My Photo

Ordering Information

Tomi on Twitter is @tomiahonen

  • Follow Tomi on Twitter as @tomiahonen
    Follow Tomi's Twitterfloods on all matters mobile, tech and media. Tomi has over 8,000 followers and was rated by Forbes as the most influential writer on mobile related topics

Book Tomi T Ahonen to Speak at Your Event

  • Contact Tomi T Ahonen for Speaking and Consulting Events
    Please write email to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com and indicate "Speaking Event" or "Consulting Work" or "Expert Witness" or whatever type of work you would like to offer. Tomi works regularly on all continents

Tomi on Video including his TED Talk

  • Tomi on Video including his TED Talk
    See Tomi on video from several recent keynote presentations and interviews, including his TED Talk in Hong Kong about Augmented Reality as the 8th Mass Media

Subscribe


Blog powered by Typepad

« Another Casualty in Smartphone Bloodbath! Vodafone pulls plug on 360 smartphones | Main | Smartphone Bloodbath: Report Card at Half Point of Year 2010 for all major brands »

July 30, 2010

Comments

Pragna Sen

Tomi
Thank you for an illuminating article - that was absolutely fascinating. We've been debating the future of smartphones as the next big device (entertainment, productivity, tele-medicine, security, identity, money, etc.) for a while at the Convergence Conversations we run with Intellect (the UK's technology trade association), it would have been great to have you attend and speak. Are you going to be in London anytime soon?

christexaport

@ Arild,
Your comment was very thought provoking, and it caused me to rethink some things, because you had various valid points. I actually had to sleep on that and clear my mind, because I absolutely agreed with Tomi. I'm his biggest fan, and find it blasphemous when others accuse him of missing the mark or getting it all wrong... He's that good.

But I figured out where YOU missed the point. This is a platform/ecosystem war. And you are right, we are accessing protocols and standards on our devices. They all access the web, email, make calls, IM, etc. This is true. But when a platform fails to maintain scale, it loses its viability to developers. Not ALL developers, but most major ones that make the best software.

There are new protocols and uses that will be standards tomorrow, like social networking. At some point, developers will look at a small OS, like maybe WebOS (which I love, honestly. Very MeeGoish...), and decide its not worth the $50-75k required to develop or upgrade their application. Remember, most software development costs are the same across all platforms.

Some share code bases so you theoretically kill 2 birds with one stone using cross platform technologies. This is what Microsoft and Symbian have done with Silverlight, and Nokia is doing with Symbian, MeeGo, and the desktop OSes with Symbian. Nokia has presented a lower cost of software development for major software development houses. This is Nokia's ace in the hole, and its other true advantage. They have so many that others seem to ignore, as if a UI design is much harder to make than the rest of their advantages, but I believe that not to be the case.

Also, when scale is lost, development costs aren't easily recouped, and there becomes a point when platform evolution of, say, the UI/UX stagnates because of costs of development. It becomes much cheaper to just pick up the more popular platform and work with it. If its an open platform that allows UI differentiation, like Symbian, MeeGo, and Android, it's almost a no brainer.

Just like we're using standards, so are the developers. And they prefer to remain using common standard tools that target the widest audience possible. This is why Microsoft is king of the desktop, and Apple is king of profits, but almost tanked were it not for a lifeline investment from Bill Gates of all folks. You must know that devs make far more from the Windows ecosystem that Apple.

Its the development ecosystem. Period. Without continued growth, the iOS ecosystem will stagnate. No major developers target a 20% share when there are larger slices with greater reach. It seems they do today, but remember, that was because of the App Store craze, and the newcomers started with that advantage, but it has been replicated, and is no longer a long advantage. Google and Ovi have recently emerged, and Microsoft has studied the competition, and will also show up. None of the App Stores are proving to be big money makers, so cost of development and reach will matter more once app delivery becomes a standardized thing, just like email, document handling, web, and music. Once everyone is doing it, you can't use it as a unique selling point.

"If we look at the main example used that market share matters, namely VCRs, then there is a major difference with smartphones. With VCRs the core purpose was to watch films and/or recordings off the TV. If I had a Betamax player I could never hope to play a VHS tape. So I had to "buy into" the platform long term. In other words, even if the films on these tapes were seen as "software" (not in terms of software programming, but vs the hardware of the players), it was still a physical, non-negotiable object."

Great point, and it makes mine as well. Unlike VCR tapes, our apps evolve. And if a platform fails to reach critical mass, that evolution slows, and becomes an issue. So users usually wind up where all of the developer support lands, and developer support is usually at the door of the ecosystem with the farthest reach, most volume, and lowest cost to development. This means iOS, for example, will have to find its way into more devices than Android or Symbian/MeeGo (they share the Qt ecosystem, so they are seen as one), diversify its device portfolio to allow it to reach more price points, and in turn lower the cost of development vs. the expected return.

Most apps today use ads for revenue. Its not always the affluence of the audience that brings in the dollars, its usually the amount of eyes in the ad business. Developers are embracing ad generated revenue, and eyes is the name of the ad game 90% of the time. I'll tell you this, I'd rather target Symbian/MeeGo's 40% of the eyes than iOS' 15%. And once others feel the same, that 15% becomes shakey, and has to fight to survive.

"The only thing that the platforms made a difference for was the quality of my experience of using these functions"

Hence my point of developer costs. That ease of use you favor was created with an exact cost in dollars. And customers bring revenue. Apple is making profits, but the high end consumer profits, which is Apple's niche and specialty, is more risky in the long run.

This is why most luxury automakers always have a mass market counterpart that is their bread and butter. Cadillac has Chevrolet, Lexus/Toyota, Acura/Honda, Infinity/Nissan. And it is why Mercedes tried to merge with Chrysler, though unsuccessfully, and BMW is seeking a mass market partner. You can't trust rich folks. When times are tight, they get tight, and a severe profit margin collapse can really hurt such a company. Without reach, a luxury brand won't maintain profitablity or viability long term, especially not in the tech world, where R&D costs are prohibitive. Why do you think Apple stole so much intellectual property, allegedly (we know they did.)? Its the biggest cost to absorb, and without a way to recoup that cost, you lose in the end.

"It is all about protocols (e.g. email, SMS, web) or formats (e.g. MP3, PDF, DivX) most of which are open, except .DOC. The importance of this can be seen in one of Steve Jobs first actions when he got back to Apple in the late 1990s, he then persuaded Microsoft to continue making MS Office for the Mac. This way, the dominant format for exchanging word processing documents and spreadsheet, would be present on Mac and people could safely use them to "communicate" with other people who use MS word, which is the wast majority of office users."

This is a testament to Jobs skill as a salesman, not anything more. Apple probably wouldn't even be here were it not for Microsoft continuing to support the Mac OS. They knew they lacked the mass, and were it not for Microsoft, Apple would be toast today. They got saved, and that wasn't the first time. I doubt the same happens for iOS. They really messed up putting others into the Antennagate issues, and they won't be itching to help them once they are down, and the big software houses will remember how they blocked their cross platform toolkits and raised development costs with no real reason than "it MIGHT THEORETICALLY allow bad looking apps". Its much easier to just address the mass, and ignore the niche, for most developers.

This means Apple will have to pay or beg, and pass on that cost to you. But raising prices...LOWERS share, right Master Tomi? (Learning from the best is fun...) Developers won't continue to address all of these platforms. It just costs too much. Something has to give, and the smaller market share OSes are usually the first to go or allow cross platform tech. Don't see Apple going there, do you?


"Now, if we for arguments sake accept that for people who do not choose their phone based on loyalty to a brand (which admittedly for some will be strong) or to "show off" then platforms become less important, not more (as Google indicates with their Chromium OS which is only concerned with getting the PC commected to the web). This then represents a commodification of the smartphone, just as laptops who were once expensive and only available in beige/grey were chosen based on speed and hardware features are now so cheap that we also chose them based on colours and slimness and other "soft" features. If so, I would suggest that our experience with the phone will be more important than the platform or hardware, and this is where Nokia (as the primary Symbian smartphone manufacturer) has some serious issues these days, and perhaps in the bloodbath story users (such as me), will punish them. Admittedly Symbian is a great OS in hardware terms, light on battery, small etc, but the experience is not smooth (recently a colleague of mine and I with some 40 years of experience between us in IT spent a good 15 minutes trying to find out where the email client on the E72 could be told to leave messages on the server... this should of course be a default on a mobile device). Added to this is the fact that a lot of Nokia phones are just too fat. Solid, yes. Well engineered, yes. But I want to carry less weight, and so do most people."

On THIS I do agree. But ignore recent history. Nokia paused its hardware building process R&D to focus on Ovi and Qt integration. But before 2008, no one would dispute Nokia is the king of hardware and manufacturing. And judging by the looks of the N8 and its QWERTY cousin, they haven't suddenly forgotten. They obviously rested on their laurels until now, and are repoised to show this is their forte. I've known all along about that, and also realize that the same guys that made the iPhone, Foxconn, can be paid by Nokia. So its not hard to get good hardware. The platform is more important by far. I'd bet a smart man could easily put Symbian or MeeGo on an iPhone with a little time...

"This also means that consumers can quickly switch from one platform to another without being penalised (which may make brands more important, not my area of expertise) and certainly will make the personal user experience/UI much more important."

I agree again, but I also see a new breed of devices that have much more complex runtime support and support a higher class of software. Think programs like on our PCs, not cut down "apps", in our pockets. Without the capabilities to support these complex new apps, the experience will be affected, and a penalty will be felt, just like going from a PC to a smartphone. There are penalties today, like not being able to run Photoshop, ProTools, Final Cut Pro, Nuendo, SketchUp, Autodesk, etc. This market is expanding, and so are the ecosystems.

Today, they SEEM similar, but the engineering aspects many want to ignore will come to bear when there is software to take advantage of them. Its not all UI like they think here in America. This IS a computing race alongside a communicator race. It happened with the desktop, and it'll happen here. Runtime/Toolkit support WILL MATTER...

HCE

Let me make just one comment. In one breath you talk about both platform stickiness and also say that apps are unimportant. Then you compare this to the Windows PC market. I'm sorry but all of this does not hang logically together. Why do more people buy windows than any other platform? Primary reason - apps. Why is Linux having such trouble breaking through to the desktop. Primary reason - apps. Yes, familiarity with the platform is also important but the ability to use familiar apps is paramount.

In the end, if everything is web services, then every platform will eventually be able to everything that any platform can. At that point it becomes a race to the bottom with people shopping based on price rather than other features. I would submit that no one wants this scenario to happen. Profits may be unimportant to you but they are important to every company in this space. No one wants to live on wafer thin margins.

As for Apple, they won't be interested any more. They'll move the phone business to the back burner and start on the next big thing (which so far, they've been able to find with tremendous accuracy). Even now, market share does not mean all that much to them. What matters to them is to be able to establish a niche where they can make significant money.

BTW - if smartphones become commodities, the one brand that may still maintain customer loyalty and loyalty-based sales is Apple. Even though they do not have a great market share in the PC market, they command more loyalty than anyone else.

- HCE

Timo Poijärvi

Tom,
I am simply thrilled about reading your article. You are absolutely right, spot on! The race is definitely about platforms, not individual device models - and not about companies making profit!
I too believe in cloud, especialy with mobile devices...and again you are right when saying it is about communication not computing. All those fancy i-family devices (pods, pads etc) are very nice gadgets but they are not real communication devices - email, messaging etc is not enough, it is the real voice & SMS that rule the game.
Anyway - thank you again for a very good article.

jehrler

I really have to object to this very simplistic view of pricing and market share. In fact, it is such an egregious error that it throws all the rest of your analysis in to doubt. Here is the problematic paragraph:


What do I mean? I mean that 'ceteris paribus' ie 'all other things being the same' if you and only you lower your price in the market (rivals do not change their prices) then under normal economic laws, you gain sales. In other words, your market share grows. But also, ceteris paribus, if nothing else changes in your company and you just lowered your prices, then you have cut your profits. So yes, economic theory suggests that if nothing else changes, then lowering prices should increase market share but reduce profits; and conversely, if you raise your prices, you also raise your profits but it will hurt your market share.

The first problem with this is that it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a given that lower prices will give lower profits. Even in Econ 101 they teach about elasticity/inelasticity of demand. Put simply, with an elastic demand, lower prices increase demand for a product (and vice-versa) while with inelastic demand demand does not vary with price.

With a elastic demand curve, you may well capture more than enough new customers to more than make up for the drop in price and end up *increasing* your profits. Here's an example that demonstrates this. Suppose I make gum for 5 cents and sell for 10 cents to 10 customers. My revenue is 1.00, my cost is .50 so I net .50. If I lower my price to 9 cents and now have 100 customers, my revenue has grown to $9.00. My costs have grown too to $5.00. But my profits have gone crazy so I now net $4.00.

Second, not only will you gain market share but by establishing a new lower price, the elastic market as a *whole* will increase and, in your scenario where your competitors don't respond, you will capture that too. The only time the market as a whole wouldn't expand would be if the demand was totally inelastic, a very, very, very rare occurrence. And, if it was that inelastic, you should be raising prices like crazy because people will still buy your product.

I think you need to go back and re-read some economics text books to help you really understand the market share/price tradeoffs.

kevin

I was preparing a much longer response (and still might post it) but jehrler focused in on the same quote and captured one point I was going to make; the market share analysis is too simplistic. People buy (i.e., create demand for) devices based on perceived VALUE, where price is just one of many, many factors. (Except of course, when the product is a commodity. Dumbphones/featurephones may have already become a very low to zero profit-margin commodity based on what we read in quarterly reports/conference calls, but certainly not so for the top-of-the-line smartphone.)

Second, platform is just one of the factors in the smartphone war. There are many other factors that could play an equal or larger role that haven't been addressed in this post.

Third, Bob wrote "All iphone supporters should realize one thing, US is going to be a smaller and smaller part of the world." Partly true. In the top-end smartphone market, the US is today the largest market (see today's Canalys report) and will continue to be a significant player because of its wealth. In concurring with Leebase's post, "iphone supporters" are certainly not saying that iPhone will dominate all phones, or even all smartphones (since smartphone features will move down to cheaper phones). But I am saying that iPhone will gain and hold significant market share in the top-end smartphone market, the part of the market that generates 50-60% profit margins, due to many factors but largely because these devices keep adding innovations and value. With digital convergence converging on smartphones, it's a long way before the top-end becomes a commodity.

The profit from this "limited in size but annually/biannually-upgrading market" will be more than enough for Apple and others to sustain R&D and new designs. (Like Apple, HTC knows this. I think HP knows this. Motorola and SonyEricsson have demonstrated they know this, by slashing their featurephones and changing their strategy to focus on this market. Except they don't control their smartphone platform...)

So how big is this top-end smartphone market? I don't know yet (maybe Tomi can figure it out), but I'm exploring a hypothesis that it's 30-40% of the more affluent markets (like US, UK, Japan), 10-20% of other affluent markets, and 1-5% of most remaining markets. This market is far from being saturated, and even if it were, these consumers regularly upgrade every 12-18 months to get the latest innovations.

jehrler

kevin,

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter (and read your longer post!).

kevin

As for platform, HCE and others correctly point out inconsistencies in your logic about platform stickiness. Let me add a few more points. Read these points as primarily applying to the more affluent countries/cities where more people are likely to buy top-end smartphones.

1. It's not just about apps, but also the media content and accessories around a platform that keep people from switching. It's also not just about quantity but quality. When users are satisfied, it takes a lot lot lot to get them to change/switch. There is a built-in inertia (if not fear).

2. If smartphones eventually move to web apps, then every platform has to focus on other attributes and innovations to differentiate and create consumer demand. Maybe it's the ease of accessing and using web apps, or ease of using other innovative (or previously innovated) features, or brand/aspirational marketing, or excellent customer support. Apple excels at all of these in the key top-end smartphone countries. If there's no more innovation to be had, like HCE said, Apple will quickly move on to another product.

3. If smartphones move to streaming/subscriptions for content instead of downloads, you can be sure that Apple will be the one to make it popular and piss everyone off by taking credit for it. Look at Zune and ComesWithMusic, who have tried now for awhile and haven't gotten very far. Maybe Google/Android will beat Apple on this, but I don't see anyone else.

4. iTunes, iPod, iPod touch, and iPad, although not counted as smartphones, play a huge role in Platform, at least in the key top-end smartphone countries, where they have huge numbers of satisfied users/owners. They add to stickiness.

I look for all this stuff in each of the top smartphone competitors. As Tomi and others have pointed out, each competitor has an advantage in one or more different areas, but no one is moving out ahead on as many fronts as Apple is. Clearly, if one specific area turns out to be the disrupting or determining factor, and if someone else has the advantage in that area, then Apple could/would go down. If someone knows what the real determining factor(s) will be, I'm still all ears.

Bryce

Wow, I knew smart phones were going to big big and really change the way people access and use information. I didn't realize or even think about a war going on for control of smart phone platforms. I do remember the Beta and VHS battle in the 80's.

I'm really just learning mobile advertising and I know Google just bought out Admob. i really think everyone will have a smart phone in the next 10 to 20 years.

I will keep my eye on this trend now. thanks for the super informative article.

Jon T

Perhaps this kind of analysis might shed light on the future:

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-smartphone-os-2010-8?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Falleyinsider%2Fsilicon_alley_insider+%28Silicon+Alley+Insider%29

I don't see a future for Nokia unless it gets it's Mego (or is it Symbian) systems running in a much more intuitive way. Nokia menus where always designed by people from laboratories, certainly not by people in the real world...

Lucio Bragagnolo

I wonder why people pretending to tell us what to expect by 2020 weren't writing in 1997 about Apple entering phone market by ten years from then, and changing the rules, too.

HD

I'm singling out one comment, "And I am pretty sure Foxconn has been offering Apple simpler Nano editions of the iPhone for years already, telling Apple they are ready to manufacture the simpler model whenever Apple gives the go-ahead..."

This is disgenious. You are implying FoxConn designs Apple products?

Tomi T Ahonen

Hi Guillaume, Arild, vvaz, Leebase, Brad & Enyi

Guillaume - good points. I agree about Kin, but with the Nexus One, I do think Google had major aspirations of becoming a phone maker at the time. Remember, Apple that had in previous decades strugged making years of losses in the PC business (that Google would have followed closely) turned the smartphones business into the biggest profit engine for that tech company. And Google naming it Nexus 'One' I think very clearly suggests they were preparing for eventual Nexus Two and Three.. And finally the 'superphone' monicker. Again, Google had big desires for the Nexus family but once the partners, handset makers and the operators/carriers scuttled those plans, Google wisely ended the project. That does make the Nexus a failed smartphone..

Arild - a great point and one that I am often discussing in private discussions when people talk about long term benefits of owning a platform. There are many flavors to it, and clearly in the analog days of video tape, there was no way to get a VHS tape to play your movie on a Betamax recorder, not even if you took the 250 meters of the actual video tape, and removed it from the VHS casing, and spooled it into an empty Betamax casing. The recorders were totally not compatible. So any movies we had recorded, or any home recordings on a camcorder etc, would live on one or the other platform.

In that way the Betamax v VHS war was more 'severe' one could say, of more extreme end results, than say the PC wars. In the PC world, even in the 1990s, a word document formated one way on a diskette could be read and edited on a Windows compatible PC or a Mac (but all the parts had to be done properly for this to work). Since then, the web browsers and email gateways have given us far more compatibility across the PC platforms to the degree of Adobe's PDF format by which we can view files of differing data types across differing devices.

Stil, there are those who think that the future of the mobile phone will go like the future of the PC did in the 1980s, based on the OS. If one believes that to be true (and you clearly don't), then the OS battle matters a lot. If it ends up not really being a distinction - perhaps more like Chrome vs Exploder vs Firefox in web browers for example - then those companies currently spending tons in the OS wars are fighting for a meaningless battle.

I am an analyst and I try to report the facts as accurately as I can, giving my analysis along the way, until some 'truth' is formed. And I would say that I understand your view Arild fully, but I have not become convinced yet that it is the final truth. Certainly not to the degree to say, it doesn't matter which OS wins haha.. But we will monitor that aspect too, along this decade as it develops.. The more that OS is 'not relevant' - the more the indivual platform owners should come to that conclusion too and abandon their investments. I don't see that happening, on the contrary, this year again 2 new OS's launched and yet another next year.

vvaz - I hear you and there are many who indeed hold that view. I do not. I think the big future is web services, and the apps is a small side-show (certainly currently that is true) but I am willing to accept, it may change and in realistic terms, by mid decade we should see significant numbers if your view is true and apps really come to be a dominant part of the industry. I really dont' see evidence of that at all. I think the apps story is pure hype and hope and every day more realism and evidence appears that my early gut feeling about it being a myth, is starting to be also seen by others. Not that there is 'no' market for apps, but that it is a tiny side of hte big services industry in mobile, done via the web and mobile data services on other service platforms like SMS, MMS, etc.

Leebase - ok, I see your point, I really do. But if you take just the iPhone today, it has 2% of all phones sold on the planet. If we add all iOS devices, we get to 3%. That makes no difference! Its still far smaller than what the Macintosh alone has in the PC market. Taking all of iOS, it still wont' come anywhere near Android or Symbian in reach.. sorry.

Brad - I could have guessed that you were from North America when you said dumbphones have no brand loyalty. They have fierce brand loyalty in most markets, where the carrier does not utterly mangle the market with the forced 2 year contracts, and then a lousy limited selection of phones of mostly very cheap types, etc. In Europe and Asia (and Africa and Latin America) most consumers know very well what phone brand they have (and most obviously in every market, even in Western Europe where smartphones are most adopted - are still dumbphones). That then is used by the dumbphone maker to migrate customers 'up the ladder' to more expensive feature phones, then to low cost smartphones, then to premium smartphones. There is absolutely a clear correlation with past phone use and next phone, and the mobile operators/carriers track that info very closely, because the carrier/operator is worried about churn and if a given phone brand means the customer will sign for a new period, that is very important info in loyalty/churn..

Being in Seattle I understand you are there at the very epicenter of iPhone and Apple mania. Now, that clever Chase bank check deposit gimmick on the cameraphone? That sounds impressive - if you are one of the very last countries on the planet that still uses checks for payments among consumer financial transactions. Now lets move to one of the world's most advanced financial markets - Sweden (they had fully digital money back in the 1970s and abandoned checks around that time). Sweden is rapidly rolling out mobile phone payments - using SMS text messaging for example in paying for your bus fare - to the point that the Swedish Parliament (think US Congress) became the first legislative body anywhere on the planet to open debate about when to end the printing of paper and coin currency. Sweden may become the first country to end all paper money and coins and go 100% digital money, while Americans still use the archaic checks.. I hear you the iPhone money app with Chase is clever, but its a silly solution for an obsolete model. The elegant solution is to get your full paycheck onto your phone (like say in South Africa or the Philippines), to do all your payments on your phone (like say in South Korea or Japan) where digital payments will actually earn you discounts (like a 5% discount on your utility bills like water, gas and electricity if paid by mobile rather than cash like in India) to the point where majority of all banking accounts are mobile (like in Kenya) or majority of all public transport payments are mobile (like in Finland) or all of parking fees now paid in Estonia are on mobile. Norway became the first country to allow you to post your tax return via SMS.

So I hear you, the 'innovations' can seem impressive if you are living there in the dark ages of the caveman age of cellular phones in West Coast USA, but the rest of the world has moved beyond, quite a bit..

You mention Facetime and Skype - Most European 3G operators have been bundling tons of free video calling minutes to 3G smartphones - in Europe more than 80% of all smartphones have 'second camera' for video calls, in fact its almost only the US based 3G phones like Apple and RIM that do not have this. And even though you can reach 600 million people who have the technical ability - and your monthly 3G contract has half an hour of free video calls per month or more, how many use it? Nobody. Last I saw was a stat from 2007 where something like 2% were using videocalls. You know who uses it? Kids. Playing. Hide and Seek and various spy games are cool with video calls. Then the other major category is the adult entertainment trade - but that was something Steve Jobs didn't want on the iPhone haha..

On Nokia - Brad, I totally see where you are coming from. All the evidence you have in your home market is blatantly clear, that Nokia is 'losing it' big time. But please consider. The US market is 7% of the world's mobile phone subscriber base. When we go to the rest of the world, with 93% of the population, of smartphones - Nokia sells more smartphones in the rest of the world - as Apple - plus RIM - plus HTC and all Androids - plus all Microsoft Windows Mobile smartphones - plus all Palm smartphones - combined.

You very validly examine the evidence you see, and the Nokia brand is rubbinsh in the USA. If I told you that Nokia had fully WiFi compliant Bluetooth compliant smartphones in 2006 that cost about the same as the iPhone in 2007, but were also supporting fully videocalling, multitasking, application installations by users (something the original iPhone 2G did not support) and had memory card slots - that the US carriers hated these phones because they were afraid the consumers would bypass the carrier/operator and thus the carriers wanted Nokia to cripple the smartphones! Now, what do you do if you have the world's most popular phone brand (at the time, before the iPhone)? You refuse. You say, its your Nokia brand, with excellent phones and you will not cripple them for the US market to let US carriers abuse the domestic customers. Make sense? Then the US carriers went to the Koreans and asked LG and Samsung, would they be willing to release premium phones for the US market that had crippled features - no problem! Nokia's market share cut in half, LG and Samsung are today the bestselling phones in North America.

The decision Nokia made to not cripple its phones makes sense from the global branding point of view of Nokia but it did hurt its relationship - for generations of senior management - in carrier relations in North America. So again, I hear you, the evidence in North America is clear, but please also consider the rest of hte world. Nokia is by far the biggest smartphone maker and outside of America, is bigger than all its rivals put together. The US market is an anomaly today.

vvaz (next comment) - good points about US vs world

Enyi - thanks! we agree obviously

Thank you all, will return with more comments soon

Tomi Ahonen :-)

Wholesale baseball hats

Perhaps this is one of the most interesting blogs that I have ever seen. Interesting article, Funny comment. Keep it up!

Clark

Thank you for the educational article which actually help me to decide of what brand or technology that I need consider. Which also brought me to a question about the VHS OR VCR technology. Most people replaced a VCR rather than have an old unit repaired. Would there still be a continuing market for VCRs in the US for some time to come?

Sharetipsinfo

The information highlighted in this esteemed blog is really good and informative. To add would like to highlight Indian stock market is becoming favorite among FII. They want to invest money in NSE and BSE. Share market trading is gaining popularity among local investors and traders also.

Share market trading can become lucrative if investments and day trading is done with proper research and strategies. Investors should consider all pros and cons before investing money in share market India or in any other stock exchange.


Regards
SHARETIPSINFO TEAM

Polly

Il s'agit d'un blog à puce. Je veux dire. Vous avez tellement de connaissances sur ce problème, et tant de passion. Vous savez aussi comment faire rallier les gens derrière lui, de toute évidence à partir des réponses. Youve a obtenu une conception thats ici pas trop flashy, mais fait une déclaration aussi grand que ce que vous êtes dit. Beau travail, en effet.

white iphone 4

Oh God you are a genius person and a good photographer i like your pics thanks.

white iphone 4

White iphone 4 avaiable! It's a great news to tell you the latest white iphone 4 Conversion Kit is on sale. Get the chance to make your iphone more charming!

Henry Peise

It's sorry to hear that Some white iPhone 4 buyers have reported signal reduction when the phone is held in certain ways, especially in the left hand, as the antenna problem is in the bottom left corner of the phone's side casing. Is that mean i have to wait longer to get the white iphone 4?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Available for Consulting and Speakerships

  • Available for Consulting & Speaking
    Tomi Ahonen is a bestselling author whose twelve books on mobile have already been referenced in over 100 books by his peers. Rated the most influential expert in mobile by Forbes in December 2011, Tomi speaks regularly at conferences doing about 20 public speakerships annually. With over 250 public speaking engagements, Tomi been seen by a cumulative audience of over 100,000 people on all six inhabited continents. The former Nokia executive has run a consulting practise on digital convergence, interactive media, engagement marketing, high tech and next generation mobile. Tomi is currently based out of Helsinki but supports Fortune 500 sized companies across the globe. His reference client list includes Axiata, Bank of America, BBC, BNP Paribas, China Mobile, Emap, Ericsson, Google, Hewlett-Packard, HSBC, IBM, Intel, LG, MTS, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Ogilvy, Orange, RIM, Sanomamedia, Telenor, TeliaSonera, Three, Tigo, Vodafone, etc. To see his full bio and his books, visit www.tomiahonen.com Tomi Ahonen lectures at Oxford University's short courses on next generation mobile and digital convergence. Follow him on Twitter as @tomiahonen. Tomi also has a Facebook and Linked In page under his own name. He is available for consulting, speaking engagements and as expert witness, please write to tomi (at) tomiahonen (dot) com

Tomi's eBooks on Mobile Pearls

  • Pearls Vol 1: Mobile Advertising
    Tomi's first eBook is 171 pages with 50 case studies of real cases of mobile advertising and marketing in 19 countries on four continents. See this link for the only place where you can order the eBook for download

Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009

  • Tomi Ahonen Almanac 2009
    A comprehensive statistical review of the total mobile industry, in 171 pages, has 70 tables and charts, and fits on your smartphone to carry in your pocket every day.

Alan's Third Book: No Straight Lines

Tomi's Fave Twitterati