The changing shape of Nseries - no scaremongering, just the facts

[QUOTE=KPO'M;469458]Apple sold 600,000 iPhone 4s on the first day, and would have sold more if AT&T's computers could handle the order flow. They have blown through sales estimates quarter after quarter. Meanwhile, Nokia just issued another profit warning for the second quarter in a row and reduced sales estimates for their smartphones. Friday's announcement sounds more like a defensive move.
[/QUOTE]

Apple like to show off their number. People line up for apple because if you don't get it in the first wave, you'll have to wait. Nokia is different. Before the launch, they stock their unit first, so no one will be disappointed.

On another news, if you want to talk about number, Nokia E71 sold more than ALL iphone ever sold. That's Nokia E71 vs. Nokia 2G + Nokia 3G + Nokia 3GS and you could also put the Nokia 4 into the fray. Nokia E72 also selling well, although the number is not as high as E71 (yet). It also outsell iphone (all of them) in 2009 sales number.

And nokia 5800 also outsold all the iphone put together from iphone 2G through 3GS.

So, why would you said nokia is bad??? because it doesn't suit you???

Most of us fell that symbian *IS* the best OS for mobile smartphone.

[QUOTE=KPO'M;469459]Not higher than the iPhone 4. 960x640.
[/QUOTE]

That was useful argument. Really helped...

In fact the other guy was slightly incorrect. The Psion 7 did 640x480 touch screen 10 years ago.
EPOC32 was incredibly stable and capable. I really don't know how Nokia managed to stuff it up so badly in their tenure.

[QUOTE=KPO'M;469459]
So what kind of touchscreen does the N8, Nokia's latest flagship device, use?
[/QUOTE]

One that doesn't work with gloves, styluses, shatters easily and is difficult to input some non latin character sets - but the public want because Apple use it.

[QUOTE=KPO'M;469459]
So why is the N8 the last N-series to use the OS? Clearly Nokia sees the high end needing a different OS. They spent the last 3 years trying to get Symbian up to snuff to compete in the iPhone's segment, and they apparently concluded earlier in the year and just re-affirmed Friday that MeeGo is the way forward.[/QUOTE]

I expect Nokia to screw up Meego like they did Symbian. Then they'll be searching round for another OS, or crawling back to the SF because free of too much Nokia interference I think Symbian will really improve.

Unregistered wrote:Especially when you consider what Fujitsu have been doing with it.

Fujitsu will probably dump Symbian except as a base OS in the long run which means it is pretty worthless for developers.

http://www.nttdocomo.com/pr/2010/001473.html

Unregistered wrote:
I expect Nokia to screw up Meego like they did Symbian. Then they'll be searching round for another OS, or crawling back to the SF because free of too much Nokia interference I think Symbian will really improve.

Now, i'm going to change tune a little ....

Symbian itself didn't get screwed up - the core is reliable, solid, capable. Just as its EPOC forebearers were.

The issue has often been with customisations for a specific product, be that down to a camera, slight hardware differences, operator customisation, etc.

I'd love to know how S^1 development was handled internally - was there a core development team working on Symbian, another on the S60 interface, another one doing customisation for the various models, etc.? If they hadn't had so many minor variations, they would have had considerably more resource to spend on getting what they had right.

Unsure about Meego being screwed over - at least as far as Maemo was concerned, it was always well supported, albeit semi-officially. Unsure if Nokia quite know the direction they want to go with Meego - possibly just mindlessly aping Android, but aimed at a slightly higher end segment. Its already been demonstrated running on a variety of tablets. I just hope that Nokia have a real vision of where they want to go with Meego.

The direction of Symbian has been known for a good few years - eventually its intended to replace S40, and we can finally see that starting to happen. Still not totally sure its ready though.

clonmult wrote:

The direction of Symbian has been known for a good few years - eventually its intended to replace S40, and we can finally see that starting to happen. Still not totally sure its ready though.

That's not the intended "strategy for the next few years" according to the Nokia slide at the beginning of this article.

Unregistered wrote:That's not the intended "strategy for the next few years" according to the Nokia slide at the beginning of this article.

At least in the UK, products like the 5230 and C3 - priced quite agressively (sub �100) are able to directly take sales from S40 devices, so Symbian is very definitely taking on the lower end devices, and is very definitely the current strategy, with no signs of any changes in that direction.

clonmult wrote:At least in the UK, products like the 5230 and C3 - priced quite agressively (sub �100) are able to directly take sales from S40 devices, so Symbian is very definitely taking on the lower end devices, and is very definitely the current strategy, with no signs of any changes in that direction.

The slide...............

Look at the slide.......

Nokia 1661 �4.99 T-Mobile PAYG. That's S40.

Sub �100 LOL!

One of the biggest concerns I have about Symbian's future is about emerging markets as I previously stated. India and Indonesia specifically. Historically Nokia have been massive in these markets, but they are under serious threat. Those markets are increasingly moving away from Nokia and Samsung, and toward white label devices made in China and rebadged by local telcos and distributors.

Android is starting to appear on these devices. They are dirt cheap, and getting cheaper every day. So the near future in those markets looks a little like this...

Ultra low-end (sub $10) - S40 - They have some life left in this market, though there is heavy competition from all kinds of weird and wacky platforms

Mid-rage (sub $100) - Symbian - Here they are competing with Android (and Bada, and RIM OS most likely) a well funded, well marketed, 'free and open' OS with a huge number of apps and an accelerating adoption. No one can argue that Android is on fire right now.

High-end ($100+) - MeeGo - Here they are also competing with Android, and with iOS, and with RIM. MeeGo is so far behind currently in recognition, apps, and UX that it's gonna be tough for them to compete. They don't compete on price here, they're no cheaper than the competition.

So although I think Symbian probably has a long future on the mid-range, Nokia's share of that market will start to dwindle pretty rapidly, thus making it less attractive to developers, thus making it less attractive to consumers.

As to the question of 'write once, run everywhere', that NEVER works. EVER. NEVER EVER. Even Android is irritating to develop for due to fragmentation. It doesn't matter even if they can pull off the fabled write once solution, the devices are so disparate in terms of their screens, their input methods, their camera, wifi, BT, storage, that you just can't compare developing for Nokia to developing for Apple.

Nokia are trapped between the rock and the hard place, and if Nokia fail, so does symbian.

The symbian defenders that are coming here are forgetting one thing: just because something is selling a lot doesn�t mean it�s any good. Have we forgotten the colossal failure that the N97 is??? Probably biggest Nokia flop ever.

Unregistered wrote:The symbian defenders that are coming here are forgetting one thing: just because something is selling a lot doesn�t mean it�s any good. Have we forgotten the colossal failure that the N97 is??? Probably biggest Nokia flop ever.

The Symbian haters that are coming here are forgetting a lot of things.

We know about the N97, it's history, finished. Irrelevant now.

The C3 is a Series 40 device, not a Symbian device.

Reality Check wrote:
Ultra low-end (sub $10) - S40 - They have some life left in this market, though there is heavy competition from all kinds of weird and wacky platforms

Mid-rage (sub $100) - Symbian - Here they are competing with Android (and Bada, and RIM OS most likely) a well funded, well marketed, 'free and open' OS with a huge number of apps and an accelerating adoption. No one can argue that Android is on fire right now.

High-end ($100+) - MeeGo - Here they are also competing with Android, and with iOS, and with RIM. MeeGo is so far behind currently in recognition, apps, and UX that it's gonna be tough for them to compete. They don't compete on price here, they're no cheaper than the competition.

I don't know how far ahead you're thinking, but at a bear minimum I would say you need to triple all those prices, even quadruple. I think you're roughly right on the break down. Android wont be able to match Symbian for price on a like to like basis because of the virtual machine over head.

I do agree that Symbian vs Android (and to an extent Bada) is probably the main face off in mobile OS volume terms. The interesting thing about Android is we'll likely have fragmentation through version number. I think they are going to make the same mistakes Symbian made. Nokia has a dual OS strategy for a reason - its already learned that lesson.

The low end and mid tier equation is especially interesting as value starts playing a greater role and functionality become less important (i.e. the which is the best OS is much less important). Cost, logistics, economies of scale and distributions chains are vital.

Unregistered wrote:The symbian defenders that are coming here are forgetting one thing: just because something is selling a lot doesn�t mean it�s any good. Have we forgotten the colossal failure that the N97 is??? Probably biggest Nokia flop ever.

Selling a lot = commercial success, which is ultimately what these companies are about. The best does not always win (think betamax / VHS as the classic example).

Rafe wrote:

Selling a lot = commercial success, which is ultimately what these companies are about. The best does not always win (think betamax / VHS as the classic example).

Not necessarily. Selling a lot at cut-rate prices is not commercial success. Symbian is fine for the low end. However, Nokia hasn't had any problems maintaining that segment, and S^3 and S^4 are probably overkill there right now (more power to them if they can pull it off).

Why Nokia's stock price is in the tank is that they have been flailing about for 3 years trying to reclaim the profitable and growing high end segment. As an investor since their last downturn (before the rally into the $40 range), their announcements do not give me much confidence. It seems like they are always talking about how important the high end market is, and how important the US is to them, but then later backtracking. More worryingly, iPhone and Android are making serious inroads into their home markets.

Unregistered wrote:

One that doesn't work with gloves, styluses, shatters easily and is difficult to input some non latin character sets - but the public want because Apple use it.

Or one that Nokia thinks is perfectly fine on their new flagship. Perhaps because it works well with pinch-and-zoom, doesn't need a stylus (which are clunky and easy to lose, anyway), and enables rapid typing because it is so sensitive. I can type faster on an original iPhone or a Nexus One than I can on a BlackBerry keyboard, and a lot faster than I could on the resistive touchscreens of the N97 or N900.

Did it ever occur to use that perhaps Apple used a capacitive touchscreen because they knew that the public would like it? Wouldn't it have been easier and cheaper for them to use a resistive touchscreen on the original iPhone?

People don't just buy products because they say Apple on them. Look at the AppleTV, the Cube, or even the MacBook Air for evidence. People buy Apple products because they fit their needs and are stylish. Apple is very good at predicting consumer desires, which is why they have so many top-selling products. Capacitive touchscreens gave them the flexibility, combined with Apple's software writing prowess, to make the devices easier to use. Ask yourself if Nokia would have ever thought to use pinch-and-zoom and a multitouch screen if someone didn't do it first?

Nokia's insistence (until recently) that all their phones must have stylii because people in Asia supposedly want them, or people in Finland want to use them with gloves, held them back. When it gets that cold out, I'm not using a phone even with gloves. It gets too bulky, even with a traditional keypad. I hate using stylii, and have no need for non-Latin characters which, incidentally, Apple does handle on phones sold in those markets.

Unregistered wrote:That was useful argument. Really helped...
.

The other guy brought it up, not me. I just pointed out that if he wanted to say how great Symbian was because it supported a higher resolution 10 years ago than the iPhone did 3 years ago, that isn't the right comparison.

FWIW, wasn't one reason that Nokia was stuck on QVGA for so long that S60v3 didn't support anything higher?

Apple came up with an ingenious solution (quadrupling the resolution) that allowed it to expand the resolution while maintaining backward compatibility with older applications. If Symbian supported VGA back in the day, then why couldn't Nokia do the same to permit their S60v3 phones to support better screens?

Rafe wrote:I don't know how far ahead you're thinking, but at a bear minimum I would say you need to triple all those prices, even quadruple. I think you're roughly right on the break down. Android wont be able to match Symbian for price on a like to like basis because of the virtual machine over head.

I do agree that Symbian vs Android (and to an extent Bada) is probably the main face off in mobile OS volume terms. The interesting thing about Android is we'll likely have fragmentation through version number. I think they are going to make the same mistakes Symbian made. Nokia has a dual OS strategy for a reason - its already learned that lesson.

Admittedly I'm talking about where I think we'll be in 12 months from now, which really is when Nokia's recent announcements become relevant anyway. Though I would point out that we're already seeing devices at less than $100 subsidized, and soon we'll see them around the $100 mark unsubsidized: http://www.androidcentral.com/tags/cheap

Again I'd point to the Chinese white-label OEMs for a vision of where we're headed. As for Bada, Samsung is the world's second biggest phone manufacturer, and the writing is on the wall for Symbian with them too. I think many people are making the mistake of thinking that Android is for smartphones only, it's gonna be on everything soon, toasters, fridges, everything. If I was Nokia this would terrify me. I really do feel for Nokia, they're in an almost impossible position. Unless they can add value in the mid and low range, what's the point of them not giving in and using Android like everyone else? Then what happens to Symbian?

I agree that Android is going to have fragmentation problems, but I don't see them being much worse than Symbian's frankly, and I don't buy that Symbian has now solved this, it's almost impossible to solve unless you go the Apple route.

I'm a bit confused at what the differentiators will be between Meego and Symbian^4?

Lee Williams said that Symbian (not sure if it was in reference to ^3 or ^4) would be the most advanced mobile OS on the planet and way ahead of the competition in terms of features and support for upcoming technologies.

From the media so far released on the N8, at least in terms of some of the hero features and the UI, it looks on a par with what a smartphone should be in 2010 (who knows in practice) and ^4 can only build upon this and advance the UI to Android/iPhone levels of slickness?

Let's say that we see the first ^4 devices in Q1 2011, what will Meego do that Symbian can't? We've had the phrase 'mobile computers' and 'high end' bandied about and Rafe in the latest AAS podcast say even 'create a new class of devices ' with regards to Meego (and hey, Apple did it with the iPad) but I still question the real need for Meego?

Admittedly I've not played with the N900 to get a grasp of Maemo, but then again there's only the current crop of S60v5 to compare against, and I can't believe that the difference between say, a N97 and N900, could be as monumental between a Symbian^3 device (never mind ^4) and the Meego devices to come.

morpheus2702 wrote:
Admittedly I've not played with the N900 to get a grasp of Maemo, but then again there's only the current crop of S60v5 to compare against, and I can't believe that the difference between say, a N97 and N900, could be as monumental between a Symbian^3 device (never mind ^4) and the Meego devices to come.

I haven't used an N97, nor an N900. But along similar lines, I own a 5230 and had a Nokia 770 for quite a while.

From the OS side, the 770 running either the original firmware, or the later HE (Hacker Edition - semi official updates from Nokia and the community giving later UI changes and functionality to the older devices) even a few years ago was a much better all round computing platform than a 5230 on the latest firmware. Not quite as easy to use for your average person, but the browser was quite good (Fennec, early version iirc).

The biggest difference was screen real estate - 800x480 was just so much more usable than 640x360.

The difference is akin to comparing S60v5 or S^3 to a desktop. Maemo really is a desktop level operating system that just happens to fit and work quite well on a mobile device.

And interestingly, Nokia did veer from QVGA on the N80 - that was running 352x416? Shame that they dropped back to lower resolution screens for the subsequent models.

Unregistered wrote:Fujitsu will probably dump Symbian except as a base OS in the long run which means it is pretty worthless for developers.

http://www.nttdocomo.com/pr/2010/001473.html

NTT (albeit not the DoCoMo side) were an interesting company when I worked for them, an app that we'd developed and put a lot of resources into (and did exactly what was asked of) was unceremoniously dropped for a.n. other solution developed internally. Interesting that nothing ever seemed to come of the discussions for them to setup some form of european base.

Unregistered wrote:The slide...............

Look at the slide.......

Nokia 1661 �4.99 T-Mobile PAYG. That's S40.

Sub �100 LOL!

That sort of market price point isn't interested in data in the slightest though, and the arpu will generally be ridiculously low.

Devices such as the lower end Symbian products are very likely to be bought/used on data tariffs which are likely to be more lucrative.

And the 1661 .... we've been looking at a phone for the step daughter at her next birthday (10 years old, too young for a mobile .... ?). What do the kids seem to be wanting? Games, camera, sending of pics/videos between friends - something that the 5230 can do considerably better than such a basic S40 device.

Of course, the 1661 is purely aimed at people who only want to make/take calls and absolutely nothing else, and as a result isn't quite as mass market as higher end S40 devices or lower end S60 devices.

[QUOTE=KPO'M;469546]Or one that Nokia thinks is perfectly fine on their new flagship. Perhaps because it works well with pinch-and-zoom, doesn't need a stylus (which are clunky and easy to lose, anyway), and enables rapid typing because it is so sensitive. I can type faster on an original iPhone or a Nexus One than I can on a BlackBerry keyboard, and a lot faster than I could on the resistive touchscreens of the N97 or N900.

Did it ever occur to use that perhaps Apple used a capacitive touchscreen because they knew that the public would like it? Wouldn't it have been easier and cheaper for them to use a resistive touchscreen on the original iPhone?

People don't just buy products because they say Apple on them. Look at the AppleTV, the Cube, or even the MacBook Air for evidence. People buy Apple products because they fit their needs and are stylish. Apple is very good at predicting consumer desires, which is why they have so many top-selling products. Capacitive touchscreens gave them the flexibility, combined with Apple's software writing prowess, to make the devices easier to use. Ask yourself if Nokia would have ever thought to use pinch-and-zoom and a multitouch screen if someone didn't do it first?

.[/QUOTE]

Pinch and zoom is one of those "ooh" things that amuses people. But when you are one handed and trying to zoom a map you need something more practical. Nokia used the spiral zoom on Maemo, far better. Apple were too busy doing "ooh look at that" to think of the guy navigating in the street with a bag in one hand.

People who think narrow and parochially do often dismiss the stylus. But if you use one of the languages that use them as the most practical means of input they are indispensible.

Have a look on Ebay at the number of broken screen iPhones for sale.

I can type faster on a physical keypad than I can on my iPhone.

I see that KPO'M and the rest of the know-it-all armchair businessmen have got nothing better to do again.

Unregistered wrote:Pinch and zoom is one of those "ooh" things that amuses people. But when you are one handed and trying to zoom a map you need something more practical. Nokia used the spiral zoom on Maemo, far better. Apple were too busy doing "ooh look at that" to think of the guy navigating in the street with a bag in one hand.

You can zoom an iPhone map by tapping it.

Unregistered wrote:
People who think narrow and parochially do often dismiss the stylus. But if you use one of the languages that use them as the most practical means of input they are indispensible.

And for those of us who don't (i.e. speakers of most European languages) the virtual keyboards we get on our capacitive touchscreens on iOS, Android, and yes, Symbian phones are perfectly adequate.

Unregistered wrote:
I can type faster on a physical keypad than I can on my iPhone.

Good for you. But the N8 doesn't have a physical keyboard, either, so the debate between iOS and Symbian and Android can't be argued in terms of keyboard vs. no keyboard. Apple chooses not to make any phones with keyboards, but not because they couldn't. Several Android devices have keyboards, and several Symbian devices are keyboardless.

I actually prefer Android myself. That said, it's impossible to deny that Apple has found a winner with the iPhone and iOS.

UnInterested wrote:I see that KPO'M and the rest of the know-it-all armchair businessmen have got nothing better to do again.

And you have the time to reply why?

clonmult wrote:
Devices such as the lower end Symbian products are very likely to be bought/used on data tariffs which are likely to be more lucrative.

Not necessarily. People looking for "free" or low upfront costs phones will likely buy anything in front of them that looks nice if the price is right. They may be purchasing a smartphone without realizing what it can do.

Unregistered wrote:And you have the time to reply why?

Because I've got nothing better to do either. But I'm not going to waste my time writing baby boardroom amateur naieve business strategy bullshyte.

Next.

KPOM wrote:You can zoom an iPhone map by tapping it.

To a preset level defined for you by Apple and you can't zoom out again.Not good enough. Nokia and spiral wins. I know this beause I have an iPhone and unlike the many I am not blinded to it's very irritating UI faults.

KPOM wrote:
And for those of us who don't (i.e. speakers of most European languages) the virtual keyboards we get on our capacitive touchscreens on iOS, Android, and yes, Symbian phones are perfectly adequate.

I prefer to think more broadly and less parochially.

KPOM wrote:

I actually prefer Android myself. That said, it's impossible to deny that Apple has found a winner with the iPhone and iOS.

I use an iPhone. I'm not sure that the OS and UI are the entire reason for its success. It is extremely poor in very important areas. These are areas that Nokia always get right, but they are not the upfront in your face eye candy areas. It's the superficial stuff that sells.

KPOM wrote:Not necessarily. People looking for "free" or low upfront costs phones will likely buy anything in front of them that looks nice if the price is right. .

All phones are available free.

clonmult wrote:That sort of market price point isn't interested in data in the slightest though, and the arpu will generally be ridiculously low.

Devices such as the lower end Symbian products are very likely to be bought/used on data tariffs which are likely to be more lucrative.

And the 1661 .... we've been looking at a phone for the step daughter at her next birthday (10 years old, too young for a mobile .... ?). What do the kids seem to be wanting? Games, camera, sending of pics/videos between friends - something that the 5230 can do considerably better than such a basic S40 device.

Of course, the 1661 is purely aimed at people who only want to make/take calls and absolutely nothing else, and as a result isn't quite as mass market as higher end S40 devices or lower end S60 devices.

Correct! That's S40 defined.

That's why Symbian isn't replacing it. They are different. It took a while but you got there.

BTW, 10 year olds and up want a qwerty keyboard and prefer Blackberry curves to the cheaper LG type phones.

Unregistered wrote:Correct! That's S40 defined.

That's why Symbian isn't replacing it. They are different. It took a while but you got there.

BTW, 10 year olds and up want a qwerty keyboard and prefer Blackberry curves to the cheaper LG type phones.

Eh? What? S40 is quite a capable "featurephone OS", having Java for gaming, GPS functionality, bluetooth/A2DP, autofocus cameras, etc. If the 1661 is representative of where S40 is going to be going, its basically dropping 90% of its selling points.

Symbian is going to replace S40 though, that was *always* Nokias intent. And it still is judging from what they're actually pushing.

10 year olds and up don't want qwerty, and definitely don't prefer blackberry devices. What they want - as I have said before - is to have something that looks good (ie. not a blackberry), can take pictures/video, play games, do some facebook, play music. The music ability of the BB range really isn't that good. And gaming just hasn't taken off on BB.

Oh, and if its a girl, they'll want it in pink.

Have you tried sending files over bluetooth from a BB? Its absolutely terrible! But then the BB success truly is amazing - its never looked good, only ever worked well in a corporate environment (where I supported and used them for years), the UI is .... kludgy - it makes S60v5 look simple!

Unregistered wrote:I use an iPhone. I'm not sure that the OS and UI are the entire reason for its success. It is extremely poor in very important areas. These are areas that Nokia always get right, but they are not the upfront in your face eye candy areas. It's the superficial stuff that sells.

If you love Nokia/hate iPhone so much why do you use an iPhone? What UI complaints do you have against iOS? I'm curious as your point of view is usually the opposite way around. Most of the people I speak to usually want to get rid of their Nokia/Samsung/Sony Ericsson in favour of an iPhone.