impossible to predict, which then escalate with larger and larger repercussions. It’s similar to how a butterfly’s beating wings, on one continent, can in principle give rise to a raging hurricane in another continent. Small changes in the mobile world can unexpectedly generate hurricanes too (of sorts). (Think of the emerging virtual hurricane over Apple’s decision to reject the Google Voice application from the AppStore.)
In this sense, I believe that “the future is open”: nothing is firmly set. There are credible future scenarios in which the Symbian platform is the leading mobile software platform in 2012, and credible future scenarios is which it is not.
However, I recommend that forecasters consider a “capability analysis”, and weigh up the various mobile software platforms against six broad criteria.
I’ll conclude this article by listing these six capabilities, and in each case, stating my aspiration for the status of Symbian regarding that capability. In aggregate, they provide what I see as the “reasons to choose” the Symbian platform.
Independence: Which software platform is least likely to have its evolution controlled by a single corporation or organisation that fails to share common goals with the mobile industry as a whole?
- Symbian: Open foundation governance
Technology: Which software platform delivers superior performance, battery life, security, low defect count, improved user experience…?
- Symbian: Designed for mobile; 10 years maturity
Commercial: Which software platform results in low total cost of development, manufacture, deployment, and maintenance; and which provides good opportunities for value-adding differentiation?
- Symbian: Complete and competitive; Freedom to create
Reliability: Which software platform is likely to be delivered on schedule and to pre-agreed quality levels, in fulfilment of a multi-year evolutionary roadmap of changes?
- Symbian: Track record of skills and software discipline
Ecosystem: Which software platform has the most vibrant and productive movement of developers and users supporting it?
- Symbian: Rich runtimes, new tools, publishing initiative, level-playing field, opportunity for all
Renewal: Which software platform is most capable of ongoing renewal and is building the swiftest engine for innovation?
- Symbian: Open for innovation.
Which software is least likely to have its evolution controlled by corporations or organisations that fail to share common goals with your company?
One of the best articles I’ve read about competing mobile ecosystems. As an outsider to some aspects of mobile OS development and deployment (but by no means an outsider to the industry) I would like to make these observations about your conclusion.
Independence: I must admit that I like the governance model in place for Symbian. I don’t see how I – as an interested party – could ever contribute to, say, iPhone or Windows mobile. But with Android, there is an open discussion by the community about features they want and bugs they need fixed. What will make Symbian stand out is how it let “little guys” have a say in its growth. If there’s a $5,000 fee to sit at the table, that may well put otherwise competent people off – simply because they’re not employed by a large company.
However, Apple’s strength is in its pig-headedness. It doesn’t have to give consideration to anyone other than itself. While I’m sure that there are committees slaving away in Apple HQ – they’re answerable only to themselves. Will Symbian get stuck like the W3C sometimes is over whose proprietary software to use? Which toolkit a vendor is plugging? etc?
Technology: “Symbian: Designed for mobile; 10 years maturity”. Agreed. But how often will the Symbian Foundation say “That’s the way we’ve always done it!”? Part of Nokia’s trouble is they have got in a rut and have been late with a number of simple developments (screen auto-rotation).
Commercial: Again, no question that if Symbian OS can be got at a similar price point to Android it will be a real contender. But as Android users will find out – and Symbian users know to their cost – an application developed for one device won’t always work on the next model. Up or down. iPhone users will be spared this – for now – only because there’s a monoculture for their platform.
Reliability: “Symbian: Track record of skills & software discipline”. AFAIK, there’s no *public* changelog for Symbian. There are plenty of unofficial sources for bug lists and bug fix lists – but I don’t see anything out in the open. Unless one is an insider, there’s no way to really know if Symbian has historically kept to their deadlines. Admittedly, this is a problem all manufacturers face. With the possible exception of Linux.
Ecosystem: This is the real challenge. A few years ago I tried to write a simple app for my N95. I couldn’t even get to “Hello World”. No central tutorials, no help, high fees, no credible deployment solution. In short, an unpleasant experience. Compare that with Android; I was literally compiling my first app within an hour. I’m told that Apple is fairly easy as well.
Now, there’s no doubt that there are a huge amount of developers working on Symbian – but do you have the PR muscle to convince neophytes that they should be working for your phones rather than your “sexy” competitors’? Can your environment ensnare people with its ease of use and helpful community?
Renewal. Again, Symbian is renewing itself, no doubt. It is the only phone OS I know of with such a long pedigree. It has outlasted PalmOS, LiMo, all manner of proprietary systems. The only software I can think of which competes in longevity is Windows Mobile. The less said about that, the better!
Symbian is currently installed on millions upon millions of phones. That’s a terrific starting base. If you can convince customers that their next phone will be familiar but better, you’re on to a winner.
Even better – give old N70s and P910is a new lease of life with new Symbian OSes for them. Old phones rarely die – they get passed on. Will they keep growing with their new users?
I am really excited to see where Symbian heads next. It would be a very dull industry with just Apple and Google slugging it out – although some commentators seem to believe that is the current reality!
Terence
(Disclaimer, I work for Vodafone, I don’t speak for them)
I’ve noticed that the hyperlink to the Nokia N86 page (at “Second, consider the Nokia N86…”) is non-functional (it points to http:/// instead of http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/devices/nokia-n86-8mp or http://www.nokia.co.uk/find-products/all-phones/nokia-n86-8mp).
Thanks for reporting that broken link Tyson – I’ve now fixed it.
// David W.
Very well written. I’ve been working on something similar for a couple of days but I think I’ll just link here instead. Oh, “dawdle” should be “doddle” by the way. Dawdle is when things go slowly.
Hi Terence,
Many thanks for the positive and constructive feedback. You raise a series of fair points. As I said in the article, “The future is open” – meaning that it remains to be determined whether the capabilities I highlighted turn out to be sufficiently weighty and unique to make a real difference to lasting platform success.
In the meantime, I have a couple of specific comments:
Symbian Foundation membership fee is $1,500, not $5,000. But in any case, our goal is to connect with independent contributors and commentators too. For example, people can comment on the Council forums, without belonging to an organisation that is a member of the foundation. That means ‘little guys’ have a voice too.
Whenever we’re being too stubborn, I’m sure that the community will speak up and bring us to our senses!
Me too!
// David W.
I think the undertones to this piece are telling. What resonates through is “We may be a bit on the skids now, but don’t bet against us because anything can happen in this space and we’ve got cool stuff(TM) in the pipeline 1-2 years from now”.
Unfortunately (a) the cool stuff is probably coming to market too late for OEMs who need to compete now, (b) given Nokia’s recent innovation track record coupled with what’s been said about Direct UI publicly, that cool stuff looks more catch-up than breakthrough, and meanwhile (c) the core non-touch UI competencies of the platform, ironically on display in the two great Nokia phones highlighted, are being allowed to atrophy at the expense of the slow-motion goldrush to touch.
Bottom line is, by the end of this year it looks like pretty much all of Symbian’s current and ex (non-Nokia, worldwide) OEMs will have significant Android portfolios leading their charge in the touch screen segment (Samsung, LG, Motorola, Sony Ericsson). By the end of next year, Symbian/Nokia *may* have a touch offering that’s on par. But:
Will on par be good enough to convince those OEMs to port all the software assets they’ve developed for Android in the meantime?
Will the great transformations carry along or alienate all the third party developers currently being wooed who will have do a rewrite when Avkon goes away?
And all without S60’s historical differentiator of a pure non-touch phone UI option.
Let’s hope apparent trends really can be misleading, for Symbian’s sake.
Hi Furie,
I’m glad you like the posting. A lot of thought went into it.
Thanks for catching this – now fixed.
// David W.
Hi PP,
On reflection, I probably should have given more emphasis to shorter term improvements as well:
*) improvements delivered in devices (in the way that the E71 improves on the E61i, and the E72 will presumably improve on the E71);
*) improvements delivered by the platform (in S^2 and S^3).
For example, there have been modest contributions to S^2 so far as a result of wider access to the source code. I’m expecting many more contributions to come via this route in time for S^3.
S^3 also includes the new graphics architecture (Screenplay) and the new IP networking architecture (Freeway).
We may well lose some developers along the way. I can’t rule that out. But my guess is that most will stay – attracted by the facts that (1) they can re-use a fair chunk of their existing Symbian knowledge, (2) the expanding Symbian market will present lots of opportunities. And I think lots of new developers will join the party.
The best way to continue the excellent support for non-touch UIs is a live topic for discussion and contribution!
// David W.
I have yet to read this very informative blog entry, and I will tonight while in bed on my E71.
However, another note – off topic – should be addressed (possibly not the best venue for this comment).
Wikipedia has way too many non-linked entries regarding Symbian.
Symbian Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbian_Foundation
Symbian OS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbian_OS
Symbian Brand
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbian_%28brand%29
Symbian Ltd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbian_Ltd.
These and more should now be sub entries under Symbian-Foundation, with member companies side linked with a small comment to Symbian-Foundation as well. Its great that Symbian-Foundation has their own sites, but for newbies, the consumers they get quite confused using wiki as a source.
Hi prom1,
(just like I read it again, on my E71, while walking home from the train station last night…)
Agreed – but within Symbian, we’re a bit apprehensive about taking the lead to alter these articles, on account of the principle that people shouldn’t rewrite Wikipedia articles about themselves (apart from correcting vandalism). There’s some further discussion on the Ideas site. Hopefully the wider community will step in to fix things.
// David W.
Hi David,
Great article, I do agree with you! Trend analysis can not predict the future from the past since Nokia is recreated as a service company now.
In my humble opinion you guys should create a NMAIL or OVIMAIL service or maybe buy yahoo, and also expand mobile software to desktop like Ovi browser integrated with Ovi Services.
Now with Qt it seems to be easier! I also would like to tell you: Keep up the great work!
Once Nokia rolls out Linux phone then the real race begins.
Earlier, Symbian was granted success. Now Symbian has to earn its success. That’s the difference.
Will Symbian (non UI) APIs remain accessible after the move to Qt as a dev platform?
Thanks
Simon Judge
Hi Simon,
The plan is to continue to publish the header files on listed Public APIs (apart from Avkon APIs) and to maintain binary compatibility for these APIs.
In general the native APIs will remain and will be accessible, but many will be layered over by Qt APIs to make development easier in that environment.
// David W.
Hi SYndroid,
I’ve no objection to the principle of having to earn success. But I don’t agree that Symbian has been “granted success” within Nokia projects.
It’s not appropriate to talk about details here, but I will say that Symbian time and again (over the years) had to demonstrate continuing fitness of purpose, to keep on winning individual device projects.
Where symbian is trying to be in 2012, other platforms are there now and this article assumes that they won’t be doing enhancement/innovation in these 3 years. The reality is that Symbian was too comfortable to be in top position and didn’t try to innovate and now lagging 3 years behind. Not only it missed the opportunity but also time and again they refused to accept the reality.
I still remember how many time David has used the words “most widely used software on the planet” on his personal blog and ignoring the reality that its not going to be the same forever. If don’t believe me try to search it on google.
I believe Symbian still lacks focus. To lead the industry symbian need to look where the compeititor would be in 2012 and then have one step further to the compeititor.
No need to under estimate the Symbian . No doubt Symbian is the Lion in the mobile software jungle.
If lion takes a step back sure it will go 10 steps
ahead. There are many great technology and multimedia
capabalities like SMP,freeway etc will make “most widely used software on the planet” to keep its Number one postion.
Any way actions always speak louder than words,i believe SyFo’s people are make it true.
Hi gailu,
It’s true, it’s a phrase I’ve used often. But it has never been a statement about the present. It’s always been a statement about a possible future, in which Symbian-powered devices might number in the billions rather than the 100s of millions. (It’s not a phrase about being the leading operating system for smartphones. It’s an admittedly audacious phrase about becoming the leading operating system, period.) And the fuller context of such quotes has always been that this is something that might be achieved provided various tough challenges are solved.
I disagree. At no time in its history has Symbian been a “comfortable” place. The management have always been keenly aware of strong and powerful competitors – and of the need to keep innovating fast. It’s been one fierce challenge after another.
For example: As I write this in my office, I look up at a poster that I keep, from an exercise inside Symbian Software Ltd two years ago. It says, “This is a moment we can’t afford to miss… powerful and disruptive competitors are vying for our space…”
I’m interested in suggestions for where we should focus – what we should do more (and what we should do less). Our present focus is on building an extremely productive and vibrant software movement.
// David W.
@sdhar27
>>”multimedia capabalities like SMP”
LoL
@gailu,
You’re parsing @sdhar27’s comment unfairly.
Surely, SMP is mentioned as an example of a technology, rather than as an example of multimedia:
>>”There are many great technology and multimedia capabalities like SMP,freeway etc”
(though it is true that multimedia is one of the areas of functionality whose performance could be enhanced by an SMP-optimised kernel)
// David W.
David
You asked this question a few posts up and I felt compelled to answer. Admittedly,I am no longer a Symbian follower, but always have a soft spot for it since I still believe the 6682 was the best device I have owned. However, as someone who has tried an E-71 (lack of focus on the United States was the main reason for the gap), I did not see huge improvements. For point of reference, I currently use an iPhone 3GS and a Blackberry. I have also used my share of Winmo phones through the year. Now onto your question.
“I’m interested in suggestions for where we should focus – what we should do more (and what we should do less).”
If you want to take the market back by storm, you need to attack it with passion. The OS needs to be smooth, customizable, easy to use, yet complex. I want my OS to be able to do want I want it to, but easy enough that anyone can pick up the phone and figure out it’s basic functions. Creating a development community that is passionate about the OS is key, but just as key is the ability for people to purchase apps. I hate iTunes, but at the same time my freaking Mom can use it. The reason people develop for Apple, ignoring their shortcomings, is because their Apps get to market and are purchased. You know more about OS’s then I ever will, so the basics, I will leave to you. Symbian has always been a great multi-task platform. If the usability remains at a high level and features are innovative people will take notice.
Most importantly is the ability to create a device to take advantage of these capabilities. I realize you probably are more interested in the software side here, but the hardware to run the software is just as important. If you were to come out with the phone that had everything, people would notice. At this point, any game-changer is going to be a touch screen (slide out keyboard or not). Create the hardware, with the camera, the GPS, the multi-media capabilities, the touchscreen that seamlessly integrates with the OS. I am talking top-of the line here. Don’t cut any corners and people will pay. I want my phone to be business and fun. Hell, if I could push my BB and iPhone into one, I might have the phone I am looking for.
Lastly, do not forget the United States market. Nokia has begun releasing devices in a timely manner for US use, but 98% of the US population would never even know they could purchase a N97 and use it on AT&T. In addition, I am not a fan of CDMA, and maybe when Verizon gets there LTE network built out we will see more Symbian devices, but by ignoring CDMA you are missing out on over 100 million US users. There is a passionate group of mobile users in the US who are tired of being left out. If you don’t think that can work, it certainly didn’t hurt Apple. I realize they are a US based company, but they certainly used the US to springboard (no pun intended to us Jailbreakers), the device to the rest of the world. If you want to be the leader in 2012 the US is going to have to be a big part of it. Right now, Symbian is simply not relevant here. – Again, make a splash with the right software on the right device and that can change in a hurry.
This was a little longer and a little more generic than I would have liked, but hopefully it gets some points across. I look forward to future success of your platform as competition brings out the best for the consumer.
Bryan
I’d like to hand it to David for replying to all comments here. Very pro-active and engaging the community responses … truly representing Symbian-Foundations core philosophies! Excellent work and I hope we get as much responses from future contributors.
Man this is a powerful read.
I myself have come back the Nokia E71 3 times now. And although it lacks only in multimedia – some purple fringing on camera shots in late afternoon/evening summer sunlight and sub-par video recording, its still my favorite device EVER. I’m looking forward to using the E72 as my daily device.
Something I’d like to see in future non-touch ui Symbian devices is higher resolution HVGA in landscape for full-qwerty devices. The future looks brighter daily at Symbian.
Unfortunately too much press is going for Android running on netbooks in labs or one off “I’m the master coder” seeking 5mins of fame. Yet hardly any light in the press that Symbian can run SMP and on current off the shelf Intel netbook hardware. I reminisce of the days of Psion supremacy.
A major change for Symbian is how it deals with Notes. If I edit and escape the changes are still saved. This needs to be fixed. but this is for ideas site.
Hi Bryan,
Many thanks for the suggestions. To boil down your suggestions as to what Symbian should do more, let me pick out three points (followed by my comments):
The Symbian Horizon app publishing initiative should hopefully help to address this issue.
There’s a lot of different companies in the Symbian ecosystem who are all keen to be part of exactly this kind of breakthrough product. The hard question is, what should Symbian itself be doing differently to better support these companies?
We’re in the process of putting a much larger proportion of our employees in California, compared to the past. This includes three members of the extended Leadership Team. This ensures that we keep the United States regularly in mind!
// David W.
PS As I mentioned earlier, focus means finding things to do less, as well as things to do more. I’m still interested in the former kind of suggestion, as well as the latter kind…
What a great analysis yet again, David, thank you so much.
My only concern lies in these 1-2 years before the stable release of Symbian^4. This OS will be so powerful and full of features that unless mobile phones are not important anymore (quite unlikely…) it will be the most interesting platform for developers, OEMs, and customers alike.
If Qt manages to win the open-source and academic environments it will definitely be a huge boost for hobbyist and amateur programmers as well. A nice touch for users to write/tweak their own applications.
There’s no doubt that Symbian’s relentless charm offensive demands respect; the branding, the globe-trotting, the schmoozing, the blogging, the endless twittering, the ubiquitous presence at mobile get-togethers of all kinds. This seems to be working, and general awareness of Symbian does appear to be being raised.
But the key players aren’t really buying it it seems to me. The major manufacturers (apart from The Great Creator) have either bailed (LG, Motorola), put Symbian projects on indefinite hold (not many Samsung announcements recently), or are currently playing Symbian off against Android (Sony Ericsson, whose leaked Android UI customization for Rachel already looks more polished than their S60 UI customisation, despite all their years of experience on Symbian(+)). The network operators are playing wait-and-see too. Sure they signed up, but membership is cheap.
In the end I don’t see adequate device-fueled momentum here yet to build a software movement upon, try as you might. Trying to do so is putting the cart before the horse. By year’s end I fear Symbian = Nokia again(*). The engine of innovation stroking away with just the one cylinder and a handful of enthusiastic anorak sparkplugs. No significant contributions from other major companies.
For me, any upswing for Symbian comes only once (a) Nokia has demonstrated the competitiveness of the reworked platform, and (b) Nokia has successfully seeded developer interest in it through the launch of devices that are compelling to consumers.
–
(+) Wonder if Sony Ericsson are looking forward to rewriting their entire front-end in Qt next year? Doesn’t sound like a great investment for an ailing company.
(*) Yeah yeah, the Japanese.
Hi PP,
I like your phrase, “device-fueled momentum“. It chimes with my long-held view that the best marketing tools for a mobile OS are great devices built from that OS.
If there are devices selling in large quantities (and, provided there is a credible and accessible route to market on these devices, for developers), it will make a big difference to the energy and enthusiasm of developers who consider writing software for that platform.
For this reason, I see it as highly desirable, over the next 6-12 months, that devices built from S^1, S^2, and S^3 receive strong and sustained market acclaim.
It’s too early to tell which of the roadmapped devices will get the best market reception. As I’ve said, “the future is open”
// David W.
Fascinating article and follow-ups. The thought in my mind when I see a really good analysis, is, that anything left out or missed would have to be totally unexpected, and maybe extremely valuable.
“Device-fuelled momentum” definitely rings a few bells.
Remembering previous game-changers: AppleII (colour), Sinclair ZX80 (low cost), PC (multiple manufacturers of shared software platform driving down cost), Linux (porting of academia/enthusiasm to large software project facilitated by Internet)…
What’s your game-changer, David?
Perhaps what’s interesting about the brief list above is that, not all differentiators were *that* important (colour, cost < £100, even the more recent "multitouch"), but nevertheless profoundly affected the perception of the product, because it created a single parameter for customers to identify, and which the competition did not have.
Great article by David Wood.
It would be a grave mistake to consider Apple and Andriod as the only competitors. Those mobile devices probably cover just the top 5-8% of the market or even less.
Once again, Apple iPhone is like the Mac – you pay an exorbitant price for it, even on contract.
Today, I can buy a very good Symbian powered smartphone for as low as 200 GBP contract-free and that’s very important.
And each maker has just one device on the market today (maybe Apple has a few variations).
So Symbian, don’t design the new UI only to compete against the 2 devices from Apple and Google.
And I don’t agree with Bryan that the game-changer is going to be the touch screen. Its going to rule one segment of the market or maybe two. It will still be only a small percent of the total mobile device market. There will always be a demand for qwerty devices and the plain old t9 key pad.
Never under esimate Apple iPhone. They take almost one third of industry profits.
Apple will soon surpass Nokia too in terms of profits. Don’t be surprised.
Guys, It’s not a volume game anymore. It’s a value game.
Instead of making thousand unusale devices it’s better to have one iconic device that is constantly backed by innovation.
Hmmm… by game-changer, I would say to argue over which particular technology is going to do it is a mistake, because each carries a risk factor that is massive when a technology is initially considered (the steep incline of the investment phase).
I’d suggest “game-changer” as a meta-technology, a variable rather than a value, and ask, by what criteria would its value be measured. And then try thinking of twenty or so every day…
I remember Psion’s first product using EPROMs for high capacity non-volatile storage. That came down to including a voltage multiplier for the 9V battery.
Hi David,
Will Nokia applications available on E71, N97, N86 .. etc be available to open source / Symbian Foundations? If not what are alternative sources or terms to license them from Nokia and 3rd parties.
Dinesh
Hello,
I know this has came up before,Is there a chance that the user will be able upgrade to a newer os like in iphone,winmo,android etc.
Like Terence pointed out earlier,perhaps give an old device a new life,otherwise mentioning the massive installed base doesnt have much point,does it..
Also again as he mentioned,symbian is not so friendly with new developers with its tutorials and examples.
So wheres my SF device
Hi Dinesh,
The Symbian platform contains the standard S60 applications. You can see the whole list by following the links on the platform defnition page on the Symbian Developer website. As such, the source code is already available to Symbian Foundation members, and will be in open source by the middle of next year (perhaps sooner).
Individual phones – such as the Nokia N97 – will in general contain additional applications, sourced and/or customised by the phone manufacturer. This enables rich differentiation between the different handsets.
If you see an app on one phone but it’s not built into the particular Symbian handset that you own, the chances are that this app (or something like it) will become available for download to your handset from one of the application stores.
// David W.
Hi Tony,
That’s a great question.
I started to write a reply in a comment, but it kept growing in size … so I converted it into a new blog posting in its own right, Symbian game-changers.
// David W.
Hi leomax,
You’re right, this question does come up often – which is an interesting data point in its own right.
Some upgrades already take place – rolling out incremental improvements in the software in a device.
However, so far, none of these upgrades convert the platform from one version to another. I believe we’ll see that in due course, on at least some devices. However, there are a series of technical and business model issues to be addressed first. I wrote these up in my earlier posting “An open discussion about software upgrades” – though I think it might be worth re-visiting this subject some time soon.
It has a point for developers who may wish to target that existing installed base. It also has a point as an indication that at least the core parts of the platform have been very well tested in the field.
I think matters are improving a lot – but this is a never-ending task! If you think you can make a difference, feel free to get involved in the improvement process (eg on the wiki in the Symbian Developer website). Your contribution will be gratefully received!
// David W.
I agree with many things said throughout this thread.
2 key points.
1. Symbian/Vendors DO need to consider OS version ugprades (most so than just minor fix packs) especially with more expensive phone models that have enough horsepower to run the newer version.
2. Flash (and I don’t mean FlashLite)is the “killer app” that is looming on the short term horizon. We have heard that Flash might be available to developers this fall. Getting it into new and existing Smartphones (see item number 1 with respect to existing phones) will be the iPhone killer.
If I can do Hulu(Flash based) from my phone, I essentially have much of my PC on my E71 (and above) Symbian phone (already have a decent browser with Opera and Skyfire on Symbian as well as good email with gmail and built in mail client). Flash is not expected to be on iPhone any time soon.
Hi EVVJSK,
You make two good points – thanks!
I share your excitement about having “full Flash” on Symbian phones. Keep an eye out for further news about this
// David W.
One big reason for me when I choose my next mobile phone will be if the default music player will be able to play ogg vorbis or not.
Hi Fredrik,
I am the technology manager for multimedia here at Symbian.
Codecs are part of an evolving strategy here at Symbian. You can follow the progress of this, and other multimedia topics, on the Symbian Multimedia blog at http://martinpwebb.wordpress.com
Ogg, as an open-source codec, is one that we intend to make available as quickly as possible.
Martin Webb
i have a symbian certificate but i loose my key please help
Hi nacer,
Questions about Symbian Signed can be posted on the Symbian Signed Support forum.
// David W.
HI David,
to start, i’m not a techy and know very little about APIs and how software is written. Here i will try to give you just the consumer perspective
here are my key immediate issues with symbian,
1) UI look and feel – Compared to iphone OS and android, symbian (say v5, the latest touch optimized OS) currently does look ‘boring’. It has the same look and feel as the older versions and is not as sleek as the others. UI changes are ‘incremental’, not ‘path breaking’. While symbian has focussed on functionality always (which for me is perfectly fine), success of iphone os/android proves how important eye candy and the visual appeal is in a UI, even though they are not any more functional than symbian.
b) OS/Firmware updates – The iphone has a simple strategy – 1 hardware and continous, consistent software updates. Compared to that is the story of Nokia. Let me illustrate with my own example. I have a Nokia N80, bot 3.5y back. In terms of hardware and functionality, it is very close to today’s iphone (3G, wifi, bluetooth, screen resolution, 3 MP camera, email etc etc) but the key issue is software. After initial firmware updates, Nokia suddenly stopped working on any more updates for the model. Same is the story of other models. So today i’m stuck with a OS and functionality i had about 2.5y back. In other words, the phone has nobody working for it anymore and it has no scalability. Maybe Nokia produces too many smatphones with symbian to keep updating each of them, but this is a major reason why many people, in the search for something new and better, have bot iphones and androids. In other words, if symbian really is a ’smartphone’ platform, then a) why does it need to be ‘mass’ market and be ported to each and every handset nokia/others make?, b)why it does not have dedicated resources that take care of updation and scalability of each phone model it is installed on? Although symbian has updated its OS to v5 and has also shifted focus to the new platform, since nothing is backwardly compatible, it is of no use for millions of consumers who are stuck with older phones. And the worst part is there is no guarantee it will not happen again.
Today if i buy a symbian device, i’m not sure upto how long i will have support and updates for my phone model and i dont want to be in that situation. Today Iphone OS 3.0 works on iphone 2G and 3G, apart from the latest 3GS upgrade and i’m more sure that the software platform will keep getting upgraded even for the older models.
3) Appstore – A related issue to point 2 is the appstore. Symbian probably has 10 times more apps than the iphone OS but all of them are scattered on different third party websites, making it extremely difficult to find something useful. The OVI store from Nokia is a step, but how about a ‘Symbian store’ (since other manufacturers, notably samsung, are also making symbian devices)where generic phone-manufacturer-independent apps can be made available? Such a store can also aggregate all apps (1000s of them) and vet them for functionality and compatibility. And if you are thinking ‘why copy apple/others’, well there is nothing wrong in copying something that has been found so useful by consumers.
i think the way forward is a mix of tactical and strategic steps. Strategic thinking is important but tactical steps like immediate upgrade of the UI, dedicated resources to ensure scalability and the symbian appstore are key for the immediate future. What happens in 2012 is being determined now and if symbian is not upto the mark in the short term, there may not be a 2012 (unpredictability can hit both ways).
regards,
Vivek
Vivek – I am a but late in responding but I did want to say how great it is to get consumer feedback here on the blog. On the store – did you catch the HORIZOn news?
tks Haydn. I saw the news bit on HORIZON and i think it’s really a great step. Pls be very quick with getting it up and running.
However, dont you think symbian is once again falling short of the final big step i.e consumer access?? Why can’t HORIZON. apart from collaborating with 7 or more third-party/manufaturer/carrier stores, not sell the apps through the HORIZON store itself? Ideally i wuld not want restricted access to apps due to manufacturer/carrier specific barriers.
Chk this out – basically the article predicts downgrade of symbian to cheaper phones and a dead-end for development. I hope it does not pan out this way
http://www.mobile-review.com/review/nokia-rx51-n900-en.shtml
Hi Vivek,
Thanks for your comments!
>UI look and feel
The main Symbian UI is in the process of being substantially upgraded and refreshed, in three stages. You can see these three stages in the picture on the main roadmap page on the Symbian Developer website:
*) UI makeover step 1: Web Runtime offers web design on mobile;
*) UI makeover step 2: Graphics support for advanced layering and effects (eg semi-transparent content layered over video, complex animated transitions between apps);
*) UI makeover complete: Direct UI – a complete refresh of the touch UI
>OS/Firmware updates
This is a topic that many consumers bring up. For good reason!
There’s nothing in the Symbian platform itself that prevents this kind of continual upgrades of software for older phone models. If enough consumers ask for this kind of service, I’m sure that manufacturers and/or third parties will respond.
>Appstore
I don’t think that the industry needs yet another appstore (ie one from Symbian). But one thing it does need is what the Symbian Horizon initiative will deliver:
*) An overall directory of applications, together with info on which stores sell these applications;
*) Assistance to developers (especially smaller developers) in getting their applications published.
>Article saying Symbian will be downgraded
The best response is probably from Anssi Vanjoki. According to Reuters,
As more product lines are populated with Symbian – including those that retail at lower and lower prices – it will bring the world of powerful mobile applications and services to huge new groups of consumers worldwide. That’s great news for developers. And as more developers become involved, the resulting new applications and services will be great news for consumers too.
// David W.
Vivek – the mobile-review story is just plain wrong. What happens to Symbian is, at some point in this equation, linked to its community and its ability to be a vibrant movement for a better mobile future. Bridging the developer, customer communities is one of the ways we’re hoping to build a new dynamic. Not the only way of course. The developer community has enormous technical, design and application attributes. I hope we can get unique interaction between the developer and the user – so any thinking you have around that – it would be great to hear it.
Hi david, tks for your response and pointing out some great info on the symbian roadmap.
Reg the OS update issue, i feel one reason why nokia/others have not provided continous upgrades is because of their commercial interest in selling more handsets. An old handset if upgraded to a new OS gets most of the functionality of the newer handsets (barring hardware changes, which are not too path breaking most of the times) and therefore may cause people to not buy new handset upgrades at all.
given above,
a) wuld symbian^1 be upgradable to symbian^2 and ^3 for the set of devices running symbian^1 currently (like n97, omnia HD etc)? and
b) wuld this be the manufacturer’s prerogative to provide such an upgrade (which i think is very unlikely to happen as indicated above) or users culd do it independently through other means?
reg, vivek
Hi Vivek,
In principle, a manufacturer could release an upgrade package for a S^1 device, to upgrade it to S^2.
Users can’t do this indedendently, even with full access to all the Symbian platform source code. That’s because a device will contain software from many locations, apart from the Symbian platform itself. This extra software provides differentiation and added value to the device.
Some of this extra software is likely to take advantage of “platform APIs” (which can change between versions of the platform) rather than just “public APIs” (which usually remain compatible between versions). This means that someone wanting to put S^2 onto a device originally built from S^1, will need to obtain updated and rebuilt versions of the add-on software.
As you say, device manufacturers will, in general, not be willing to do the work to create these upgrades, without any commercial benefit ensuing. However, if sufficiently many consumers said they would be willing to pay a reasonable upgrade fee, this could change the equation.
// David W.
Hi David,
These are serious issues for users and developers. Resolving them would make a HUGE difference to confidence in the operating system.
If manufacturers have the confidence to put out products that can be upgraded, then this shows the consumer that the manufacturer believes there are good reasons to buy their latest phones.
The converse is also true.
hi david and haydn,
Sry haydn i missed your remark on possible ways to bridge the consumer-developer divide. As a consumer, i feel the way forward is manufacturer/carrier independent aggregation. I mean if i have symbian, it shld not matter whether i have a nokia or samsung device, both shld have the facility to run apps developed for symbian, Similarly, developers shld have the ability to sell apps in an open, non-restricted way. This aggregation can happen through
a) manufacturers coming together (unlikely),
b) third-party orgs like yours providing the common platform (cleaner solution) and,
c) some very successful developers starting on their own (which i think again is very unlikely as they do not have the marketing muscle).
Means of aggregation may include stores, common websites and in today;s age, maybe a Facebook page!!
Another good step could be for the symbian foundation to ‘own’ a piece of hardware (say the n97 or omnia HD) and make manufacturers commit to dedicated resources for future upgrades, such that the model becomes a showcase for symbian (The Iphone of symbian). This can aggregate consumers and developers under one hit device, even though it wuld be restrictive.
One thing – It is true for most people that they do not know what software or application they actually want. Usually exposure to Innovation ‘creates’ needs that consumers realize after getting exposed. So one thing is clear – If you have good ideas and good developers, nothing can come in the way of a good and sustainable business model
Sorry i’m no expert and all of the above is half baked. Neverthless it is my honest opinion.
Also, David, tks for the explanation. However i need to point out one thing. Twice, in successive posts, you have mentioned that ‘if consumers want in sufficient numbers or pay a fee’, manufacturers will provide upgrades. I have gone through some other posts on this blog and it is very clear that almost ALL customers want their phone OS to be upgraded consistently and i bet the manufacturers also know this,
Apart from that, as i see, this issue is a make or break (THE ISSUE) for symbian today – i might want to buy an extremely good device in terms of hardware like the omnia HD, but i probably will not because i will be stuck with the software, with nobody to take care of later bugs and OS upgrades.
What i ask is this – do you guys, who are the torch bearers of symbian now, not have equal responsibility (apart from consumers) to lobby with manufacturers in every way possible to get upgrades made available to end consumers and compel them to work on platform APIs etc? and further, since this problem threatens the very existence of symbian in the smartphone race (i mean the high end smartphones which are not mass market and where most of the competition is concentrated), would you guys not fight for your very survival and not put onus on consumers alone?
It is difficult to aggregate consumers in a united voice and push manufacturers as long as there is choice. Consumers will continue to have choice and they will choose to buy a device with another OS unless the above issues are sorted out
regards,
Vivek
Hi Vivek,
Fair point. Having reflected on what you say, I’ve raised a new idea in the Symbian Ideas site – “Systematically investigate and promote ways to enable major software upgrades on Symbian devices“. The ideas site is one way to aggregrate voices. If anyone feels strongly about the issue, or if you have additional angles you’d like to add to the mix, add your voice to the site. (If you don’t have a login already, send me your email address, and I’ll ensure an invite comes your way.)
// David W.
PS See here for more info about the intended operation of the ideas site.
David,
I am interested in commenting on “Systematically investigate and promote ways to enable major software upgrades on Symbian devices“. How can I send you my email address?
Jeff