I'm Not Dead Yet, Points Out The PC

I suppose if more and more software is becoming web-based (Google's recently launched word processor for example), eventually it might not matter whether you're using a PC or mobile to view it as long as the device's browser can handle things like HTML, java and flash.

Devices could become more like windows, with a small w, onto one giant internet where the applications are, with just a few local functions (security etc) reserved for the device itself.

I'm not sure if I agree with his view. Its nothing like the same analogy as the PDA replacing the PC. The main reason being just about everbody already has a mobile phone (vastly greater than people with PC's) so all you have to do is increase the functionality that they actually use on their mobile devices. Crackberry addicts already seem to prefer emailing via their handset rather than PC. The only thing holding mobile data use back is the lack of websites deigned for mobile devices and the percieved cost of data use by the consumer. These problems no doubt will be fixed in time.

OK I think the PC will be around for a long time espeshally in business but I can see mobile devices replacing a lot of the PC's traditional functionality hence drastically reducing its importance in the technology market as a whole. I also wonder if games consoles will start to take over some of the PC's traditional uses after all they are well powerful enough. A combination of smartphone and next gen console MAY cover all of my computing needs.

If your next gen console has a keyboard, mouse, HDD and non-gaming applications available, and you're officially able to program apps and games for it... I think that makes it a computer. It'd be marketed for gaming, true, but in terms of what you can do with it it wouldn't be any different to a PC.

You could say the same about the very latest smartphones: they can have a bluetooth keyboard attached, the newest ones have a TV Out so you can see things on a big screen, you can write your own software for it (the owners of the OS even give away the dev kits for free).

If you had some kind of docking station for a smartphone to plug into, with a full keyboard, monitor and mouse, I can't see any practical difference between that and a PC (of course a desktop PC would be a lot more powerful, but most people don't need more than a fraction of a modern PC's power so a smartphone is good enough for their needs).

Something that looks and works like PC probably won't disappear, people will always prefer to type in front of a large screen on a large keyboard, but for many people it could merge with the smartphone using the docking station model. They'd use it as a PC at home, and as a smartphone on the move.

Where the guy has a very good point though is when he asks why would anybody want to use Symbian on a PC.

If smarpthones are to replace PCs as the Symbian's CEO always claims, then we'll first need to find a way to have much larger screen on our devices because current smarpthone screen are far to small for any serious PC use. We'll also need to find a way to get an input method as good or better than a full size keyboard and a mouse in there. And last but not least, smartphones will need more powerfull processors because right now, they're still too slow for many things (try to open a web page on a smartphone: even with a fast wfi connection, it still takes several seconds to display).

But then, if the smartphones of the future will have a large screen, a proper input method and a powerful processor, why would I bother to use Symbian on them? Why not simply use the normal version of Windows instead? Everybody is already familiar with it, there are dozens of thousands of applications already available for it, including a good deal of freeware and open source applications, i'd be able to use the same applications that i use on my PC, hence won't have to learn how to use them again...

I honestly dont think people will give a toss about what OS is used in their device as long as it works, provides the functionality it the user wants and is secure. All Symbian were saying was that smartphones will supercede the PC they did not say that it would only be Symbian devices, although I'm sure they want a large part of the market share.

One of the reasons why I think they may be right is because a lot of the world does not have access to the deicated landline/cable infrastucture that we do in the west. I was in Sri Lanka this year and nearly everbody has a mobile phone, partly because landlines are hard to come by and are expensive to have installed. For them the mobile phones is the most practicable way for them to get access to the internet. A PC is an expensive luxuary that most of then can't afford but for many of them a mobile phone is a necessity, to make the best use of it is just a logical progression.

One of the reasons the DOS and later Windows PC's became popular is software compatability. WinXP can still run DOS apps, for instance, and there are still 'lots' of people doing this (including my own doctor 😉).

In contrast, Symbian OS has a history of introducing incompatabilities in each and every version of the OS. So instead of each version of the OS being a superset of the previous version and the new API's, the new version looses some API's as well. Loosing API's means that older programs cannot run anymore.

Another reason Windows PC's is popular, is that nobody is going to tell you what software you can install, and what software you can *not* install. If you want to install a certain piece of software, you only need to find it, and sometimes pay some money for a license.

In contrast, with Symbian OS there are a number of parties that are trying to prevent smartphone owners to install any kind of software. Some operators have forbidden to install software outright, others insist on you only installing signed software.

Still another reason for Windows being popular was that you could program the PC yourself, if you couldn't find a suitable program. BASIC was one the the apps that came with DOS. Because programming the device was relatively easy and essentially free, if you couldn't program it yourself, you could find somebody else who could. Your nephew, or some kid next door, for candy money or a change to play games.

In contrast, on Symbian OS there is no real builtin programming facility. This will prevent the kind of cheap nephew-neighbourhood kid level of programming, which (to me at least) sounds like the kind of programming that will be popular in developing world countries, especially for the poor. I don't see poor people fork out for all kinds of fancy web services, if they need to pay for data transport., and a web services subscription to boot. Much cheaper if they can do the processing locally by writing the programs themselves.

Sander van der Wal

The smartphone has already replaced the PC as the major 'digital unifier', i.e. the device that has bridged the 'digital divide' for the masses, something which the PC, due to its inherent complexity, was never able to do. Largely through Symbian, complex, multi-function, heavily converged devices have finally offered a human face which you do not need to be computer literate to utilise. The PC has never been able to do that.

As a data input device, the phone obviously has limitations. But this has very little to do with Symbian OS per se. The Symbian OS v5 Psion netBook, in its day, was a terrific data input device.

With technologies like NFC, Wibree, Bluetooth around, there is nothing to prevent us from effortlessly adding full sized screen and keyboard to the phone. In a desktop PC analogy, the phone would take the place of that bulky and heavy piece of junk in the middle, the main difference being that the phone can be brought to another place (from office to home for instance) and wirelessly hooked up with another set of screen and keyboard.

However, I fully agree with Sander. For Symbian to have any success in encroaching into traditional PC domains, the strategy for the furtherance of the OS will have to be seriously revamped. Since v5, every or every second release has been made incompatible with the previous release.

It also appears that the enterprise perspective is largely ignored. One of the reasons PCs have become successful is the symbiosis between private use and enterprise use. I don't really see any point whatsoever in Symbian attempting to become multi-user, which enterprise usage will require. It's completely against the whole design philosophy.