[funlovingirl]

Nokia is due to announce a major smartphone strategy shift in February. The media are speculating that Nokia will announce that it may ditch Symbian for Android or the Windows Mobile platform.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/..._February.html

I really hope Nokia does ditch Symbian and starts using Android. Some of the handsets that Nokia offers do have nice hardware specs, but for me, Symbian is a big let down.

[clonmult]

Quote:

Originally Posted by funlovingirl

I really hope Nokia does ditch Symbian and starts using Android. Some of the handsets that Nokia offers do have nice hardware specs, but for me, Symbian is a big let down.

Symbian is a fine OS, it definitely works as well as the competition.

But I do laugh when people come out with what is an idiotic suggestion of Android on their handsets. Its just stupid idle speculation from keyboard warriors who really don't seem to have a clue.

The S^3 code base runs extremely efficients on the current devices with a relatively basic 680mHz CPU, but thats down to making good use of the GPU throughout the OS wherever possible.

My last Android handset was running a 600mHz CPU, and for basic work was fine, but try any gaming on it and it practically ground to a halt. Android just doesn't make such good use of the GPU, and it just not as efficient.

[finbaar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clonmult

Symbian is a fine OS, it definitely works as well as the competition.

But I do laugh when people come out with what is an idiotic suggestion of Android on their handsets. Its just stupid idle speculation from keyboard warriors who really don't seem to have a clue.

The S^3 code base runs extremely efficients on the current devices with a relatively basic 680mHz CPU, but thats down to making good use of the GPU throughout the OS wherever possible.

My last Android handset was running a 600mHz CPU, and for basic work was fine, but try any gaming on it and it practically ground to a halt. Android just doesn't make such good use of the GPU, and it just not as efficient.

You are missing the point as you always do when this is brought up. The fact that Symbian may or may not be a fine OS does not matter when people do not want a phone running it and the do want a phone running Android. Nokia are in business to make money not act as a support system for Symbian.

I love Nokia hardware but would only buy another if it ran Android. Symbian is seen by me and many others as slow, clunky and a step backwards if we got a new phone running it. The customer is always right and if the customer wants Android then Nokia need to start offering it.

Also I believe you are comparing a budget £99 Android phone (The Orange San Francisco) with a premium £450 Symbian phone (Nokia N8). Not really a true comparison - try comparing similar priced units.

[prking]

finbaar, you say people don't want to buy a Symbian handset. Yet Symbian devices outsell Android, iP hone etc. Nokia's weakpoint has been marketing especially in the US.

[david.boobis]

The reason Nokia sells so many handsets in Africa and Asia is that their phones last so long on a single charge - people in the developing world don't have daily access to power, so need a phone that will last for a week or so. The reason Nokia phones last so long on a single charge is Symbian. So I don't see them ditching it any time soon.

Think about it logically - MeeGo and Symbian can both be developed for using the same SDK. You can't develop for Android on this SDK. You can't have a dumbphone running Android. They're not going to drop MeeGo before it's even launched. So the only one they could drop would be Symbian^3, which would mean supporting 2 smartphone platforms, and having a platform that isn't being developed for at the same time as their other 2 platforms.

So no, they're not ditching Symbian. They're probably going to announce a range of MeeGo phones, or a complete overhaul of Symbian.

[finbaar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by prking

finbaar, you say people don't want to buy a Symbian handset. Yet Symbian devices outsell Android, iP hone etc. Nokia's weakpoint has been marketing especially in the US.

Nokia are losing market share:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...tner-says.html

Android's market share has increased dramatically in 2010 and with the all the new handsets coming out this year it will go up again. Symbian, with only Nokia in the frame now, will continue to loose out.

I thought Symbian^3 WAS supposed to be a complete overhaul? And why, logically would they not drop MeeGo? When they started to develop this a year ago Android was way behind but things are different now and they may decide that they will loose money with MeeGo. I state again Nokia are a commercial organisation, they will go with what is best for them. If they think launching a Android phone is a winner they will do it.

I actually think they wont do it my self which means I will not be getting another Nokia which makes me just a little bit sad.

[BT@home]

Quote:

Originally Posted by finbaar

Nokia are losing market share:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...tner-says.html

Android's market share has increased dramatically in 2010 and with the all the new handsets coming out this year it will go up again. Symbian, with only Nokia in the frame now, will continue to loose out.

If Symbian sales were DECLINING then I might be able to see your point of view, but since they are still selling more and more then its hard to understand.

Is the same to be said for iOS or RIM or WM7 as they sell alot less phones than Symbian does and they have also lost market share recently.

[clonmult]

Quote:

Originally Posted by finbaar

You are missing the point as you always do when this is brought up. The fact that Symbian may or may not be a fine OS does not matter when people do not want a phone running it and the do want a phone running Android. Nokia are in business to make money not act as a support system for Symbian.

I love Nokia hardware but would only buy another if it ran Android. Symbian is seen by me and many others as slow, clunky and a step backwards if we got a new phone running it. The customer is always right and if the customer wants Android then Nokia need to start offering it.

Also I believe you are comparing a budget £99 Android phone (The Orange San Francisco) with a premium £450 Symbian phone (Nokia N8). Not really a true comparison - try comparing similar priced units.

You're missing the point.

Symbian isn't slow; yes, aspects of it are a little clunky (primarily the browser), but at least you can easily install an alternative browser.

My comparison is more based around the OS itself though, and to be honest stock Android really isn't that great. Sure, you can get various fancier front ends to it, new launchers and the like, but you tend to *need* those to make Android into something interesting. And of course you can get similar front ends for Symbian as well .....

You may as well say that both Apple, MS and RIM should start offering Android .... although rumours are that RIM are going to be including the Android JVM to allow access to a wider range of apps. BB taking on Android isn't too much of a leap though - the BB was always based on a JVM, we had to reinstall the OS quite regularly on the older 7230 and 7290 devices when they invariably failed ....

And why are Samsung persisting with Bada? They may as well drop it completely and focus on not adequately supporting Android.

[finbaar]

Ahhhh, no, stop. I will repeat it again. It's not about our opinion of the the OS it's about Nokia retaining market share and keeping profits healthy.

http://www.reghardware.com/2011/01/31/android_rules/

Looking that Nokia may well decide to jump on the Android bandwagon.

[Eejit]

It's inevitable that Nokia will switch to Android. Blackberry probably will in the end too. The war is pretty much over - Android won.

The only company that won't (and doesn't need to) adopt Android is Apple. They have an ultra-sucessful strategy with iOS. But the rest are finished.

This (especially the third chart), tells you all you need to know:

http://www.asymco.com/2011/01/31/fou...stry-overview/

Apple now takes over 50% of the profit in the entire mobile phone industry. And that used to be where Nokia was. They need to change, and fast, if they're to survive.

(And as for WM7, I just think it's probably too little, too late).

[Vallhund]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eejit

(And as for WM7, I just think it's probably too little, too late).

Microsoft's Phone 7 is Dead in the Water


The fat lady is about to sing.

[Soundburst]

Windows Phone 7 was actually the most intriguing of Mobile Phone OS's IMO (obviously other than the pioneering phone OS of today , iOS).

Perhaps it's the fact they went with HTC and Samsung as launch models.

Not exactly the kind of big brand phones people want to throw big bucks at.

A Sony one would have been quite nice to those not wanting to buy an iPhone. Obviously not happening, but it could have been better than those two brands I've mentioned. People look at Samsung and HTC and say to themselves - what's the point. . .they'll roll out another one next week.

[scorpionatthepc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clonmult

Symbian is a fine OS, it definitely works as well as the competition.

But I do laugh when people come out with what is an idiotic suggestion of Android on their handsets. Its just stupid idle speculation from keyboard warriors who really don't seem to have a clue.

The S^3 code base runs extremely efficients on the current devices with a relatively basic 680mHz CPU, but thats down to making good use of the GPU throughout the OS wherever possible.

My last Android handset was running a 600mHz CPU, and for basic work was fine, but try any gaming on it and it practically ground to a halt. Android just doesn't make such good use of the GPU, and it just not as efficient.

Was it a wildfire?

[Eejit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vallhund

Microsoft's Phone 7 is Dead in the Water


The fat lady is about to sing.

Microsoft would have been better taking the risk and making a phone themselves (perhaps one focusing on gaming, spinning off from Xbox), or just not bothered and accept that the thing was lost.

WM7 is kind of interesting, but they've never given much reason for people to actually buy it.

[clonmult]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soundburst

Windows Phone 7 was actually the most intriguing of Mobile Phone OS's IMO (obviously other than the pioneering phone OS of today , iOS).

Agreed that WP7 is definitely intriguing, they've actually tried something different to everyone else on the UI.

But please, since when has Apple and iOS been pioneering? They've never led, invariably they've taken someone elses ideas - yes, they're good at marketing them, but its rare for Apple to actually lead.

[flagpole]

here's a discussion surrounding a statement from the nokia CEO

Elop also emphasised that Nokia's products should guarantee "sustainable differentiation"- which may dampen speculation he'll join the Me-Too world of (say) Android licensees. In Android-land, it isn't clear that investment creates any significant profit. It's what investors want to hear though, and Nokia's share price rebounded on the news.

it depends how you want to interpret it.

we find out on Feb 11th.

[Eejit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clonmult

But please, since when has Apple and iOS been pioneering? They've never led, invariably they've taken someone elses ideas - yes, they're good at marketing them, but its rare for Apple to actually lead.

Lol. Yeah, nice try.

[clonmult]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eejit

Lol. Yeah, nice try.

You may laugh, but its true. Damn near everything that Apple has done involves popularising someone elses work. Okay, Apple will polish it a bit, but generally thats relatively easy.

[Eejit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clonmult

You may laugh, but its true. Damn near everything that Apple has done involves popularising someone elses work. Okay, Apple will polish it a bit, but generally thats relatively easy.

Yeah, right. Of course the iPhone wasn't innovative in the slightest. Or the iPad. Or the iPod. Or the iTunes Store. Or the App Store. Or the Mac. Or the Apple II. Or etc etc etc etc.

Go back to using a pre-iPhone smartphone if you want. The rest of the planet rather is rather enjoying the fruits of Apple's shaking the mobile phone industry to its core. Just as it's finally enjoying the first tablet that a sane person would actually like to use.

Nobody serious in the computing or mobile phone industry (least of all Google, or Bill Gates, or any other tech leader) would claim that Apple "never leads". Quite the opposite. Apple is, and has always been (especially in the Jobs eras) one of the key leaders in the technology industry.

[clonmult]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eejit

Yeah, right. Of course the iPhone wasn't innovative in the slightest. Or the iPad. Or the iPod. Or the iTunes Store. Or the App Store. Or the Mac. Or the Apple II. Or etc etc etc etc.

Go back to using a pre-iPhone smartphone if you want. The rest of the planet rather is rather enjoying the fruits of Apple's shaking the mobile phone industry to its core. Just as it's finally enjoying the first tablet that a sane person would actually like to use.

Nobody serious in the computing or mobile phone industry (least of all Google, or Bill Gates, or any other tech leader) would claim that Apple "never leads". Quite the opposite. Apple is, and has always been (especially in the Jobs eras) one of the key leaders in the technology industry.

The original Apple/Apple II were cutting edge, but it pretty much demonstrated that Wozniak was the electronics wizards in the company.

Apple doesn't lead. It takes other peoples creations/ideas, sprays a bit of the jobsian magic dust over it, and then its popular. That somehow then gets viewed as being a leader.

Bill Gates and the guys at Google would admit to Apples marketing success, but would probably agree that Apple don't truly innovate. When was the last time they did something totally new and groundbreaking?

[Eejit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clonmult

Apple doesn't lead. It takes other peoples creations/ideas, sprays a bit of the jobsian magic dust over it, and then its popular. That somehow then gets viewed as being a leader.

So you're just going to make assertions then, rather than attempt to back them up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by clonmult

Bill Gates and the guys at Google would admit to Apples marketing success, but would probably agree that Apple don't truly innovate. When was the last time they did something totally new and groundbreaking?

No they wouldn't. Microsoft and Google know full well that Apple innovate. That's why they often try to follow them if they can. (And as anyone who's ever visited the Google campus will tell you, just about every computer in the place is a Mac).

And as for the last time they did something groundbreaking - hello iPad. (Unless you're going to try to hilariously claim that they were just copying the dreadful, borderline unusable Windows based tablets that nobody was buying beforehand).

[Soundburst]

Look at the most popular phones pre-iPhone.

Look at popular phones today.

Apple Changed Everything. Came in. Made a great product with great access to apps and now everyone has followed suit. Can't believe it was a few years ago I paid that much for a Samsung e900. Thank god iPhone came out otherwise I'd still be buying dross from Samsung/Nokia.

[Vallhund]

Quote:

Originally Posted by clonmult

Agreed that WP7 is definitely intriguing, they've actually tried something different to everyone else on the UI.

But please, since when has Apple and iOS been pioneering? They've never led, invariably they've taken someone elses ideas - yes, they're good at marketing them, but its rare for Apple to actually lead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eejit

Lol. Yeah, nice try.

Indeed ROTFLMAO.

It works like this. Microsoft has an idea for a square wheel (such as a Windows Tablet). It flops. Apple develops a round wheel (the iPad). It is a success. I still call that innovation.

[Soundburst]

Yeah the original windows tablets were things that people automatically would imagine if someone said "What do you think a windows tablet would be like". Products like that have little thought put in other than the obvious. That's the problem.

[clonmult]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eejit

And as for the last time they did something groundbreaking - hello iPad. (Unless you're going to try to hilariously claim that they were just copying the dreadful, borderline unusable Windows based tablets that nobody was buying beforehand).

To most people, groundbreaking (and innovation) implies something totally new, never done before. But you make it sound like nobody had done tablets before.

Apples first PDA, the Newton - that was definitely groundbreaking. It was the first truly usable touch screen PDA. The iPad is "just" another tablet - okay, its more popular and easier to use, but thats not groundbreaking.