AAS Insight 70 - Nokia E52, N97 processors and Pandemonium

I'm actually surprised by your attitude to the N97. You seem to be saying that the compromise on hardware is OK. Surely the point is that it's a flagship device. It should do everything and do it well. I know that Joe User doesn't read the specs, but he doesn't need to: he'll just find the YouTube video that somebody is bound to publish, with an N97 running Global Race or Crash Bandicoot next to an N95 doing the same thing, and he's going to say, "Sod that. I'm not paying �500 for something that's not as good as what I had before." And then he's going to go out and buy an iPhone. OK, so the batteries run out after an hour of playing those games; but you don't play them for an hour, you play them for fifteen minutes in the doctor's waiting room or whatever, and you don't even notice the power usage. Then there's the "watch this" factor down the pub, which I notice you didn't mention this time, Steve.

I suppose I should reserve judgement until I've seen the aforementioned YouTube video, but I've seen a 5800 attempting to play Global Race, and it can only be described as "embarrassing".

extra hardware........?

what the TI DM-500 (camera/video...media accelerator) thats in the 5800
note how the 5800 can only support wmv at 320x240...
the n97 will do the same,

you all refrain from saying the n97 is slow. my guess is the web browser will be slow just like the 5800. iphones web browser is the smoothest in the industry.

yes, the use of such a old platform, for the n97, is seriously a disappointment.

I dont see any different in the 5800 hardware compared to the N97. except new things such as the compass.

Funny how the E52 has everything the N97 has, and even the 600mhz processor. If the N97 isn't an outdated product , then what is?

Unregistered wrote:

Funny how the E52 has everything the N97 has

Really?

Lower resolution screen
Smaller screen
No touchscreen
No QWERY
3 megapixel camera
No autofocus
Single LED flash
Older version of OS
No compass
32 gigabytes less storage
FM transmitter

Those just from the top of my head, I'm sure list could be longer.

Maybe it's just the excitement of the N97 actually arriving, but despite my criticisms of lack of graphics hardware acceleration and Xenon, I really do think we should give the N97 the benefit of the doubt until we've used it with production firmware. I say this because having used the 5800 with v21 firmware, the quality of its video playback at fullscreen is pretty darned good, despite everything running on an unaided 'slow' CPU....

Action games will, I suspect be the biggest casualty. Will this be an important loss to the N97's target market? Discuss! 8-)

I know the N97 specifications is a controversial subject.

You'll note that I (and the others I think) said that personally I'd like to see more. However the point that we were trying to make is this issue tends to get over played. For most people buying the device it will not be an issue. Nokia looks to serve this market first because it is what operators want. Elite users tend to be perennially disappointed.

Neil - we're not necessarily saying its OK, we're just trying to put it in context. And yes there is the watch this element - but I suspect in the N97's case that'll be the hinge. WRT to Global Race - there's relatively few games using OpenGL, but as I think I said in the podcast I think processor speed and graphic co-processor are separate issues. I think you can make a good case for a GPU, but it would need the ecosystem of games to go with it. Since they don't exist I'm not sure it's worth it. The Omnia HD will have this issue - there's going to be very few games that take advantage of its full capabilities... and you know what - the most popular mobile games are ones that put game play first.

Browser - yes I've complained about this. I think it is a software issue rather than hardware though.

And honestly I'm reserving judgement until I see and use the device. Also consider that specs are only one part of the equation (look at the difference between 5800 v10 and 5800 v21). Where I have seen the N97, the performance has looked good.

'Flagship' is a relatively unhelpful label as it's mainly about perception. iPhone as a flagship device - yes? If Nokia did the same type of device and it only had a 2/3.2 mp camera would people call it a flagship? If iPhone lacked Apple branding? Who knows. Flagship is a catch all in many ways. Is the N97 Nokia's technology flasghip - no? Is it Ovi flagship - yes? See also N86 as imaging flagship or E71 as messaging flagship etc etc.

These days (as far as most consumers are concerned) it is far more about software than it is about the hardware specs. Design and form factor are still all important (N97 keyboard anyone). The N97 comes with Ovi services and has the biggest pre-load package for third party software of any Nokia device ever... That will make a much greater difference to most people.

I would say you could make the argument that the hardware is outdated - or rather it is not next generation - it's same generation... but that is only one part of the equation (and a diminishing one at that).

I've been saying for a while now that I think the N97 will disappoint elite users, but will do well generally. I think this debate demonstrates why this is the case. (And yes I'm one who would like more hardware, but I think I will still get more out of the services that I would out of hardware)

I really questioning who is the target customer of the Nokia N97?

Looking back at the launch of the N95, it was an expensive gadget only bought tech geeks, because of its camera, its GPS, and its hardware (read HW 3D). Today it is slightly different, since prices dropped significantly. But N97 will be expensive, and its first success won't be as large because the whole device is not as revolutionary as the N95 was. We are all spoiled by Nokia releasing phones with cool features in less than a year (N90 (high resolution display), N91 (large capacity HDD), N92 (TV), N93 (optical zoom, graphics HW), N95 (5mp cam, GPS, 3D HW), N82 (as N95 + xenon flash), but the last update could not live up to the expectations of the tech geeks. But those guys are the early adopters, the customers willing to pay a premium the own a device with those high specs, and are willing to accept disadvantages (read battery life).

So, I actually have no idea who is the target customer of the phone? I am sorry, but I don't think Nokia can convince "normal people" to buy an "swiss army knife" phone like Apple can get people buying an iPhone.

I switched from an N82 to an iPhone 3G, the only thing I am missing is Nokia's great expertise in the camera department. But the N97 has nothing interesting to me. I wish Samsung good luck with their i8910 HD (stupid name, btw), I hope that can get some "Nokia priests" to the Samsung, which could wake up Nokia. Well, if Samsung get's the software straight (tbd.).

I really like Nokia's phones and their design, but this current "small steps" strategy killed Siemens Mobile, is currently killing Motorola and Sony-Ericsson, and will kill Nokia. Nokia has to wake up in order to compete with Apple, HTC (together with Microsoft or Google), Samsung, and (although to a lesser extent) LG.

my 2 cent

What problem with the browser?

These days (as far as most consumers are concerned) it is far more about software than it is about the hardware specs. Design and form factor are still all important (N97 keyboard anyone).

What about 'Best social networking' phone? [ref to home screen widgets, qwerty keyboard and good cam etc]

Some one seriously slap me down if I'm wrong, but I personally think the n97 has a break through feature, taming web communication (social networks etc), it is in my opinion a break through to a new generation of "total communication" devices, the other components aren't break through, but highly competent. My biggest concern is the O/s, the new paradigm of advanced phones isn't what they can directly do, but how many people use them (i.e. will services like "social location" reach critical mass and be useful). The new paradigm requires devices your grandma can use, if anything gimps the device, it's the expansion and full usage of the device being too complicated for many.

twinpeaked

Edit: Dammit Steve, you just got in before me oh well

What about 'Best social networking' phone? [ref to home screen widgets, qwerty keyboard and good cam etc]

Personally i don't get why nokia hasn't put all their best hardware specs in this "revolutionary" "mobile computer" as they call it. And the thing that i don't understand the most is that all these tech specs are present in other nokia phones. i would like to see the best specs from the various phones, all put into this one... for example: HSDPA 10Mbs (present in the 6700), HSUPA 2Mbps (6700), bluetooth 2.1 (6700), 3d graphics accelerator (N95 8gb), 8MP camera (N86), AMOLED screen (N85), DVB-H (N96), and finally a higher screen resolution for example 800x450 16:9 (remembering the E90 with 800x352)...!! if they could just take all these features and put them together in the N97 then..... i just wouldn't know what to say!!!

rvirga wrote:You clearly don't get it. Neither hardware nor software are especially important here. In the case of flagship devices, which typically cost a small fortune, the most important thing is that (1) the device is perceived as "the best" in some category, and (2) that category is both well understood and considered valuable by the average consumer.

I think you may have been missing my point. I was try to put across the point that what software adds to the phone is more important than what hardware adds.

I think part of this comes back to the flagship definition problem. It's made more complex by the shading of the hardware / software debate. What you say make sense though I'm not sure one defining best-ness make of breaks a device (see below).

Personally I'd say the N97 is about the combination of Ovi services, with the homescreen being a key selling point. i.e. the best service driven device. In a broader context you can describe this as the convergence of mobile and Internet. Nokia sees this as the next stage in 'connecting people'.

I'd also point to it being Nokia's first high end S60 5th Edition phone. The combination of touch and QWERTY on the N97 hits two very big market trends.

Looking at phone as 'best' in a one dimensional way is rather simplistic (though it is a good shorthand). The N95 is a good example of this - yes it sold well because of the camera - but it was also widely embraced by network operators and there support means an awful lot. There was defintely something of a virtuous circle about the N95. The N82, by contrast, was just as good as the N95 and had a more standard form factor, but did not sell as well.

Perhaps you can argue that this 'bestness' is important for marketing which I think everyone would acknowledge is a big part of this, but we should also recognise there's more to it than that.

Anyway - really good to see a conversation on this.

Personally i don't get why nokia hasn't put all their best hardware specs in this "revolutionary" "mobile computer" as they call it.

Part of this is down to device lie cycle. The N97 will have been in development for some time. But also - all device are compromises against size, cost, feature set etc etc. There's also some limiting factors in the software platforms (sort of the same as device life cycle).

The basic question that will get asked comes down to this:

If we add y, how much will it cost? Then.. if we add y how much will consumers be prepared to pay for it?

Of course some people would keep on paying, but every time you add something you'll get some who would not. Thus your addressable market shrinks... You can easily create the ultimate device for one person, but that's not a very sucessful business strategy. The art of product creation is striking the right balance.

Now the thing is that many people here will not agree with the decision made wrt the N97, but the above will the basis for the reasons behind it. (Though you can throw in some product segmentation too).

e.g. higher resolution screen - more expensive and would need a major engineering effort to get software platform working on it.

Well, I admire you guys (Rafe, Steve and Ewan) for your thoughts and your (hobby) work for Nokia's S60 platform. And I really think your right, that software is today more important than hardware.

BUT:
Software runs on hardware.
And no modern gui can live without graphics acceleration (Win Vista/7, KDE, Mac OS, iPhone, the fancy 3D cube of the Samsung i8910 HD). Maybe this is just optical effect, but it looks nice, and it can be user friendly (e.g. iPhone).
3D-Games: Yes, there is a great market for casual gaming, and good graphics do not neccessarily mean fun, but you have to have good graphics to convince hardcore gamers (the casual gamer guy does not know solid snake). And the iPhone has both, great games for casual gamers and real games for hardcore gamers. Worst of all, my N82 and N95 8GB even have a stronger graphics hardware that could beat the shit out of the iPhone, but only a few programs use it at all.

On the other hand, yes it takes time, to implement all those features. But there is a tiny phone called Samsung i8910 HD. It has stronger hardware, has HD recording, will ship with a hand full of games using 3D hardware, AND, it will run on Symbian S60 5th ed., the same OS as the N97. I think the development time of N97 and i8910 was roughly the same, so Nokia could have implemented those features, at least the different hardware, as well.

In my opinion there will be a lot of people (Nokia fans, mainly) getting this thing, but it won't be a huge success as the N95 was.
I think I will go again with a Symbian phone for this season, but not a Nokia one.

So, Rafe, the target N97 buyer is someone who is completely ignorant about all things hardware, but somehow well-researched enough in software to know what S60 9.4 and Ovi are? Here's the scoop: such an individual does not exist!
Typical consumers are equally ignorant in both hw and sw, and, when shopping for devices of this price range, usually buy "the best" for what they're most interested in, as I discussed before. Tech geeks like me and you, OTOH, are well-versed in both hw and sw, and see the N97 as a disappointment, and not worth the money Nokia is asking for.
As a side note, this somewhat reminds me of the argument for the N86. First, Nokia comes up with a very technical explanation of why the N86's 8MPX camera is much better than the competitors' (which is true), and then, when it came to the flash, it switches to marketspeak and tells you that the N86 has a "3rd gen led" flash which is just as good as a xenon one (which is total BS). Who was this argument targeted at? Not at the tech geek, who understands the finer points about maximum aperture, sensor size and pixel density, but who also understands that he/she's being BSed about the flash, and decides to stick with his/her N82. Not at the average consumer, for whom all 8MPX are the same, and who believes that, since 12 > 8, the Idou 's camera will be 50% better than the N86's one.

I am still curious to know why the primary concern of those considering the N97 is still the processor speed. We have been able to run good software on far less capable processors for quite sometime and hopefully Nokia�s commitment to optimising their code will continue throughout the N97's lifecycle.

My primary concern is that Nokia has decided to introduce their �flagship� device with only 128MB of RAM. This means that power users� ability to multitask will become increasingly limited as they get more accustomed to using widgets especially those that update with live feeds.

I would appreciate more feedback regarding people�s thoughts on this aspect of the N97�s hardware.

Nokia has knowingly N96ed the N97. They shouldn't wonder later why it failed.
Why do they forget, such high priced devices are only purchased by geeks and superfans, if you don't satisfy their needs, they'll skip it, just like they skipped N96. The general public wouldn't buy it anyways because of the price.

Hi,
Something that Nokia must be aware of but is seldom talked about on here is that people upgrade their phones because they can get a new one every year with their contract. So if someone has a good Nokia phone they will get the current new Nokia phone when their contract is up for renewal. This does not mean the new phone is good or not - its actually being bought on the quality of the last phone.

I feel that this is not actually helping Nokia because one continues doing this until your friend shows you their new non-nokia phone that can do something better than your Nokia phone. An example of this would be 3d games on the Iphone compared to the N97. The N95 was a great phone and people will buy nokia based on that but if the next phone is not better than the competition - will people buy Nokia next year?

I think the flagship phone should have the fastest processor, the 3d chip, everything to beat all other phones on the market - whether people know about it or not. Apple is going to sell alot of iphones due to gaming and I thought Nokia was going after this market as well (n-gage) but yet their flagship phones can't compete with the iphone gaming hardware wise and in gaming hardware is very important..

I think Nokia is a bit confused these days.

I'm no Apple fan - just stating my own experiences.

I'm ok with nokias n97 not being the best at one thing, because I still think its a better all arounder. I'm even ok with it not being a terribly significant hardware upgrade from previous n series phones; nokia needs to put more effort in their
services anyways.

But why is it so damn expensive? What am I paying for?

Unregistered wrote:
Software runs on hardware.
And no modern gui can live without graphics acceleration (Win Vista/7, KDE, Mac OS, iPhone, the fancy 3D cube of the Samsung i8910 HD). Maybe this is just optical effect, but it looks nice, and it can be user friendly (e.g. iPhone).

I've mentioned this before but here's why: There isn't any hardware graphic acceleration in the platform. None of the UI etc. This is being added in future version of Symbian (Symbian^3 (?) I think). I'd be perfectly happy for people to say it should have it now, but the fact is it does not. Therefore there's nothing to be gained from graphic acceleration in devices using the current version of the platform / OS.

The exception to this is where OpenGL is specifically used by third party developers. Off hand I can think of two applications that use this... there is, as I have said before, a case to answer for games.

3D-Games: Yes, there is a great market for casual gaming, and good graphics do not neccessarily mean fun, but you have to have good graphics to convince hardcore gamers (the casual gamer guy does not know solid snake). And the iPhone has both, great games for casual gamers and real games for hardcore gamers. Worst of all, my N82 and N95 8GB even have a stronger graphics hardware that could beat the shit out of the iPhone, but only a few programs use it at all.

This is an area where I think you can make a valid argument about the need for a separate GPU. But as you say even with a device like the N95 (sold 10 million +?) developers have not made games for it. Thus is there a business argument for including it? Yes I'd like to see it, but I can understand why its not there too.

On the other hand, yes it takes time, to implement all those features. But there is a tiny phone called Samsung i8910 HD. It has stronger hardware, has HD recording, will ship with a hand full of games using 3D hardware, AND, it will run on Symbian S60 5th ed., the same OS as the N97. I think the development time of N97 and i8910 was roughly the same, so Nokia could have implemented those features, at least the different hardware, as well.

I suspect the N97 has been in the works longer than the Omnia HD. I would also expect the N97 to gain maturity faster than the Omnia HD (though I hope Samsung will prove me wrong). You also need to remember you wont be getting Nokia services. The Omnia HD is a great multimedia powerhouse, but I think it *may* be weaker in other areas. I see it as more of a mobile phone PMP cross over. I actually think it and the N97 are in significantly different segments.

rvirga wrote:So, Rafe, the target N97 buyer is someone who is completely ignorant about all things hardware, but somehow well-researched enough in software to know what S60 9.4 and Ovi are? Here's the scoop: such an individual does not exist!

Sorry I should have been clearer. No I don't expect them to know about the OS version or Ovi in general. What I do expect is that the widgets (social network / location stuff) will be demoed / promoted, along with the ability to get to the Internet, GPS navigation and so on. Put another way its the things people can do with their phone that will drive purchase decisions not the hardware that enables them to do those things.

Typical consumers are equally ignorant in both hw and sw, and, when shopping for devices of this price range, usually buy "the best" for what they're most interested in, as I discussed before. Tech geeks like me and you, OTOH, are well-versed in both hw and sw, and see the N97 as a disappointment, and not worth the money Nokia is asking for.

Agreed, as I mentioned previously I do think a subset of elite / power users will be disappointed. However I think the overall package - what they can do with it - will appeal to many. I do think its fair to say it wont be another N95, mainly because there is so much more competition in the space now.

As a side note, this somewhat reminds me of the argument for the N86.

Yes good point. I think its probably the informed consumer? I wouldn't be so skeptical about Xenon versus LED. Without stepping into another mine field I think its fair to say the Xenon argument is going to run and run. Nokia does not make these decision on a whim - it will have done market research on this. I imagine its to do with the video light mode and relative performance (even with Xenon flash photos shot at night don't look that great).

N7 Fence wrote:I am still curious to know why the primary concern of those considering the N97 is still the processor speed. We have been able to run good software on far less capable processors for quite sometime and hopefully Nokia�s commitment to optimising their code will continue throughout the N97's lifecycle.

This is difficult to judge until people start using the device in the real world over a long period of time. I think you'll probably find things will be OK, but will be interesting to see impact of widgets etc. Current devices do fine on 128 MB - most still have plenty of RAM left over - and the OS is now better at handling memory in the back ground.

Hardeep1singh wrote:Nokia has knowingly N96ed the N97. They shouldn't wonder later why it failed.
Why do they forget, such high priced devices are only purchased by geeks and superfans, if you don't satisfy their needs, they'll skip it, just like they skipped N96. The general public wouldn't buy it anyways because of the price.

Pricing is not an easy issue to deal with. The N97 costs the same (roughly) as the N95 and N96 when they first came out. Look at the prices in the press releases (the ones before taxes and subsidies - both N96, N95 and N97 are all 550 Euro. In time prices will fall as they do with every handset.

Prices also tend to be blurred by subsidies in many markets.

smellati wrote:I'm ok with nokias n97 not being the best at one thing, because I still think its a better all arounder. I'm even ok with it not being a terribly significant hardware upgrade from previous n series phones; nokia needs to put more effort in their
services anyways.

But why is it so damn expensive? What am I paying for?

See above. Its similar in price at launch to other handsets. Its relatively expensive compared to older devices at current prices, but really you have to make the comparison to launch prices.

Rafe, I appreciate you taking the time to answer everyone's question. I would like to make a point however;

The n95 was 550 euro, or in my case, 700 dollars. And it was worth every penny. Why? Because, even with todays standards, it still a pretty damn good phone. In other words, the n95 aged well. I can't say the same with the n97. I don't see it being considered a great phone 2 or 3 years from now. And that matters when youre paying a premium price.

one of the big issues is the web browser...

if the web browser will be slow as a 5800, which clearly the n97 will be. what is the big deal about n97? the issue nokia has had since N95 is web browser performance. N95, N96, N97, E71, 5800, all share the same problem. the web browser is just slow. when its downloading, its not capable of rendering. that seems more like a hardware issue than anything.

its either, their web browser is not optimized, or the hardware is not up to speed. web browsing on the iphone is a pleasure. sheer pleasure. large touch screen, web sites load quickly.

for people who question the speed of the processor, its not all about games, mhz for the sake of it. its to GAIN overall speed of the phone.

how many of you have thought about upgrading your n95......only to compare it with the latest phones to know that the new phone wont be much faster than the 2 year old model you are currently using.

N97 is slated to be a web/social phone. if it fails in the tasks its sold as.....what is the point of that?

even with firmware v20 on 5800, the web browser is still slow. it scrolls slow, and hangs when loading. its like a forever wait for the site to completely load before you can start reading.

Giancarlo wrote:Personally i don't get why nokia hasn't put all their best hardware specs in this "revolutionary" "mobile computer" as they call it. And the thing that i don't understand the most is that all these tech specs are present in other nokia phones. i would like to see the best specs from the various phones, all put into this one... for example: HSDPA 10Mbs (present in the 6700), HSUPA 2Mbps (6700), bluetooth 2.1 (6700), 3d graphics accelerator (N95 8gb), 8MP camera (N86), AMOLED screen (N85), DVB-H (N96), and finally a higher screen resolution for example 800x450 16:9 (remembering the E90 with 800x352)...!! if they could just take all these features and put them together in the N97 then..... i just wouldn't know what to say!!!

Maybe it's because the "Internet phone" they want to create needs a critical mass to succeed so they new to lower the launch price as much as possible. It makes sense

smellati wrote:Rafe, I appreciate you taking the time to answer everyone's question. I would like to make a point however;

The n95 was 550 euro, or in my case, 700 dollars. And it was worth every penny. Why? Because, even with todays standards, it still a pretty damn good phone. In other words, the n95 aged well. I can't say the same with the n97. I don't see it being considered a great phone 2 or 3 years from now. And that matters when youre paying a premium price.

Heh thanks 😊 I enjoy these conversations as it helps me clarify my own thinking.

I think that's a very fair point about the pricing and perceived vale. I really don't know how well the N97 will age, but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. Doesn;t the provision to easily updates services / software given it better long term value? I think part of this also stems from the fact there's a lot more competition now (HTC Magic, iPhone, Touch Pro 2, Pre, etc etc.)... so inevitably it stands out less.

Unregistered wrote:one of the big issues is the web browser...

I agree that the browser is a very important element. The version of the N97 I saw a while back had implemented kinetic scrolling - that made a big difference. But I'll reserve judgement until I've used one for a while.

Not sure how much of the 5800 speed issue is perception (similar speed, different user interaction). It is also a matter of connections / sites etc. (e.g. the much debated flash support). I'm really looking forward to having Opera 9 running on it too. Incidentally this and other browsers performance suggest the issue is software not hardware.

flash support , is useless, because it runs so slow.
also the support is based on flash lite, which is totally a waste of time.

what flash will load? youtube? and???? and thats about it.
what is the point of flash if, you cant even view websites properly with it. might as well remove it from the web browser......no one would really miss it.

name one site........... that has working flash..... on symbian that is actually of any use.....

even with flash turned off the web browser is slow slow slow as a snail.

I think part of this also stems from the fact there's a lot more competition now (HTC Magic, iPhone, Touch Pro 2, Pre, etc etc.)... so inevitably it stands out less.

I guess when we tallk about N97 there's a lot more competition inhouse than its outside, iphone is an inferior device so i wouldn't even talk about it. Nokia E52 has a 600mhz processor, why couldn't Nokia add that to the N97.

Moreover, we can talk all day about what's good and bad in N97 but the fact is, the fans have spoken, its there money that Nokia wants and they aren't getting any of it, just like they didn't get any of it no matter how much they advertised the N96.

Hi Rafe,

You say it's about the software well sorry but i have zero interest in any of the OVI services as I'm not firstly going to change from the services i already use to OVI. Or secondly commit myself to having to only buy one brand for ever to be able to use my services irrespective of what other devices are out there and may be better for my needs.

This is where IMO Nokia lost their way a bit instead of delivering the best software on the best hardware they decided to try and offer their own services and tie their users to them. I know myself and many others never liked this idea and want to continue to choose and use the services we want but get the best user experience whilst doing so. I think if Nokia had managed to fix the call log problem that still exists where you don't know from which device a contact has called you. Improved the PIM and E-Mail apps along with the Browser and done what that have just announced better integration with 3rd party services they would of spent their money better. They would also of been able to continue the lead they had in using and fitting the best and most advanced hardware in their devices.

I never imagined Samsung would have the first S60 with the OMAP3 processor or large OMLED screen but they have now put all the hardware from the Omnia HD in the N97 and imagine the reaction from us the users most of us would of wanted it and proclaimed it the flagship it deserved to be.

Also i have read you are limited to a max of 5 Widgets and that only the first screen can have any short cuts or Widgets at all is that true?. As if so Active standby and the Home and Work screens on the E71 offers far greater choice.

I'll wait and see just how well the N97 performs once released but currently it's no where near my buy list unlike the Omnia HD from Samsung.

Marc

Marc,

The reason Nokia are getting into services and software is because that's where they think they will make money. Hardware will become commoditised (like the PC) and margins will be small so it will be harder to make money from it. Clearly this isn't going to suit everyone and I would agree there is a balcne to be drawn.

All the manufacturers are following this strategy. Nokia's generally more open to partnership with third parties (and this will increase going forward - see recent announcements) e.g. Flickr in Share Online, preloading Qik, Ovi Store policies.

Compare Nokia's Ovi to Google's Android, Micorosft's Live and Apple's Mobile Me for example. All have quite high levels of lock in. However with Nokia you can generally get alternatives fairly easily (e.g. install Google Maps, use Gmail, Hotmail with Nokia messaging) etc etc. That's less true of the other platforms. The reverse is not necessairly true.

And yes you;re right about the 5 widget limitation. I think nokia might have done well to consider an extra virtual screen. Of course there is a balance to this too (simplicity versus complexity).

I'd also say that in six months a lot can change - I think sometimes its necessary to have a longer term view. Yes its important to be first with things, but its not the only consideration.

That said I'm looking forward to trying the Omnia HD - no questions it will be the most technically capable device of the summer, but whether it will be the most usable is much more open to debate...