ifanboy
Why do you even bother to post on here if you are going to run down every post made, are there no interesting topics on the iphone sites to keep you busy or something?
Symbian can be tricky to set up, granted but it's only because it is a complex, feature laden and mature OS.
I found Symbian^1 to be a little confusing with the double taps. It is more than simply a matter of getting used to it. It is also more difficult to operate while walking, etc. since it requires more coordination.
Touchscreen phones make more sense as phones morph into GPS devices and mini tablet PCs, which are better suited to touch or touch/keyboard combos than to keyboard/d-pad-only devices. However, touchscreen UIs aren't just non-touch UIs enabled to handle touch input. That was the issue with Symbian^1. Even ignoring the whole tap/double tap issue, Symbian^1 buried too many settings deep within nested menus, and wasn't always consistent. IIRC, some GPS settings were within Maps, while others were within the Settings menu, for instance. Whenever I wanted to change settings it always seemed more difficult than it needed to be.
It is here where more "horizontal" UIs such as the iPhone and Android come in handy. iPhone does have the limitation of lacking a home screen, but it is very simple to use. Apple also seems to use higher quality touchscreens, and I do find the virtual keyboard even on the original iPhone to be superior to the ones I see on Android and Symbian^1.
I think Android does a decent job in balancing the desire for a simple UI with the desire for customizability. It isn't quite as easy to use as iOS, and it isn't as customizable as Symbian^1, but it does show one way forward. Froyo makes it even better, with the dedicated phone, app, and browser buttons on the home screens.
Android also does a better job than Symbian^1 at integrating the native applications. More often on Android I can click on an address and the GPS application will appear as an option than ever happened on Symbian. It works from the browser, contacts, and even the calendar. Ovi Maps never seemed quite so integrated with the rest of the applications.
Where Apple gets it really right is in the integration of the phone UI with the rest of the device. When a call comes in, the phone app takes precedent. Even on S60v3 devices (and Symbian^1) I recall some issues in answering a call quickly when I was in another application. It's this kind of attention to detail that sets Apple apart.
KPOM wrote:I found Symbian^1 to be a little confusing with the double taps. It is more than simply a matter of getting used to it. It is also more difficult to operate while walking, etc. since it requires more coordination.
.
LOL! I think if walking makes coordination difficult or confusing we are lookin at a possible dyspraxic disorder.
Took me about 60 seconds to get used to it.
That's not to say it doesn't need improving. But reading all this anally retentive stuff about consistency and efficiency just makes me sad. Seems that everybody wants everything spoon fed.
And buried deep in menus? Bullshit.
Settings->General->Network->WiFi->Other
Settings->Mail, Contacts, Calendars->Time Zone Support->Time Zone
Name the phone?
I really don't worry that I've had enough calories for breakfast so I've got enough energy for an extra keypress. I really honestly have got better things to get anal about.
Oh my God some of you are idiots. This feels like the dying days of Dreamcast. After waiting MANY years & sticking by Nokia since 3210, i'm jumping ship to Android. I wish Nokia all the best & I sincerely hope that by the time I can next upgrade, Nokia have got their act together. Let's be honest, it's a bad joke that's got very, very old. Fanboyism is just scary at this stage, Nokia have totally struggled to come up with a user experience that can even begin to compete with iphone (yawn) or Android. I fully agree, it's all about the user experience but how something so inconsistent (s60 5th) could ever be expected to compete in the real world is totally beyond me. I've been a mostly happy user of a 5800 for the past 18 months. Aside from the crashes & hard resets (getting more frequent), i love the phone. I'll come back in a year or so, hopefully s60 will have evolved & will finally be fulfilling it's potential & killing ios as I fully believe it should.
LOL... the fanboys commenting here are nothing short of clowns. No wonder that Ricky Cadden and others have abandoned this silly circus.
Tweaks ? All of S60 and Symbian needs a total overhaul. Every time I see a 5th edition screenshot I am reminded how unbearably ugly it is.
May I suggest an article from people other than fanboys?
http://infoworld.com/d/mobilize/what-nokia-must-do-stay-relevant-in-mobile-176
"But seriously, Symbian is catching up with the iPhone on the app / interphase front. I've just downloaded Rotary Dialer to my i8910 from OviStore. The ultimate dialling interphase - it should be standard on all mobile phones. I'm sure the iPhone had it first but as I said, Symbian's catching up fast."
I remember a few years ago when people on message boards and blogs like this one would repeatedly say how many light years the N95 was ahead of the iPhone. Now they're behind & Nokia is "catching up?" What happened?
I think this article is dangerous as it suggests setting Symbian's / Nokia's goals way to low.
I hope people at Nokia who are reading what you've wrote will not see it as a sign they've taken a good enough direction with changes in S^3 UI.
This is the problem with Nokia / Symbian in general. They should aspire much higher. Nokia was innovating back in the day. Why shouldn't they do the same now? Why should they settle for providing merely decent hardware/software/services ?
Of course even making S60v5 UI work properly by adding more RAM and CPU power would make N97/N97 mini WAY much more usable. That's what I'm thinking everyday: I wish, I wish, I wish it would JUST work (and it doesn't) But it's not enough to push things forward. Doing what you ask for in your article would just make Nokia catch up with the competition. Overtaking it will take much more effort. It will take much more thinking and much more tweaking to the UI and UX. And possibly starting from scratch.
Nokia seems to me to be rooted in the old-school days. Their touch interface merely replaces physical buttons and softkeys with touch sensitive ones. That's not enough. That's misunderstanding and underutilizing touch. That's not taking full advantage of opportunities touch presents. That's not bold enough. To set itself apart Nokia would have to start from scratch. With user, tasks and touch in mind.
Look at brilliant way Palm's Web OS uses gestures and multitasks. Not to mention their notification system and calendar interface...
Look how convenient iPhone is despite it's lack of multitasking and how quickly it allows you to do what you want to do.
But both iPhone and WebOS were created exclusively on the foundation of touch. And those of you who think it's the transitions and shiny icons are what make iPhone's UI outstanding should keep your mouth shut:d
What you ask for in the article is merely addressing bugs and clarifying inconsistencies of current UI. This is neccessary, but not enough. It's bugfixing. It's enough to make "okayish" interface. Making a game changing interface requires much more care and subtlety. And I'd love to see that in Nokias approach to it's UI.
After using a lot of Symbian devices (9110, Samsung SX1, 9300, E90, E71 just to name a few) I was persuaded to get the Iphone 3GS, after jailbreaking I was able to have an almost perfect device (all the software I need, an informative homescreen (LockInfo), great musicplayer, webbrowser ect.) only let down by a mediocre camera. Afer reading Steve's articles about the HX hacked i8910 I decided to try this out, only to find out that I was such a pain to use and look at. My main concerns, inconsistent use of single/double tap, outdated font and used inconsistenty some fonts very big, other very small - it just look clumsy, no good software available and what is available is 5-10 times more expensive as on Iphone platform.
I used to like the Nokia's so much ever since the 9110 (which was a breakthrough device for me).
I don't see Nokia getting it right. A touch screen device needs a different aproach all together. They were doing that in the Series 90 and now with the N900/MeeGo.
Please Nokia, stop trying to make S60 work for touch, it's symply not designed for it.
For now, I'm back on the Iphone wagon, Android looks promising, but needs some more time...
manual_ wrote:This is neccessary, but not enough. It's bugfixing. It's enough to make "okayish" interface. Making a game changing interface requires much more care and subtlety. And I'd love to see that in Nokias approach to it's UI.
Why does it need to be game changing? Do you really think most people care beyond the point that it's easily usable?
They don't.
The people who are jumping ship to Android amuse me. Stock Android is pretty clunky and I suspect what most of you are doing is jumping to HTC Sense or Moto Blur or one of the many other skins Android has to use to make it usable.
Sorry, you must be on crack to make this suggestion with a straight face.
The UI as it stands is a basket case, with too many flaws and usability issues to justify the necessary work for it to have a hope of succeeding in an iPhone dominated world.
Common sense would be to dump Symbian now, and move to Maemo/Meego, and given that a fighting chance of creating a successful, open handset platform in a market currently being dominated by Apple and Android.
Unregistered wrote:Settings->General->Network->WiFi->Other
Settings->Mail, Contacts, Calendars->Time Zone Support->Time Zone
Name the phone?
True, but at least Apple is consistent by putting settings in the "Settings" menu. Android also has everything in "Settings." Nokia buried some GPS settings within Maps, while some of the aGPS features were in another menu (I think it was Network settings). While I owned my N97 with its twitchy GPS, quite often I had to tweak settings, and was very annoyed burrowing through the menus only to realize that I had to go back and burrow through a different menu set.
Also, often times you have to go much deeper into a menu setting than on iOS or even Android (which shares some of Symbian's characteristic of nesting commands too deep in menus). I don't have a Symbian phone anymore so I can't go through precise comparisons, but after using a Nexus One for the past 6 months (after 2.5 years with S60v3.1, S60v3.2 and Symbian^1) I can tell you it is much more logical on the Android side.
Plus, and this was an issue even with S60v3, the phone "app" was wildly inconsistent, sometimes causing me to miss calls while I tried to remember the sequence to get the phone to come to the foreground. At least the v3 devices had the slider, but as I recall the N97 sometimes required hitting the "home" button to get the phone screen to come up. This is one area where Apple and Android have it right (the phone always comes to the foreground) and hopefully where Symbian^3 does, too.
Mr Mark wrote:The people who are jumping ship to Android amuse me. Stock Android is pretty clunky and I suspect what most of you are doing is jumping to HTC Sense or Moto Blur or one of the many other skins Android has to use to make it usable.
Nexus One - Stock 2.1 and now Stock 2.2. I've enjoyed the phone for the past 6 months without having to wait for the "next big thing" to come from Espoo. If it comes, great, but I decided back in January I wasn't waiting any longer. The only thing I miss from Symbian is Cisco VPN access while tethering (there seems to be some incompatibility with Android without rooting), though the new Wi-Fi hotspot feature makes regular "tethering" pretty simple.
There was always something "wrong" with the Nokia phones that made me desire the next one. With the N95 it was the size. The N85 fixed that, but it had build quality issues. The N97 had its notorious C: issues (which I constantly ran into), as well as the lens "protector" issue and the overall blandness of Symbian^1. It really did not look like something that Nokia/SF had been working on for 2 years. Plus Symbian^1 broke compatibility with a number of applications expecting QVGA (Sling, for instance). Contrast this with how iOS neatly quadrupled the resolution so that existing applications would work just fine (just using up 4 pixels instead of 1).
Plus, Nokia's insistence that the only way to get "major" OS updates (e.g. from s60v3.1 to s60v3.2) is to buy a new phone is outmoded. Most Android users at least have a path from 1.5 to 1.6 to 2.1. iOS 4 is available to someone who purchased the iPhone 3G in 2008. Since most phone contracts are two years long, I think it is reasonable to expect OS updates for that length of time (and not just bug fixes). Steve writes at length about how great it is that Symbian updates are OTA, but for the most part they are just bug fixes. Sure Symbian^1 added kinetic scrolling and a few other UI enhancements along the way, but it appears Symbian^3 is out of the question, and Nokia still isn't clear as to whether N900 will get MeeGo, or whether the N8 will be upgradeable to Symbian^4. That kind of assurance (that buyers won't be orphaned after Nokia turns to the "next big thing"😉 would do wonders for Nokia's image. Instead it seems they are stuck in the "planned obsolescence" era like the automakers of old. Nokia wants us to think of their devices as mobile computers. However, we can usually upgrade the OS of our computers, so why not with Nokia's devices? We don't expect infinite upgrades (I'm not disappointed iOS 4 doesn't run on the original iPhone, nor am I disappointed that Windows 7 won't install on my old 2003 Dell), but we know MeeGo and Symbian^4 will be released in 2011, so some assurance that our 2010 phones will work with them would be welcome news.
thewinchester wrote:The UI as it stands is a basket case, with too many flaws and usability issues to justify the necessary work for it to have a hope of succeeding in an iPhone dominated world.
Symbian^3 or Symbian^1?
but we know MeeGo and Symbian^4 will be released in 2011, so some assurance that our 2010 phones will work with them would be welcome news.
Why? Yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice as they say. I don't get the expectation that it should run a new OS because where's the incentive to upgrade the hardware - which is where Nokia make their money? Given that firmware is supplied that adds new features then isn't that enough because, fundamentally, all that the Android and iOS upgrades have added in their newer iterations are... err... features that Symbian already had.
KPOM wrote:Nexus One - Stock 2.1 and now Stock 2.2. I've enjoyed the phone for the past 6 months without having to wait for the "next big thing" to come from Espoo. .
http://www.pcworld.com/article/186399/google_faces_deluge_of_nexus_one_complaints.html
Not only that, but Google have stopped selling it, sprint and verizon have dropped it.
It didn't sell many. Bit of a flop.
thewinchester wrote:The UI as it stands is a basket case, with too many flaws and usability issues to justify the necessary work for it to have a hope of succeeding in an iPhone dominated world.Common sense would be to dump Symbian now, and move to Maemo/Meego, and given that a fighting chance of creating a successful, open handset platform in a market currently being dominated by Apple and Android.
How is the world iPhone dominated?
How is the market dominated by Android and iPhone?
Have you seen the numbers?
Or are you talking about a different world, your little world?
Arthur wrote:LOL... the fanboys commenting here are nothing short of clowns. No wonder that Ricky Cadden and others have abandoned this silly circus.Tweaks ? All of S60 and Symbian needs a total overhaul. Every time I see a 5th edition screenshot I am reminded how unbearably ugly it is.
May I suggest an article from people other than fanboys?
http://infoworld.com/d/mobilize/what-nokia-must-do-stay-relevant-in-mobile-176
How can the market leader in sales volume by a long way not be relevant?
How does "all of Symbian" need a total overhaul? Are you familiar with all of it?
I'm not a "fanboy" I'm an Android user, but this "Arthur" clown is so negative and such a creep that I feel that some kind of psychotherapy is required.
At least the fanboys are positive people, even if they are PollyAnna, it's better than being a hateboy like Arthur.
Your post made no sense anywhere.
Unregistered wrote:http://www.pcworld.com/article/186399/google_faces_deluge_of_nexus_one_complaints.htmlNot only that, but Google have stopped selling it, sprint and verizon have dropped it.
It didn't sell many. Bit of a flop.
So what? For the record, Google is still selling the Nexus One, and Android sales are skyrocketing. Nexus One was an attempt to sell phones sight unseen exclusively through a Google-hosted online store. Apparently the market isn't ready for that, so they have turned their attention back toward the more traditional carrier-dominated avenues and are doing rather well. Motorola is back from the brink, and HTC is establishing itself as a big player in this market.
Most of the complaints about the Nexus One were about the lack of support and the 3G issue (since fixed), not the OS itself.
On top of that, Google provided the 2.2 update free to all users of the Nexus One, even though the phone itself wasn't a commercial success. Nokia couldn't be bothered to let N95 owners install S60v3.2.
Mr Mark wrote:Symbian^3 or Symbian^1?Why? Yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice as they say. I don't get the expectation that it should run a new OS because where's the incentive to upgrade the hardware - which is where Nokia make their money?
Apple doesn't seem to have that problem. Each successive version of the iPhone has sold better than the previous version despite Apple making the latest OS available to the previous 2 versions.
Apple's policy encourages people to buy phones because they know they won't be "orphaned" during their contract periods.
Contrast this with Nokia, where I take the risk that a major feature omission will go uncorrected since Nokia expects me to buy a new phone every time I want a meaningful OS update. S60v3.2 released in 2008 added a long-overdue feature to S60, which was the PBAP protocol that enabled synching of the phone's contact list to a car kit. If you owned 2007's flagship N95, guess what. You were out of luck and still had to use Nokia's clunky software add-on that wasted memory space and didn't work on all car kits. Technically, there was no reason N95 couldn't run S60v3.2. It's hardware specs exceed even the N97 in some instances. The only reason it didn't run 3.2 was that Nokia didn't want it to.
While Nokia's model may work for the low-end markets where they get most of their market share, it doesn't appeal to the high-end market (those plunking down $200-300 after subsidies), which is why others have had their lunch for the past 2 years. N8 is supposed to compete with the iPhone and Android. A buyer of an iPhone 4 knows with reasonable certainty he or she will get an OS update next year to keep up with whatever Apple decides to add. An Android buyer is a little less certain because Google doesn't control the release cycle for individual phones, but most of the big manufacturers have provided OS updates.
Mr Mark wrote:Given that firmware is supplied that adds new features then isn't that enough because, fundamentally, all that the Android and iOS upgrades have added in their newer iterations are... err... features that Symbian already had.
So Symbian already had multitouch support (added OTA by Google), and wi-fi hot spot capabilities (added OTA by Google)? With 2.2, Google's Flash support is now on par with Maemo and exceeds any that of any Symbian phone I've ever used. That was also available OTA.
"Technically, there was no reason N95 couldn't run S60v3.2. It's hardware specs exceed even the N97 in some instances. The only reason it didn't run 3.2 was that Nokia didn't want it to."
This is of course true, one can accomplish any software task with sufficient cash. However 3.2 requires a different baseport than 3.1 does, being based on Symbian 9.3 instead of 9.2. IIRC that was a fairly major update including many new kernel features and quite a bit of driver rework as a consequence. You'll note that there aren't any Nokia OMAP2420 devices running 3.2 - they're all on a different HW platform. BTW, the N95 did get the major feature from Symbian OS 9.4 (the basis for S60 5.0) backported to it - you may remember the Demand Paging update which almost doubled the free RAM? That was a pretty huge feature backport that went largely unnoticed.
I guess you could get one from TI, but you would have to get TI to do it because it's theirs. Remember this was long before SF and open source base ports. I'm not even sure that TI would have done the work however much you wanted it. At the time TI was really hard pushed to get OMAP3430 devices out of the door.
Even if they did make one (did they? Did those Samsung 3.2 devices have an OMAP?) I'm not sure any company would upgrade something like a base port on a device. It would be tantamount to making a new phone and very expensive to do for the miniscule % of 2007 customers who upgraded FW.
And yes, FW upgraders are a tiny minority of users, even when the device pulls FW OTA. This is unavoidable when you're selling mass market devices. iPhone is much better in this regard, since you have to tether it to a PC/Mac to do anything, right from activation onwards.
KPOM wrote:Apple doesn't seem to have that problem. Each successive version of the iPhone has sold better than the previous version despite Apple making the latest OS available to the previous 2 versions.
Apple now their audience very well. The average Apple fan isn't going to use old hardware because it simply isn't cool.
So Symbian already had multitouch support (added OTA by Google), and wi-fi hot spot capabilities (added OTA by Google)? With 2.2, Google's Flash support is now on par with Maemo and exceeds any that of any Symbian phone I've ever used. That was also available OTA.
Symbian^3 has multitouch support and will support Flash 10.1 as will Symbian^4 and MeeGo. What's your point here? Also, can you confirm that every Android phone released - even those in the last twelve months - will support 2.2?
Actually don't bother: they won't. Some yes, other no much in the same way that the iPhone 3G and 3GS do not support all the features (which are... err... multitasking and folders which Symbian has had since 2005 at least). How is this different from Nokia do?
Incidentally, if you cast your mind back you'll recall Nokia added AGPS - which was fairly revolutionary - to the N95 back in 2007. The idea that Nokia don't update their popular phones is preposterous.
Mr Mark wrote:Apple now their audience very well. The average Apple fan isn't going to use old hardware because it simply isn't cool.
That's a tired argument. Apple is now a mainstream producer, and not just a seller to "fans."
Plus, if Apple "knows" their fans are going to buy new phones every year, then why bother updating the old phones? Perhaps they realize that not everyone updates every year, and that even those who do might pass their old phones down to someone else (creating new potential customers)?
Mr Mark wrote:
Symbian^3 has multitouch support and will support Flash 10.1 as will Symbian^4 and MeeGo. What's your point here?
It was in response to your contention that "every" update to iOS and Android simply added features that were "already in Symbian." Multitouch and Flash 10.1 support aren't in Symbian^1. Nokia is the one playing catch up with Symbian^3, although Maemo did have good Flash support before.
Mr Mark wrote:
Also, can you confirm that every Android phone released - even those in the last twelve months - will support 2.2?
No, and I've pointed that out because Google doesn't control what manufacturers do, but most manufacturers are announcing their plans regarding Android 2.2. Manufacturer obstinance is a risk with Android. It's a known pattern with Nokia. Apple has done their best to avoid it.
Mr Mark wrote: Some yes, other no much in the same way that the iPhone 3G and 3GS do not support all the features (which are... err... multitasking and folders which Symbian has had since 2005 at least). How is this different from Nokia do?
Folders and Multitasking DO work on the iPhone 3GS, and Folders work on the 3G. As for the lack of multitasking on the 3G, that could be based on hardware limitations (much like the OMAP discussion from a previous post as to why the N95 never got S60v3.2), since Apple doesn't want to degrade the performance of the older phones with the kind of out-of-memory errors and crashes that plague certain other phones (e.g. N97). Anyway, by making the latest OS version available they reduce the possibility of application incompatibility, which has plagued Symbian for a long time.
Plus, in past updates, Apple provided features such native Exchange support and support for MobileMe.
Mr Mark wrote:
Incidentally, if you cast your mind back you'll recall Nokia added AGPS - which was fairly revolutionary - to the N95 back in 2007. The idea that Nokia don't update their popular phones is preposterous.
They provide updates, but not OS updates. Most of the firmware updates to the N95 were bug fixes. Very little new functionality was added. iOS updates have tended to be more substantial. Incidentally, aGPS never worked as well as advertised for me for the N95. It was a nice addition, but Nokia's own software never really used it to great advantage. I found third party GPS software to be better than Nokia Maps at locking into position, and Google Maps far better at using cellular triangulation.
Actually, the original non-GPS iPhone used cellular triangulation, so the fact that Nokia later added aGPS to a GPS-enabled phone wasn't all that stunning. It should have been there in the first place.
KPOM wrote:That's a tired argument. Apple is now a mainstream producer, and not just a seller to "fans."
Tired but true. the iPhone is a high end phone and a significant number of its buyers purchase it for the cool factor. I rather doubt any significant number buy it because the OS may be upgradable.
Perhaps they realize that not everyone updates every year, and that even those who do might pass their old phones down to someone else (creating new potential customers)?
Possibly yes but ask yourself what they have been upgraded to. It's generally baseline features on other phone models.
It was in response to your contention that "every" update to iOS and Android simply added features that were "already in Symbian." Multitouch and Flash 10.1 support aren't in Symbian^1. Nokia is the one playing catch up with Symbian^3, although Maemo did have good Flash support before.
Not with you - multitouch was always in iOS, it's not been added so any new additions to the OS do not affect this. Symbian^1 never had it. Symbian^3, Symbian^4 and MeeGo will.
We're talking about the features an OS upgrade adds to the baseline proposition. The upgrades to iOS have added copy and paste, multitasking, folders and a few other bits and bobs so, to me anyway, it's not a wonderful upgrade, it's merely completing an unfinished product.
No, and I've pointed that out because Google doesn't control what manufacturers do, but most manufacturers are announcing their plans regarding Android 2.2.
So all Android handsets released in the last year will not support the latest version of Android. OK, we've now established that the new OS will not trickle down to all relatively new handsets anyway.
Folders and Multitasking DO work on the iPhone 3GS, and Folders work on the 3G.
Yes. Now they do one to two years after release. Meantime every Symbian device since the early part of the decade has had these functions embedded.
As for the lack of multitasking on the 3G, that could be based on hardware limitations (much like the OMAP discussion from a previous post as to why the N95 never got S60v3.2), since Apple doesn't want to degrade the performance of the older phones with the kind of out-of-memory errors and crashes that plague certain other phones (e.g. N97).
The 3G runs a CPU that's equivalent or better than the N95, 5800 and other phones all of which multi-task effectively. Are you really arguing that Apple want to protect us fro ourselves here?
Anyway, by making the latest OS version available they reduce the possibility of application incompatibility, which has plagued Symbian for a long time.
Except it's not available to the original iPhone and not all applications are compatible between models are they?
Plus, in past updates, Apple provided features such native Exchange support and support for MobileMe.
Which Nokia also available for most recent smartphone handsets under MS Exchange and Ovi Files.
They provide updates, but not OS updates. Most of the firmware updates to the N95 were bug fixes.
Sure. Just like iOS - you might want to look at the 'feature' logs.
Very little new functionality was added. iOS updates have tended to be more substantial.
Well yes, they had to be given that we're back to the point that Symbian already supported MMS, copy and paste, multitasking and folders from the get go. Once again, it's hard to add stuff that's already there.
Actually, the original non-GPS iPhone used cellular triangulation, so the fact that Nokia later added aGPS to a GPS-enabled phone wasn't all that stunning. It should have been there in the first place.
Indeed. Like MMS and copy and paste one would imagine.
Mr Mark wrote:Tired but true. the iPhone is a high end phone and a significant number of its buyers purchase it for the cool factor. I rather doubt any significant number buy it because the OS may be upgradable.
Then why does Apple make OS updates available while Nokia does not?
Mr Mark wrote:Not with you - multitouch was always in iOS, it's not been added so any new additions to the OS do not affect this. Symbian^1 never had it. Symbian^3, Symbian^4 and MeeGo will.
I was speaking of Android. Multitouch was not part of Android, but Google added it and made it available.
Mr Mark wrote:We're talking about the features an OS upgrade adds to the baseline proposition. The upgrades to iOS have added copy and paste, multitasking, folders and a few other bits and bobs so, to me anyway, it's not a wonderful upgrade, it's merely completing an unfinished product.
Maybe to you, but the N95 was an unfinished product. "Feature Pack 2" added the PBAP protocol to S60, a glaring omission that was in the original iPhone. It's still missing from the N95 and any "Feature Pack 1" phone.
Mr Mark wrote:
Yes. Now they do one to two years after release. Meantime every Symbian device since the early part of the decade has had these functions embedded.
The "gap" between what's missing in Android 1.6 and Symbian was pretty small. Android always supported Bluetooth, MMS, cut-and-paste. However, NO Nokia device has an upgradable OS. Some Android devices do, and ALL iPhones are upgradeable, at least to the next generation OS. We are in agreement here.
Mr Mark wrote:
The 3G runs a CPU that's equivalent or better than the N95, 5800 and other phones all of which multi-task effectively. Are you really arguing that Apple want to protect us fro ourselves here?
Perhaps. The N95, 5800, and even N97 start choking when too many applications are running in the background. Apple has added mechanisms that permit notifications, etc. Apple's philosophy isn't to fill a spec sheet. They want to release a product that works properly. Nokia seems more interested in checking boxes off a feature list, regardless of whether or not they actually work right.
Mr Mark wrote:
Except it's not available to the original iPhone and not all applications are compatible between models are they?
Again, the original iPhone is 3 years old now, and it was kept current through the OS that went into the 3GS. Nokia apparently can't be bothered to let a phone released in 2010 be upgradeable to the OS that is already announced for 2011.
Plus, you cannot seriously argue that Nokia does a better job maintaining compatibility than Apple. The vast majority of applications on the App Store work on the following devices: iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad. When I upgraded from the N85 to the N97, nearly all of my applications had to be upgraded, if upgrades even were available. I thought the whole point of Symbian^1 and why it took so long was that Nokia/SF were trying to ensure compatibility while adapting the non-touch S60 to a touch environment. Heck, even the update from the N95 to the N85 broke compatibility with some applications.
Mr Mark wrote:Well yes, they had to be given that we're back to the point that Symbian already supported MMS, copy and paste, multitasking and folders from the get go. Once again, it's hard to add stuff that's already there.
Just like PBAP? Feature Pack 2 added a lot of stability and security improvements over S60v3.1. It also made the BT stack more reliable, and it also added the ability to preserve data while installing patches. Also, FP2 reduced (but did not eliminate) FP1's Vista-esque "permissions" that required me to click "Yes" multiple times to open relatively simple applications like Earthcomber that wanted to use the GPS and phone features.
What about the ability to tap on a phone number within a calendar entry and have it dial out? Android does it. iOS does it. Symbian^1, S60v3.1, and S60v3.2 do not, at least not without separate applications. I used to use Papyrus for that functionality, except it was never updated for Symbian^1. Hopefully Symbian^3 adds that basic functionality.
It's the same with reading PDFs. I was very annoyed that what had been standard on S60 became an optional purchase on Symbian^1.
Plus, Apple now has a superior cut-and-paste solution to Symbian (and Android, for that matter). Sure, Nokia had the feature, but they never improved it. It's the same with browsing. Nokia adopted the Apple-created open-source Webkit browser first, but they didn't improve upon it as others passed them by.
The fact of the matter is that Apple and Google have improved their operating systems and made them available to existing users. Nokia reached a basic level of development in 2007, which in many respects was ahead of the nascent Apple and Android systems, but then rested on their laurels in 2008 and 2009 while Apple and Android not only filled in the gaps but exceeded them.
Let's think back 3 years to the common arguments as to why the N95 was superior to the original iPhone and see what has happened:
- N95 supports third party apps. 2010 - Apple does and has 200,000. Android does and has 50,000. Symbian has a fraction of that. Yes there's a lot of junk in the 200,000 and 50,000, but there is also a lot of junk for Symbian. iOS is unsurpassed in applications such as medical applications.
- N95 has aGPS. 2010 - So do Apple and Android. Arguably, Ovi Maps still leaves Nokia a bit ahead of Apple (since turn-by-turn requires apps on iOS), but Google is making navigation free in North America and much of Europe, with more countries on the way.
- N95 supports cut and paste. 2010 - So do Apple and Android, and they work better than they do on Symbian.
- N95 supports video recording - So do Apple and Android. iOS has superior editing software built in. Apple also seems to be taking the iPhone camera more seriously now. The N8 looks good on paper, but we'll see once it actually is released. Nokia reached a pinnacle with the N95 and N82 in 2007, and then seemed to get worse, not better, from 2007 to now. iPhone has always taken better daylight photos than its specs would suggest, because they used a good sensor. That has continued with iPhone 4.
- N95 supports MMS. 2010 - So do Apple and Android. Meanwhile, Nokia thought so much of MMS that they decided to release the Maemo-based N900 for $600 without MMS support. It didn't seem to deter the Nokia fans.
- N95 supports Exchange with third-party support. 2010 - Apple and Android do natively. Plus Apple has long had a better e-mail client than Symbian. Even the N97 lacked a built-in HTML e-mail reader, which Android has had since Day 1.
The bottom line is that it's pretty obvious why Nokia has lost significant ground in the profitable high end of the market. They rested on their laurels and tried gimmicks like the DRM "Comes with Music" while their competitors were improving their offerings and providing better hardware to boot.
KPOM wrote:Then why does Apple make OS updates available while Nokia does not?
Because they need to.
I was speaking of Android. Multitouch was not part of Android, but Google added it and made it available.
I should point out that the G1 was capable of multitouch but disabled from doing so. It was always there, just blocked.
The "gap" between what's missing in Android 1.6 and Symbian was pretty small. Android always supported Bluetooth, MMS, cut-and-paste. However, NO Nokia device has an upgradable OS. Some Android devices do, and ALL iPhones are upgradeable, at least to the next generation OS. We are in agreement here.
I don't think we are. All Apple devices are upgradable but not all can use the features in the new OS. Android can implement across a selection of devices and Nokia's devices already had the functions (multitouch aside) that they had.
Perhaps. The N95, 5800, and even N97 start choking when too many applications are running in the background.
How many is too many?
Apple has added mechanisms that permit notifications, etc. Apple's philosophy isn't to fill a spec sheet.
Which is fine. It's one way of doing things.
Nokia seems more interested in checking boxes off a feature list, regardless of whether or not they actually work right.
I think Nokia's philosophy is to allow the user to make their own choices.
Again, the original iPhone is 3 years old now, and it was kept current through the OS that went into the 3GS. Nokia apparently can't be bothered to let a phone released in 2010 be upgradeable to the OS that is already announced for 2011.
Again, why would they since those phones already have the core feature set? Again, Apple's OS upgrades have merely added functionality that already existed on Symbian devices. In addition, iOS upgrades do not enable all features on all iPhones.
Plus, you cannot seriously argue that Nokia does a better job maintaining compatibility than Apple.
For their own stuff, yes. For third party, nope. You're right there.
When I upgraded from the N85 to the N97, nearly all of my applications had to be upgraded, if upgrades even were available.
Oh come on. The N85 isn't a touch enabled device. If Apple ever get round to producing a non-touch device I can guarantee you that most of their apps will need rewritten.
I thought the whole point of Symbian^1 and why it took so long was that Nokia/SF were trying to ensure compatibility while adapting the non-touch S60 to a touch environment.
Not sure what gives you that idea. They're two completely different UIs.
What about the ability to tap on a phone number within a calendar entry and have it dial out? Android does it. iOS does it.
OK, but what has that to do with upgrading an OS? It's a feature iOS and Android has regardless of the version you use.
It's the same with reading PDFs. I was very annoyed that what had been standard on S60 became an optional purchase on Symbian^1.
Agree. That was annoying to say the least.
The fact of the matter is that Apple and Google have improved their operating systems and made them available to existing users. Nokia reached a basic level of development in 2007, which in many respects was ahead of the nascent Apple and Android systems, but then rested on their laurels in 2008 and 2009 while Apple and Android not only filled in the gaps but exceeded them.
I disagree. Nokia's approach has been firmware based rather than OS based which it really has to be given the diversity of the the range. Upgrading the iPhone is easy, it's essentially one product and we've already discussed how fragmentation means Google can't offer the latest Android version to all Android handsets.
Let's think back 3 years to the common arguments as to why the N95 was superior to the original iPhone and see what has happened
Why? The n95 is a three year old phone.
N95 supports third party apps. 2010 - Apple does and has 200,000. Android does and has 50,000. Symbian has a fraction of that.
Incorrect. Symbian has a fraction of that in Ovi. In GetJar and other repositories there are many more. Apple has also had the winnowing out of useless apps that Nokia has had over the last five years.
N95 has aGPS. 2010 - So do Apple and Android. Arguably, Ovi Maps still leaves Nokia a bit ahead of Apple (since turn-by-turn requires apps on iOS), but Google is making navigation free in North America and much of Europe, with more countries on the way.
Ovi maps is considerably ahead of Apple and Android because it doesn't require an always on data connection. Try seeing how 'free' Google Maps is when you cross European borders and carriers.
N95 supports cut and paste. 2010 - So do Apple and Android, and they work better than they do on Symbian.
Yup.
N95 supports video recording - So do Apple and Android. iOS has superior editing software built in.
Rubbish. iMovie isn't free. It costs $5 from the app store. Nokia's on the other hand is free.
Apple also seems to be taking the iPhone camera more seriously now.
Welcome to 2007 and all that.
The N8 looks good on paper, but we'll see once it actually is released. Nokia reached a pinnacle with the N95 and N82 in 2007, and then seemed to get worse, not better, from 2007 to now.
Nonsense. The N86 is a far better camera phone than the N95 and, Xenon flash aside, the N82.
iPhone has always taken better daylight photos than its specs would suggest, because they used a good sensor. That has continued with iPhone 4.
No, it's because of wishful thinking. It doesn't take any better or worse pictures than a 3.2Mp camera with a small sensor can be expected to take. The iPhone 4's camera is better but still well behind the curve.
N95 supports MMS. 2010 - So do Apple and Android. Meanwhile, Nokia thought so much of MMS that they decided to release the Maemo-based N900 for $600 without MMS support. It didn't seem to deter the Nokia fans.
Whilst releasing well over 200 million phones the same year that do. The N900 is a Maemo handset. Totally different beast.
N95 supports Exchange with third-party support. 2010 - Apple and Android do natively. Plus Apple has long had a better e-mail client than Symbian. Even the N97 lacked a built-in HTML e-mail reader, which Android has had since Day 1.
Nokia's agreement with Microsoft prevented its install. Symbian^1 now has an HTML e-mail client and has for months.
The bottom line is that it's pretty obvious why Nokia has lost significant ground in the profitable high end of the market. They rested on their laurels and tried gimmicks like the DRM "Comes with Music" while their competitors were improving their offerings and providing better hardware to boot.
I agree to a point. The problem with your list of comparisons is that it appears to have taken Apple and Android three years to match or exceed the N95's feature set. I do think Nokia have dropped the ball, let's make no mistake there, but the rationale that every device should be upgradable to new versions of an OS is spurious - Apple can do it because they make one product and Android have now admitted they can't release later versions to separate handsets.
But you're right about Nokia sitting on their laurels. I don't think anyone can argue that.
Mr Mark wrote:Because they need to.
??? Nokia "needed to" as well, but didn't. Lack of PBAP was nearly inexcusable in a flagship.
Mr Mark wrote:
I should point out that the G1 was capable of multitouch but disabled from doing so. It was always there, just blocked.
Patent dispute, but the key here is that Google later made it available.
Mr Mark wrote:
I don't think we are. All Apple devices are upgradable but not all can use the features in the new OS. Android can implement across a selection of devices and Nokia's devices already had the functions (multitouch aside) that they had.
But most of functionality is there. The point is that iPhone and Android get better over time, while Nokia devices pretty much don't. Not even the flagships.
Mr Mark wrote:
Which is fine. It's one way of doing things.
I'd argue it's a superior way of doing things. Part of Nokia's problem is that it crams so many features in, doesn't integrate them very well, and has lots of bugs to fix.
Mr Mark wrote:
Again, why would they since those phones already have the core feature set? Again, Apple's OS upgrades have merely added functionality that already existed on Symbian devices. In addition, iOS upgrades do not enable all features on all iPhones.
Except that while Nokia had the features, they didn't work very well. Some of the biggest improvements came in FP2, but Nokia didn't let N95 users update to it. Similarly, there were no significant updates to the FP2 phones. I still hear complaints on the boards about N85 bugs that were never fixed.
It's one thing to put a feature in. It's another thing entirely to make it work right. In general, iOS phones do fewer things but do them more effectively than Symbian phones. Sure, Nokia has had cut-and-paste since V3, but it still doesn't work in the browser.
Mr Mark wrote:
Oh come on. The N85 isn't a touch enabled device. If Apple ever get round to producing a non-touch device I can guarantee you that most of their apps will need rewritten.
That doesn't explain why so many of my N95 applications needed updates when I got the N85. Plus, Nokia had been saying for a long time that part of the reason v5 was taking so long was that they wanted to ensure compatibility. Most of the broken apps weren't because of the touch/non-touch issue. It was because Symbian^1 had no way of treating S60 applications that expected a QVGA screen (Sling is a perfect case in point).
Mr Mark wrote:
I disagree. Nokia's approach has been firmware based rather than OS based which it really has to be given the diversity of the the range. Upgrading the iPhone is easy, it's essentially one product and we've already discussed how fragmentation means Google can't offer the latest Android version to all Android handsets.
But flagships are different. I'm not saying that every Nokia phone should be upgradeable. However, it is reasonable to expect that the N8 would be upgradeable to Symbian^4, particularly when SF has made clear that Symbian^3 is a stop-gap solution to stay competitive, and Nokia has made it clear that it sees Symbian^4 and MeeGo as its flagship products in the relatively near future.
It is Nokia's decision to make myriad variations of their products. Perhaps they'd be better suited with a smaller product line. Why was it necessary to have the N95, N85, N86, and N82 all for sale at the same time? Google can't control it since it just writes the OS. However, Nokia produces the hardware and is the biggest user of Symbian. They could be as tightly integrated as Apple, yet they create their own differentiation problems.
Mr Mark wrote:
Why? The n95 is a three year old phone.
It's a good way of seeing how the industry has evolved over the last 3 years.
Mr Mark wrote:
Incorrect. Symbian has a fraction of that in Ovi. In GetJar and other repositories there are many more. Apple has also had the winnowing out of useless apps that Nokia has had over the last five years.
Which explains why there are 0 medical apps for Symbian and dozens for iOS? I suppose that's an example of "winnowing out useless apps"?
The fact of the matter is Apple has a winning strategy with the App store. They have created an integrated market that supports smartphones, music players, and tablets, and with that they are attracting significant developer interest. It's also possible that AppleTV will be powered by iOS. As it is, there is significant compatibility between iPod Touch, iPhone, and iPad, which have different target audiences and very different hardware specs. Therefore, I don't buy the argument that Apple has it easier because they have "just one product to support."
Mr Mark wrote:Ovi maps is considerably ahead of Apple and Android because it doesn't require an always on data connection. Try seeing how 'free' Google Maps is when you cross European borders and carriers.
As it should be considering how much Nokia spent for Navteq. That said, Google's approach works well in the US and Canada where we can drive for days without switching carriers. Google was actually the first mover here when they made navigation free with the Droid. Perhaps it was Nokia's plan all along to make Ovi Maps free, but if so, $8 billion was a lot to pay for Navteq. My guess is that they saw the writing on the wall and realized that free GPS was about their only marketing advantage.
Mr Mark wrote:
Rubbish. iMovie isn't free. It costs $5 from the app store. Nokia's on the other hand is free.
And it doesn't work very well. Fair point on the $5, but then I paid $20 for Papyrus to get a calendar that interacted with the phone (and it wasn't even available for Symbian^1).
Mr Mark wrote:Nonsense. The N86 is a far better camera phone than the N95 and, Xenon flash aside, the N82.
The N86 was a niche product, though. The N97 camera was worse than the one in the N95. There really was no excuse for that. Both phones targeted the same audience, and the N97 came out 2 years later. At minimum, they should have been on par, but weren't.
Mr Mark wrote:
No, it's because of wishful thinking. It doesn't take any better or worse pictures than a 3.2Mp camera with a small sensor can be expected to take. The iPhone 4's camera is better but still well behind the curve.
Not really. Check out some photo comparisons and it does quite well against most other smartphones (particularly Android and WinMo devices).
Anyway, I have no doubt that N8 will be a great cameraphone, but did Nokia really need to make it 12MP? They are going down the "megapixel path" and might have done better to keep it at 8MP and improve on other specs. I worry they haven't quite gotten over the "spec sheet" approach to designing a phone.
Mr Mark wrote:
Whilst releasing well over 200 million phones the same year that do. The N900 is a Maemo handset. Totally different beast.
True, but Maemo is supposedly the future. They released a $600 phone and concluded that MMS wasn't all that necessary.
Mr Mark wrote:
Nokia's agreement with Microsoft prevented its install. Symbian^1 now has an HTML e-mail client and has for months.
It was Nokia's decision to contract with Microsoft. They are open to the same criticism as Apple for partnering with AT&T.
Do you mean Nokia Messaging? I always had issues with that one. If they have now finally updated the basic mail application, then good for them.
Mr Mark wrote:
I agree to a point. The problem with your list of comparisons is that it appears to have taken Apple and Android three years to match or exceed the N95's feature set.
No, most of those features were added a long time ago. My point is that in 2010, Apple and Android have surpassed what is Nokia's best offering in most areas, often by quite a bit. Considering that neither were even in the phone business 4 years ago, that's quite an accomplishment.
Mr Mark wrote:
I do think Nokia have dropped the ball, let's make no mistake there, but the rationale that every device should be upgradable to new versions of an OS is spurious - Apple can do it because they make one product and Android have now admitted they can't release later versions to separate handsets.But you're right about Nokia sitting on their laurels. I don't think anyone can argue that.
Again, I'm not arguing that every Nokia device needs to be upgradeable. They can sell dirt cheap phones in developed and emerging markets, and those customers neither expect nor necessarily desire OS updates. However, N8 buyers are of the same ilk as Droid/Milestone or iPhone buyers. They are buying a high-end phone and either paying a lot upfront or signing on to a more costly contract to get it. Like it or not, most markets are carrier-dominated, and even many early adopters and tech-savvy buyers keep mobile phones longer than other devices for that reason.
There was really nothing "wrong" with the iPhone 3GS. It sold very well and it scored extremely well on customer satisfaction surveys. Apple didn't have to let users update to iOS 4, but they did anyway. If Nokia wants the N8 fanbase to be as passionate, they should do the same.
Remember, we're not talking about Nokia's entire market here. We're talking about the high end, where Nokia now is claiming underdog status and vowing to "fight back." Breaking with the past and allowing last year's flagship owners to stay current is a great way to show they are serious this time.
Unregistered wrote:How can the market leader in sales volume by a long way not be relevant?How does "all of Symbian" need a total overhaul? Are you familiar with all of it?
I'm not a "fanboy" I'm an Android user, but this "Arthur" clown is so negative and such a creep that I feel that some kind of psychotherapy is required.
At least the fanboys are positive people, even if they are PollyAnna, it's better than being a hateboy like Arthur.
Your post made no sense anywhere.
Am I familiar with Symbian??? I've been using it since the 7650 but recently gave up on it. Get it?
Tell you what my friend, instead of listening to me why don't you go and read the comments and tell these people they are "hateboys":
http://www.symbian-guru.com/welcome/2010/07/symbian-guru-com-is-over.html
Just my 2 cent worth here guys, and I too have a lot of experience with Symbian over the years. I feel that the Symbian UI is very outdated, and its long overdue an overhaul.
Eye candy, and smooth transitions are more than just a visual experience, they are a way of the device actually interacting with the user. These UI elements look great, and at the same time, show the user that the device is doing something rather than what Symbian does, IE> Black screen, or short freeze between operations. There's nothing worse than having to wait for a process, not knowing it the device has indeed crashed during a process, or in actual fact is just slow to perform. Smooth UI, and eye candy rules this out by interacting with the user visually, so when a process is being carried out, the user can kind of see a UI progress situation.
Hope that makes sense? What Im trying to explain is eye candy is much more than just eye candy, it brings the device alive, and kind of visually interacts with the end user..
Exactly.
Transitions, fade-ins, fade-outs, windows sliding in smoothly that some people dismiss so easily are making interface more friendly and enhance user experience. Not only because they are nice to watch. They make the interface more "real world like". In real world things do not appear and dissappear in an instant. When you walk or drive wiev changes gradually over time - you know where you are and where you came from. When you accelerate or stop, you also don't do it in an instant. Unless you hit something. Which is usually called an accident or a crash😉. If things started to suddenly appear and vanish in real world it would be very disturbing and would make living very difficult, unpredictable and scary😉. Same applies to "virtual environment". It's harder to feel at home with sharp cuts between view changes, menus popping from out of nowhere or worse - picture on the screen going blank and then reappearing with totally different control layout. Such behaviour only adds to the confusion. Even if "just" for a second or two (remember that 3600 seconds is an hour😉 it's what makes UX worse.
There's one condition - eye candy cannot compromise speed and efficiency. If it does it does then it's better to have none at all.
While grid menus are similar on all UI, it is perhaps useful to understand why iPhone could dominate the touch UI.
Let us go back a little to see why Symbian can dominate the keypad phones. Its grid menus are not just appearance, they directly map to the T9 keypad. A phone users therefore have through the keypad a direct control consistently throughout all screens. This rationale even powers many successful apps and games on Symbian. Good example will be Opera mini which is similarly so convenient with its keypad shortcuts. This direct control via T9 is a big part of a good UI BEFORE the touch screen. Using the keypad was real and instantaneous, user feel IN CONTROL.
When Apple took away the physical keypad, they knew they need to find a new way to let the user be IN CONTROL: the instant touch. They went all the way to make it happen. They chose capacitive because it reacts instantly without ambiguity. They put in huge memory to cache screens. They put in hw accelerator to make sure screen redraw will not lag the finger drag. They even sacrifice multi-tasking so that OS UI core always remain the top controller.
They truly are obssessed with giving user the touch.
They also understand that hardware is there to support the OS UI, not the other way round.
I truly adore the functionalities Symbian put inside a small device but I think Nokia has truly misunderstood the touch or not transport the direct control Symbian did well in the T9 world into the new touch world.
Forget for a moment the R vs C screen at the moment and look at X6 which sport also a C touch screen. The lag is not just in the double taps, it is everywhere!
Screen keyboard key react a little slow. Even slower when another task happens in the background. Dragging the web pages can really be a pain sometimes. Task switching using the menu long press is just not finger friendly.
Symbian is a true realtime OS and should not sport such mediocure performance. It really is a case of Nokia not giving enough RAM, hardware and CPU. But importantly, where is the dedication to the user control they gave like in a T9 environment previously?
Or the Nokia hardware guys must have thought just another class of device for the Symbian engineers to customize and adapt.
Seriously, Nokia need to have the software people in command and back to basic UI interactivity and stop having the hardware crippling the user experience.