Group items tagged

Some years ago the operating systems challenge for smartphones seemed to be a Microsoft vs. Nokia affair. Then Apple and RIM - and Google later - stole the march and Microsoft somewhat disappeared from the field. But now they are back, and will probably use their usual tactics to gain dominance. But the real issues is: in a world where most applications run "in the cloud", do users really need "one" standard operating systems any more?

The rise of the new IT paradigm (i.e. netbooks and "cloud computing") allows reshuffling in the dominance of the operating systems standard. Could Google's Chrome be the next Windows?

Analysts are starting to recognize that - maybe - operating systems for smartphones will follow a different story than in the past. Instead of a winner-take-all market based on standardization, diversity is likely to prevail. This because handset makers and telcos will try to push in that direction  - as long as this will not reduce customer utility - and because the real source of value (and potential locus of standardization) now sits in the web and in social networks. In this case, which device and which OS is going to be used is going to be irrelevant.

Interesting take on open vs. closed operating systems. Apple's iPhone is a strange mixture that - though technically open - is however subject to close control over which applications are allowed to run on it. This raises some issues over openness of markets, well beyond the issues that people had with the monopolistic temptations often observed with Microsoft

While Microsoft is trying to gain market share in smartphone operating systems, Nokia too is trying to do something about its losing position with Symbian. A new OS is being developed together with Intel, targeting higher-end devices positioned close to netbooks. An interesting idea ... provided that users will really value this kind of device. To be sure, it seems like shying away from the core of the battle.

Motorola is a bit of a maverick in the field of smartphones. Originally a supporter of Symbian, it then switched sides for Microsoft and is now firmly grounded in the Google Android camp. The problem is that it is not clear whether dominance in the industry will depend on the device, the operating system, or in the wider ecosystem (e.g. apps and services) that rotates around it, or in the integration between the three (provided that integration is an issue at all).

An interesting perspective on the smartphone business model. Given that success of an operating system is tightly connected to the availability of applications, what will happen if the cost of porting an app to different platforms is low? Will this reduce the economic reason to standardize and lead us to a world where a number of such platforms exist?

Palm, once clear market leader in the "palmtop" segment clearly has lost ground in the shift to smartphones. Now it is attempting a revival, based on its web-oriented operating system. Will this be enough to fend off competing solutions from Apple, Microsoft, Nokia/Symbian and Google/Android? The answer depends on whether there something specific in Palm's business model, acting as differentiator and potentially as a source of competitive advantage.

HTC is probably becoming an important player, since Apple has decided to sue the company for patent infringement. The real question is whether Apple is really concerned about unfair competition by HTC as a smartphone maker, or whether it is trying to cripple the supplier of hardware to the "real" competitors at the level of operating systems (i.e. Microsoft and Google).

Now that all phone makers have left Symbian, Nokia is doing the only sensible thing, i.e. taking full control of the operating system, creating a stronger integration between hardware and software, possibly improving customer experience and quickening development

Since decades, diffusion of operating systems depends on the avilability of the complementary asset called "applications", and allowing independent developers to work on them can help a lot. Now Samsung is realizing they are late to the game and are going to open up their OS. However, they might still have a chance because they are competing on the still uncrowded low-end segment.

HP and Palm, Inc. (NASDAQ: PALM) today announced that they have entered into a definitive agreement under which HP will purchase Palm, a provider of smartphones powered by the Palm webOS mobile operating system, at a price of $5.70 per share of Palm common stock in cash or an enterprise value of approximately $1.2 billion. The transaction has been approved by the HP and Palm boards of directors. The combination of HP's global scale and financial strength with Palm's unparalleled webOS platform will enhance HP's ability to participate more aggressively in the fast-growing, highly profitable smartphone and connected mobile device markets. Palm's unique webOS will allow HP to take advantage of features such as true multitasking and always up-to-date information sharing across applications. "Palm's innovative operating system provides an ideal platform to expand HP's mobility strategy and create a unique HP experience spanning multiple mobile connected devices," said Todd Bradley, executive vice president, Personal Systems Group, HP. "And, Palm possesses significant IP assets and has a highly skilled team. The smartphone market is large, profitable and rapidly growing, and companies that can provide an integrated device and experience command a higher share. Advances in mobility are offering significant opportunities, and HP intends to be a leader in this market."

Nokia and Microsoft, who have always been at odds in the battle for smartphone operating systems, have now formed an alliance for mobile applications. The idea is to bring personal productivity (Office) tools on Nokia (Symbian) phones and fight against growing market share by RIM (Blackberry phones).

A well-written paper on the battle for OS dominance when moving from a PC-based world to cloud computing (provided this transition really happens, of course). Some interesting examples from history are provided too.

The EU commission wants to end Microsoft's bundling of a browser with the operating system. But can you really force a split between the two? And can you force Microsoft to carry competing products as well? In the end, it depends on product architecture

Good by to privacy. Google recently launched Buzz, a social network platform trying to compete with Facebook. Interestingly, it made the choice to include millions of Gmail users and to automatically create links between people who had corresponded via e-mail (and without asking for consent). The immediate lesson is (i) privacy probably is a value of the past, since complaints were relatively weak, and (ii) in the current paradigm the real power is no longer in software or operating systems, but in owning data on people and relationships. Google as the next Microsoft?

That Palm couldn't make it alone was quite clear. However, its competence and assets (the WebOS operating system) are pretty valuable, especially in the hands of the world's largest PC maker now trying to figure out what happens beyond the era of the PC.

The last pasenger has abandoned ship. Sony Ericsson has now moved to Android, officially making Symbian a Nokia-only thing, though still the one with the largest market share. It is understandable that phone makers didn't want to hand themselves to Microsoft, but is it a wise bet to do the same with Google?

The cloud computing paradigm is getting closer. Now Google is launching Chrome as an OS. While there appears to be widespread acceptance of the paradigm, we should not forget that Microsoft is strongly entrenched as a standard. The Chrome browser still has 2% market share!

The battle for smartphones is no longer a Symbian / Nokia vs.Microsoft affair. The two real competitors appear to be Apple and Google. However, it is interesting to notice that their strategy is markedly different, and depends on the underlying business model of the two companies. Apple wants to use cheap Apps to bring users to its devices. Google wants to use Internet access to bring users to its search algorithms. In any case, it is interesting to notice that both firms base their competitive position on a mixture of openness (to achieve reach) and secrecy/closeness (to make money).