Samsung Delays Tizen Phone Launch

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung Delays Tizen Phone Launch

Posted by Unknown on Monday July 28, 2014 @10:33AM from the enlightenment-deemed-too-cool-for-you dept.

New submitter tekxtc (136198) writes Slashdot has reported in the past that a Tizen phone is coming and that the design and photos leaked. But, it has just been announced that the launch of the first Tizen phone has been delayed because of Tizen's small ecosystem. Should it ever ship? Haven't Android and iOS completely cornered the market? Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen, Firefox OS, and Windows on phones and tablets?

87 of 112 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Yes it should ship! by houstonbofh · 2014-07-28 10:37 · Score: 5, Informative

Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.
1. Re:Yes it should ship! by Dan+East · 2014-07-28 11:01 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. Microsoft and Blackberry had the bulk of the market share, both based on old OSes that had been stagnant for quite a while with no real innovation. Blackberry didn't even offer a touch screen device yet, and Microsoft's could hardly even be used without a stylus.
  Apple introduced revolutionary new hardware - capacitive based multitouch technology - which IMO was one of the primary reasons for the success of the iPhone. The other was an OS UI built from the ground up for touch interface. That was a knockout combination.
  So no, Tizen doesn't have much chance unless they can bring revolutionary advancements, either hardware or software, like Apple did (and they brought both at the same time).
  
  --
  Better known as 318230.
2. Re:Yes it should ship! by msauve · 2014-07-28 11:06 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. "
  
  Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
3. Re:Yes it should ship! by kuzb · 2014-07-28 11:08 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  >Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market
  That's total bullshit. Microsoft was selling smartphones long before Apple ever was. The completely came from behind in the market.
  >Apple introduced revolutionary new hardware - capacitive based multitouch technology
  No they didn't. That already existed long before Apple came along and used it.
  Apple trying to say they invented multitouch is a complete joke, and frankly is insulting to all the other people involved. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
  
  --
  BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
4. Re:Yes it should ship! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  >.That's total bullshit. Microsoft was selling smartphones long before Apple ever was. The completely came from behind in the market.
  Didn't the PalmOS phones have touchscreens and loads of apps? They could play music, videos, take videos and pictures, run games, send email, etc.
5. Re:Yes it should ship! by narcc · 2014-07-28 11:45 · Score: 1
  
  Yes.
  
  --
  Required reading for internet skeptics
6. Re:Yes it should ship! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 12:09 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Really? There were phones with bitmapped displays and capacitive multi-touch screens before iPhone? Please enlighten us.
7. Re:Yes it should ship! by aliquis · 2014-07-28 12:20 · Score: 1
  
  Also of course Windows got a chance on tablets.
  (and if they gained traction there they likely still have one on phones.)
8. Re:Yes it should ship! by icebike · 2014-07-28 12:33 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.
  You've totally been taken in by Samsung.
  Tizen was never meant to ship. Tizen is a threat weapon that Samsung cranks up each time Google thinks of asserting some authority
  over Android. Its simply a boogie man waiting in the wings in case Samsung doesn't get its way. It doesn't have to be viable, or even
  cost effective. All they have to do is trot it out and demonstrate something, ANYTHING once in a while.
  As long as Google plays along, Tizen will never launch.
  
  --
  Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
9. Re:Yes it should ship! by R3d+M3rcury · 2014-07-28 14:00 · Score: 1
  
  Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.
  Popularized it, perhaps, but I wouldn't say created it.
  That said, I think the GP may have been talking about the Mac.
10. Re:Yes it should ship! by davydagger · 2014-07-28 14:43 · Score: 2
  
  Samsung is the large competitor.
  
  Given the fact that Samsung is the largest, arguably best manufacturer of android phones, they are litterally competing against another department in the same company.
  
  You have one giant South Korean buerocracy, where they have to compete within the company for the CEO/Board's attention/funding against the companies big money maker.
  
  Tizen is never going to ship a phone, ever.
11. Re:Yes it should ship! by houstonbofh · 2014-07-28 14:56 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, the "several times" referred to the Mac after the PC killed Apple ][, and again after the Mac clones killed their own market, and the iPod, and the iPhone, and... Well, they may not be anymore "and"s now.
12. Re:Yes it should ship! by amiga3D · 2014-07-28 16:28 · Score: 2
  
  They'd sold thousands of them. In a market counted by the millions that's very significant. Apple does that kind of crap. Take new technology that no one quite knows what to do with it, package it attractively, market it and sell the hell out of it. So yes, Apple did not invent the smartphone, just the idea that eveyone needed one.
13. Re:Yes it should ship! by tlhIngan · 2014-07-28 17:06 · Score: 1
  
  Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.
  Heck, when the iPhone was first released, Steve Jobs himself said he didn't expect to do much to the market - if he got 1%, he would be happy.
  It's a big market.
  Then again, Samsung controls around 90% of the Android market, and probably a majority of the phone market in general.
  And yes, Tizen is probably just a threat tool - there was a point in time that it was supposed to be able to run Android applications. Samsung's got enough power in the Android market that Google may try to kick Samsung out of the OHA for trying to sell a non-Android phone that can run Android apps, but Samsung's got countermeasures. First, they are the only OEM who has complete replacements for every closed source app, including their own app store. Second, Samsung's got muscle - owning the majority of the Android marketshare means they can force their way if they have to.
  And considering Samsung's got various OSes ready to go, I can't see it as more than a way to keep Google in its place - keep making the OS, we'll let you install your spyware/adware, and don't you dare threaten us.
14. Re:Yes it should ship! by aliquis · 2014-07-28 19:55 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know whatever the iPhone had multi-touch like he claim either.
  The Nintendo DS was released November 2004 the iPhone June 2007.
  So even if you exclude the not so common devices it's not even the first casual / well spread / far reaching product using a touch screen.
15. Re:Yes it should ship! by aliquis · 2014-07-28 19:59 · Score: 1
  
  And of course there's the Palm devices (March 1997). And especially Microsoft PocketPC (Windows CE 1996) and Compaq IPAQ (launched April 2000.)
  Apple Newton February 1998.
16. Re:Yes it should ship! by MachineShedFred · 2014-07-29 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  Or, here's another look.
  You are a massive semiconductor manufacturer, as well as a manufacturer of smartphone handsets. You've grown your phone business to being #1 in a market segment (Android) and you're one of the few making a profit, and people are actually buying in on your marketing. You've managed to do something that very few other companies ever get done, especially in a rapidly shifting tech marketplace.
  But you are completely reliant on another company for your operating system, and they don't take their marching orders from you because they need to maintain relationships with your competitors.
  We've seen this before (PC hardware), and we've seen what happens (Microsoft). Samsung is making a play to keep some leverage on Google - you fuck around with us, and we walk away taking half your market with us. The money spent on Tizen is simply for leverage on Google, to make sure that Google doesn't jerk their chain too much.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
17. Re:Yes it should ship! by Ol+Olsoc · 2014-07-29 01:22 · Score: 1
  
  Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.
  Popularized it, perhaps, but I wouldn't say created it.
  That said, I think the GP may have been talking about the Mac.
  Some times people get the concept of inventing something crossed with creating the market for it.
  Apple did not create the smartphone. But they did make the device that created the demand for smartphones, and therefore, the market tor smartphones
  
  --
  The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
18. Re:Yes it should ship! by Posthumous+Arkansas · 2014-07-29 01:37 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, the "several times" referred to the Mac after the PC killed Apple ][, and again after the Mac clones killed their own market, and the iPod, and the iPhone, and... Well, they may not be anymore "and"s now.
  It is rare to see such a large amount of incorrect information conveyed so compactly. Kudos for your brevity, but pretty much everything here is wrong.
  
  The Apple ][ continued to sell well even after the introduction and subsequent success of the Mac, which itself began development before the IBM PC even existed. The original Mac wasn't really a response to IBM, famous Super Bowl commercials notwithstanding, and the Apple ]['s eventual decline was more due to success of the Mac than the PC.
  
  Also, Mac clones didn't kill the Mac market. The Mac was already in free fall when the OS licensing program began. Licensing Mac OS was an ill-conceived, last-ditch effort to rescue an already failing platform. This failure did precede a bona fide comeback--the only one, actually, in Apple's history.
  
  Finally, neither the iPod nor the iPhone is a good example of Apple coming from behind. Their first entries in each market were both immediately successful, and the previous market leaders eventually became irrelevant. Apple entered markets in which they had never competed and completely took them over.
19. Re:Yes it should ship! by Ol+Olsoc · 2014-07-29 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.
  No they didn't. They came into a pre-existing market (smartphones) from nothing. That's the very definition of coming from behind in the market. They did introduce a bunch on new concepts and technologies to the market, but that's a given if you want to come from behind and be successful. You don't come from behind doing the exact same the others are doing and expect to succeed.
  But they didn't create the market. Not even close.
  The market is not the device.
  Her is the car analogy everyone is looking for:
  The Benz Patent-Motorwagen of 1886 is generally agreed to be the first modern automobile.
  The model T of 1908 was the auto that really created a market for them.
  This can be wordsmithed of course. There was a very tiny market for the autos produced before then. So in that respect Ford didn't "create" the market. That might even be wordsmithed to the market for steam powered vehicles in the late 1700's. There was a tiny market for those too.
  So yes, people who cannot give Apple or Ford any credit for the initial creation of the market for Cell phones or autos can argue all day about it, but one thing they cannot deny is that the iPhone and the model T surely changed the hell out of the market.that was there
  So most of us that don't froth at the mouth when we hear "Apple" do understand what is meant by "created the market". The created the demand for the smartphone as it is today.
  
  --
  The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
20. Re:Yes it should ship! by gmhowell · 2014-07-29 01:50 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  "Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. "
  Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.
  And I bet if he had said something along the lines of "Apple came from behind in the smartphone market and knocked the heretofore industry leaders on their asses", you'd have an equally useless and snarky rejoinder.
  Sometimes the inverse RDF is just as strong as the RDF itself...
  
  --
  Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
21. Re:Yes it should ship! by gmhowell · 2014-07-29 01:52 · Score: 1
  
  They'd sold thousands of them. In a market counted by the millions that's very insignificant.
  FTFY
  
  --
  Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
22. Re:Yes it should ship! by Ksevio · 2014-07-29 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  There's a difference between creating a product and creating a market for a product. The feature-phone/smartphone market was pretty much stagnating until Apple released their iPhone, at which point it took off. Android helped, but that was a bit later.
23. Re:Yes it should ship! by Posthumous+Arkansas · 2014-07-29 01:55 · Score: 1
  
  "Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. " Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.
  Both the iPod and iPhone so dramatically outclassed and outsold the existing devices in their respective categories that it seems fair to say they "created" those markets. The iPod achieved a measure of market dominance that's almost unheard of. The "MP3 player market" ceased to be something people talked about anymore, because there wasn't really a market. It was mostly just iPods. And Apple's only real competition in the smartphone market is a platform that didn't exist in the earlier market, and was specifically redesigned from the ground up before its release to copy the iPhone's most important features as closely as it could. Which is to say, the market that presently exists is a market for devices that didn't exist before Apple introduced them and which doesn't include substantial numbers of the sort of devices that previously constituted the smartphone market.
24. Re:Yes it should ship! by msauve · 2014-07-29 02:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, right. Android came later than the iPhone the same way the iPhone came after the LG Prada.
  
  It was when a convergence of technologies at the necessary pricepoint (capacitive touchscreens, high density color LCDs, low cost GPS chips, flash memory, higher speed cellular data, etc.) came together that the smartphone market took off - not any one vendor.
  
  --
  "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
25. Re:Yes it should ship! by saleenS281 · 2014-07-29 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  100% this. Notice that Google announced Android Silver recently. All the sudden the head of that project gets fired, and Tizen mysteriously isn't shipping. The last time Samsung was "just about to ship", Google sold off Motorola and suddenly Samsung had delays.
  
  It's absolutely Samsung's way of fighting back against Google pressure.
26. Re:Yes it should ship! by amiga3D · 2014-07-29 06:33 · Score: 1
  
  You went and ruined the sarcasm.
27. Re:Yes it should ship! by davydagger · 2014-07-29 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  except in really large corporations, divisions of the company fight among themselves for the CEO's attention like other companies fight.
  
  Tizen will never land a smartphone, because their biggest competitor is Samsung's Android device. They might get lucky enough to release other devices, such as invehichle consoles with tizen.
  
  Also, since android apps won't run on Tizen, which as a new OS has a chicken and egg problem with apps, its at a major disadvantage.
  
  There are other large Android vendors.
28. Re:Yes it should ship! by Parts09 · 2014-07-29 07:37 · Score: 1
  
  Oh Samsung, why do we need another OS for people to develop for. What do we have now, 5 or 6 major OSes on mobile devices? Which are the 2 that have a deep ecosystem of applications? That doesn't come overnight and will kill your market share.
  I actually wrote a letter to Samsung. I am a long time Samsung supporter and advocate (bought 3 top of the line phones, a Galaxy Gear, Gear 2 and multiple top of the line tablets. Also got family and friends to switch to Samsung/Android devices. But if they don't stay with Android, I will be dropping Samsung like a hot potato.
  I HAAATTTEEE Tizen on my Gear 2.
  Also, their S Voice application is crap, their email and text apps are substandard and the first thing I do on any phone i get is switch out the homescreen launcher because touchwiz is poop. I would have to say that while Smasung makes AMAZING hardware. They should leave software to other people.
  
  --
  My opinions are completely my own and do not reflect those of any entity I may be associated with - including the voices
29. Re:Yes it should ship! by gmhowell · 2014-07-30 01:07 · Score: 1
  
  You went and ruined the sarcasm.
  Sorry. I missed it the first time.
  
  --
  Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
lol @ hope for windows phone by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 10:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

Microsoft doesn't get it, Android is the new Windows of the phone world. Compatible & Powerful, thats it. Apple is the premium. What is Microsoft going to be??
1. Re:lol @ hope for windows phone by MrDoh! · 2014-07-28 21:10 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm... no idea. Been watching MS in this market for years, ever since 'Pegasus' and... They just wait to see what everyone else does, throw marketing dollars at it, and try again. For the last 20 years. THIS time... I really can't get it. They've been rudderless for years, we'll see if the new guy in charge starts showing an actual direction.
  
  --
  Waiting for an amusing sig.
Maybe by Imagix · 2014-07-28 10:44 · Score: 2

Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't. Why will the telcos push/carry this phone, and/or why will end-users demand this phone? Good answers to these questions will help determine whether it should be published. (And note end-users are the generic people, not the techy people. "It's more open source" isn't a good answer...)
1. Re:Maybe by thieh · 2014-07-28 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  Well Android has some deree of hardware requirements. Which makes space in competition available in the not-so-rich places. But then again, there are used phones for that...
Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 10:45 · Score: 3, Insightful

Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' If that was true Microsoft and Apple would control everything. Then Linus Torvalds proved that 2 ecosystems was not enough and people are still spouting this nonsense.
1. Re:Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' by dkman · 2014-07-29 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  That's what they keep saying, except there are plenty of people who use Linux on the Desktop. I dual boot my laptop over to Windows less than 6 times a year (averaging once every 2 months, and I would say that's high). I generally just suspend lubuntu and hitting power prompts for my password and I'm back in session. I rarely reboot at all.
  
  I use Windows at work, and I have a surface pro 3 (which is still windows for the time being, but has linux in a VM). I use an android phone, i have 2 android tablets, and an ipad.
  
  I find it difficult to pay the Apple premium for hardware, and difficult to pay MS for OS upgrades. It's not that I can't afford it, there are just better alternatives. Free and interesting is better in my opinion. However, I support other's freedom to choose those paths.
  
  --
  I refuse to sign
Well, by Spy+Handler · 2014-07-28 10:46 · Score: 1

>Haven't Android and iOS completely cornered the market?
Yes.
>Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen,
No.
>Firefox OS,
No.
>and Windows
Yes.
1. Re:Well, by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 11:02 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  >>and Windows
  >
  > Yes.
  Hope of what? Of creeping up to 4% of the market, while losing MS millions in the process? MS has deep pockets, but they are not stupid. The only uncertainty is exactly when they will plug the plug.
2. Re:Well, by sideslash · 2014-07-28 11:04 · Score: 2
  
  With regard to Windows Phone you may have a point. Microsoft and Nokia have really aggressively pursued the low end of smartphones, particularly outside the USA, and have been seeing some traction in terms of devices sold.
  
  However, in terms of profits, it's pretty much Apple and Samsung [running Android]. Bleeding millions of dollars has certainly done something, but I'm not sure what Microsoft's plan for the endgame is at this point.
3. Re:Well, by MrDoh! · 2014-07-28 21:13 · Score: 1
  
  Never. They've been trying to crack this nut for nearly 20 years and still won't give it up. They can't. If someone takes aware Windows/Office, MS dies. This market should have been theirs to own, but sticking to simply bust WindowsCE rebranded with a shiny interface stopped them doing what needed to be done. Still, they can keep throwing marketing dollars at it, and as long as they creep up %'s of ownership each year, they'll see it as a success. That they're offering their services on ios/android shows how scared they are, but they won't/can't give up.
  
  --
  Waiting for an amusing sig.
Self-fulfilling prophecy by mrchaotica · 2014-07-28 10:51 · Score: 2

Well shit, if you're so worried about the viability of the platform that you're delaying it, then of course you're going to have a hard time attracting developers!

--
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
1. Re:Self-fulfilling prophecy by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 10:54 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!
No ! Try not ! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 10:56 · Score: 1

Do. Or do not. There is no try.
1. Re:No ! Try not ! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 11:06 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Never learn how do if never try. Full of shit Yoda is.
2. Re:No ! Try not ! by sideslash · 2014-07-28 11:09 · Score: 1
  
  Do. Or do not. There is no try.
  Yeah, spoken like someone who has never had constipation. And looking at that stew the Jedi Master cooked in his little Dagobah hut, I'm not surprised.
3. Re:No ! Try not ! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 11:52 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  What I meant with this (arguably crappy) citation is that if Samsung wants to try Tizen, they
  must embrace it fully, put all their weight, spends years and billions of dollars on it.
  Making an obscure handset with no application is pointless.
  It is not just about marketing. They must bet a lot, or decide to not even try.
Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast by ron_ivi · 2014-07-28 11:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

If they just unlocked the bootloader on the rest of their phones and encouraged people to download and try Tizen on their formerly-android phones, it could grow the ecosystem fast. Just market it as a "now with no google spyware" phone, and I think many will go for it.
1. Re:Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast by uCallHimDrJ0NES · 2014-07-28 11:49 · Score: 1
  
  If they just unlocked the bootloader on the rest of their phones and encouraged people to download and try Tizen on their formerly-android phones, it could grow the ecosystem fast.
  Just market it as a "now with no google spyware" phone, and I think many will go for it.
  Well said. I'd plus you if I had points left.
  
  --
  Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
2. Re:Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast by raster · 2014-07-29 03:34 · Score: 1
  
  and c++ isn't 90's too? :) really? it was invented and used much later than that (as opposed to c)?
  
  --
  --------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------------
Tizen was just a strategic threat by pieterh · 2014-07-28 11:07 · Score: 3, Interesting

Samsung never intended to release a Tizen phone. They were the ones who leaked the design and photos. The whole point of Tizen was to get a stick against Google, after they bought Motorola. Samsung are/were paranoid that Google would give Motorola preferential treatment, and that Android was becoming a toxic platform for them. Tizen was their insurance. Google got the message and Samsung killed most of their Tizen team and went back to focusing on Android.

--
My blog
1. Re:Tizen was just a strategic threat by Graymalkin · 2014-07-28 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  Google got the message and Samsung killed most of their Tizen team and went back to focusing on Android.
  They killed their engineers? Can't Google just call their bluff now?
  
  --
  I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
2. Re:Tizen was just a strategic threat by caspy7 · 2014-07-29 15:59 · Score: 1
  
  Samsung killed most of their Tizen team
  You'd think this would have made the news.
smaller screens by asmkm22 · 2014-07-28 11:09 · Score: 1

I don't care what the OS is. Just release a decently-spec'd phone with a 3.5-4 inch screen max. I'm tired of not being able to upgrade because everything from the last 3 years has been huge.
1. Re:smaller screens by wertigon · 2014-07-28 12:30 · Score: 1
  
  Sony Xperia Z Compact? It's 4.3 rather than 4 inches but other than that seems to fit your bill...
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
2. Re:smaller screens by BBCWatcher · 2014-07-28 15:20 · Score: 1
  
  I found your smartphone(s). Apple's iPhone 5s is more than decently spec'ed, and it has a 4.0 inch display. Apple's iPhone 5c is very decently spec'ed -- specifications are a bit better than the iPhone 5 -- and also has a 4.0 inch display. The Blackberry Q10 also meets or exceeds your criteria. If you insist on an Android-based device then it depends on what you mean by "decently spec'ed." Possible candidates include Asus's new Zenfone 4, Sony's Xperia M, Samsung's Galaxy Ace 3 (the Ace 4 may be a downgrade), and Huawei's Ascend Y300. I think I'd pick the Xperia M within that Android group, but your mileage may vary.
I sure hope these ship! by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 11:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

I am tired of Google's insistence I owning and tracking everything I do, and I would be happy to leave them behind for my own privacy benefit. I have no desire to move to Apple's walled garden either. I want the flexibility to do what I want with my device, and the privacy to know that my personal data and habits are not being tracked for the purposes of trying to sell me more crap I don't want.
Captcha: Vanities
1. Re:I sure hope these ship! by Nethemas+the+Great · 2014-07-28 11:30 · Score: 1
  
  If not Google, then who? Pick your poison, for you will be tracked, mined, engineered. You have little choice in the matter save for the overt actors involved.
  
  --
  Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
2. Re:I sure hope these ship! by narcc · 2014-07-28 14:20 · Score: 1
  
  I guess it's BlackBerry or FireFox OS for you.
  I'd call that a win anyway, but ymmv.
  
  --
  Required reading for internet skeptics
... using non-Windows devices. by aNonnyMouseCowered · 2014-07-28 11:32 · Score: 1

MicroNokia has been pursuing the lower end of the smartphone market using non-Windows devices (actually I think they're pursuing the higher end of the feature phone market), even coming up with their own generic Amazonesque Android phone.
At the lower end, you don't need a Play/Appstore sized ecosystem. Just Angry Birds, Facebook and Twitter.
1. Re:... using non-Windows devices. by John.Banister · 2014-07-28 16:51 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty low end, and I don't want any of those things. What I would like is LibreOffice Base where it's possible for numeric fields to be dialable. That way I can input 1500 contacts and make & save queries that generate custom phone books for me. Other apps I actually use on my phone now are: the one to record my phone calls, text messaging, easypark, gnuchess, and Garnet, the Palm OS emulator where I have my 1500 contacts and BTZS ExpoDev.
"Killer app" by uCallHimDrJ0NES · 2014-07-28 11:52 · Score: 2

We have apparently forgotten that exclusive apps happen. If the most awesome value prop for an app in the world is on Tizen, then there will be a Tizen market.

--
Cloudiot: A person who does not see offsite storage as a way to lose control over access to his or her own data.
Tizen definition by goombah99 · 2014-07-28 14:11 · Score: 1

Tizen is the german word for dingleberry-- those pieces of crap that cling to the hairs of your butt. I think if they ever intended to ship they might have checked that.

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
1. Re:Tizen definition by rossdee · 2014-07-28 14:50 · Score: 1
  
  They would just rename it in the German speaking market
2. Re:Tizen definition by houstonbofh · 2014-07-28 14:58 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Or, not... That may work in Germany. I have seen what they call porn...
Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-28 16:54 · Score: 2

(from article) Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen, Firefox OS, and Windows on phones and tablets?
How did Windows Phone get in that group. That's the 3rd largest ecosystem and growing rapidly with multiple billions behind it. It has shipped and is shipping. Unitwise it is over 1/3rd of of iOS sales. Definitely 3rd place but not marginal, or non-existant.
1. Re:Windows Phone? by wertigon · 2014-07-28 20:53 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Because of the Carrier boycott.
  Windows Phone will most probably never see double digit market share. The reason? Skype. Microsoft owns Skype, the single biggest threat to current carrier revenue. The Skype/VOIP revolution will happen, but if you were a carrier, would YOU invest in technology that would kill you off, long-term?
  Tomi Ahonen has a rather complete rant about this topic from late 2012, and very little has changed since then.
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
2. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-29 00:24 · Score: 1
  
  Except it is total fiction. Tomi made it up. Nothing like that every happened.
  http://dominiescommunicate.wor...
  http://dominiescommunicate.wor...
  http://dominiescommunicate.wor...
3. Re:Windows Phone? by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · 2014-07-29 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  How did Windows Phone get in that group. That's the 3rd largest ecosystem and growing rapidly with multiple billions behind it. It has shipped and is shipping. Unitwise it is over 1/3rd of of iOS sales. Definitely 3rd place but not marginal, or non-existant.
  Are they "growing rapidly" in any developed market like the USA, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, New Zealand? The only person I know who has one lives in Taiwan and she admitted to me she bought it for cost reasons but would have preferred an Android or iPhone. And billions of what, exactly, behind it? If you mean sales then that is certainly not true. If you mean Microsoft is throwing billions of dollars at trying to get suckers to buy them, maybe. They don't even advertise Windows Phone on TV any more in the USA and at least a few years ago they were doing that.
4. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-29 04:27 · Score: 1
  
  Are they "growing rapidly" in any developed market like the USA, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, New Zealand?
  
  Yes.
  France 10.5% latest figures up from 1.9% two years ago
  Japan 0% to 1.4% 2 year
  UK 4.1% to 9.1% 2 year
  etc...
  
  They don't even advertise Windows Phone on TV any more in the USA and at least a few years ago they were doing that.
  
  Nokia has reduced their push in the USA market. The USA market is too different than their model, for structural reasons. Obviously the USA is important to Microsoft so I'd expect that to change post acquisition.
5. Re:Windows Phone? by wertigon · 2014-07-29 21:40 · Score: 1
  
  Except it isn't. Tomi has rather damning evidence in his wall of text:
  
  The FACT is, that Nokia CEO Stephen Elop told Nokia shareholders - and I quote - "Indeed, Microsoft did buy the Skype company as part of the ecosystem that comes with Windows Phone and Windows. The feedback from operators is they don’t like Skype, of course." Elop went on to explain why carriers/operators hate Skype " (because) it could take away from revenues."
  This is spoken by Elop himself. Why do you think Nokia fell from being twice as large as it's biggest competitor to completely fall out the top ten in mobile in a mere three years? It's called Windows Phone, and nobody wants a windows phone!
  The problem is not that retail does not carry WinPhone. The problem is that carriers - e.g. Verizon, AT&T, Sprint etc - Will not subsidize windows phones, and they started this ever since the Skype purchase. That is what is meant by the "carrier boycott". Oh sure they will sell those phones, but only at full price. Why is this a problem? Well, "you want this winphone for $49 a month or this androidphone for $29 a month?" is a serious problem because Joe Sixpack doesn't care about Android or Windows, he will take the cheapest alternative.
  Is this a fixable problem? No, it is not. Skype is now an integrated part of Microsofts Cloud strategy. So this means Microsoft has to choose between Skype or Mobile.
  Please do note that carriers do not wish to support technology that will one day make them a "mere data channel". Carriers have built their business on exclusive services in their own networks. By subsidising Windows phones, they are funding technology which will make them obsolete one day. Sure they are only delaying the inevitable, but that's how they roll.
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
6. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-29 21:58 · Score: 1
  
  Tomi has rather damning evidence in his wall of text:
  
  Read the links. Elop never said what Tomi attributes to him. At a time when Lumia phones didn't even have Skype, Elop was asked about the operator / Microsoft relationship... There was no mention of a boycott in his response. He mentioned that among the reason those operators that were hostile to Microsoft were hostile Skype was the reason. That's it as far as facts. In terms of the companies supposedly boycotting is Verizon who spends money enhancing Skype.
  
  Why do you think Nokia fell from being twice as large as it's biggest competitor to completely fall out the top ten in mobile in a mere three years?
  
  For the same reason RIM experienced a similar decline. Better products emerged from the USA: Android and iPhone.
  
  It's called Windows Phone
  
  There was a huge drop in Symbian marketshare 6 months before Elop came on as CEO. Causes cannot happen temporally before effects.
  
  . The problem is that carriers - e.g. Verizon, AT&T, Sprint etc - Will not subsidize windows phones... Oh sure they will sell those phones, but only at full price.
  
  Last year at many of those carriers the subsidies on Windows phone were higher than on iPhone. No one until that point had beat Apple ever. Take a look at the prices today they aren't at full price as we speak. Symbian had problems being subsidized because of the terrible Nokia relationship with USA carriers, Windows phone does not and never has had that problem because Ballmer and co. assisted.
  
  Carriers have built their business on exclusive services in their own networks.
  
  Lync (commercial Skype, same protocol) is for most of those carriers something they are spending tons of money to support better. You are simply wrong.
7. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-30 01:28 · Score: 1
  
  Windows phones are selling for less than ancient feature phones *without a contract*.
  
  What. The 520 goes for about $100. The high end year old phones go for about $250-300. The newer ones are about $475. That's in line with Android smartphones excluding the top and bottom of the range.
  
  Even being practically given away, on the college where I work's wireless network, windows phone (per mac address prefix) is almost non-existant. Its mostly Android with Apple getting about 30%, and you can count the windows devices that connect in any day on one hand (out of 10,000 students).
  
  Phones are highly regional, no geographic location is a random sample.
8. Re:Windows Phone? by wertigon · 2014-07-30 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  "There was a huge drop in Symbian marketshare 6 months before Elop came on as CEO. Causes cannot happen temporally before effects."
  Yes, Symbian was an aging OS that needed replacement - and there was a replacement in the works, with a clear migration path, Meego. However, at Nokia, Symbian was still alive and well, albeit the writing was on the wall. Take a look at these three pictures:
  http://communities-dominate.bl...
  http://communities-dominate.bl...
  http://communities-dominate.bl...
  And the article in full, in case you're interested: http://communities-dominate.bl...
  The data points are rather damning. Sales do not lie. Would Nokia have collapsed as much as it did, had it stuck with Meego or switched to Android? No. They might've lost a bit of market share, but it would have paid off quite handsomely, especially with Meego. It is quite clear that it's the choice of the WinPhone platform that is the culprit, here.
  Why they choose WinPhone I do not know. They go from a clear upgrade path for their users to no upgrade path for their users, along with the infamous "Burning platforms" memo, and then expect their customers won't jump ship? Sorry, not happening.
  It doesn't matter what you think - WinPhone will have a hell of a hard time to reach even double-digit market share. Right now it's flatlined. Everyone thinking otherwise are either: a) delusional, b) have a vested stake in seeing Windows Phone succeed, or c) has been fed with Snake Oil by their advisors.
  What's really, really sad though, is that we've traded the IBM monopoly for the Windows monopoly, and now the Windows monopoly for the Android monopoly.
  Yes, Android has passed iOS in both market- and mindshare - and there are no other viable competitors. Free software blew it - again! :(
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
9. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-30 02:15 · Score: 1
  
  Take a look at these three pictures:.. Sales do not lie.
  
  No but Tomi does lie. By February 2011 Nokia's market share was down to 23.1% from the summer high of 33%. The graph is simple false. As for the picture about 1 for 1 replacement no one from Nokia has ever said that was the intent. They knew it was impossible.
  
  They might've lost a bit of market share, but it would have paid off quite handsomely, especially with Meego.
  
  MeeGo was a failed product. There was no viable path forward with MeeGo as Nokia had promised conflicting things. We've had multiple people who attended the meetings with Elop concur with his choice to abandon MeeGo because the problems in the design were unfixable. If you want an example of a company that followed the MeeGo strategy: RIM. They worked through their OS issues losing another year and thus constantly playing catch up while they burned cash.
  
  Why they choose WinPhone I do not know.
  
  Well I do know because both Elop and the Chairman of the board and others from Google, Microsoft etc... have said so publicly.
  1) Since around 2002 Nokia had been allowing their margins to slip. While they were selling large numbers of phones they weren't making money under best case. Once problems hit they were a financial basket case.
  2) It became clear in 2010 that Nokia was going to have problems putting out MeeGo phones in reasonable quantities all the way till 2014. At their burn rate they would have gone bankrupt regardless of how successful those 4 phones were.
  3) So they needed either:
  a) drastically restructure the company. Which meant large 1x expenses that Nokia didn't have the cash for
  b) get their sales back up to previous levels.
  4) Elop was hired to deal with the mess that OKP had left behind.
  5) Elop approached Google offering them a Nokia exclusive in exchange for competitive advantages. Without advantages Nokia would have been competing with Asian manufacturers to produce phones and with their lower cost of financing, lower cost of parts and lower costs of construction they couldn't win. Google wasn't interested.
  6) Elop then approached Microsoft. Microsoft agreed to not only give them competitive advantages but also direct cash subsidies to offset a chunk of the cost of restructuring.
  
  WinPhone will have a hell of a hard time to reach even double-digit market share. Right now it's flatlined.
  
  No it hasn't. Marketshare is up in virtually every market vs. 3 or 6 months ago. And certainly hugely up vs. 2 years ago.
  http://www.kantarworldpanel.co...
  Seriously don't listen to Tomi he is both clueless and dishonest. There is no source I know of you'd get worse information from.
10. Re:Windows Phone? by wertigon · 2014-07-30 03:54 · Score: 1
  
  "MeeGo was a failed product."
  No. The MeeGo development certainly had it's troubles not saying it hadn't, but the Nokia N9 was seen as a phone that quality-wise was even better than the iPhone. Maybe not *everyone* thought so, but, a lot of people thought so. Seriously, they compared it to a serious iPhone competitor at the time where iPhone was the gold standard. You can twist that around however you wish, fact is, getting a phone out the door good enough to rival the iPhone is a failure? I'd like to see a few other of these failures thank you very much.
  "No it hasn't. Marketshare is up in virtually every market vs. 3 or 6 months ago. And certainly hugely up vs. 2 years ago."
  Right, keep on living in denial, don't really care.
  Some markets may be bigger than others, but you are seriously overlooking the global picture. Global 2014 Q1 market share of new devices showed Windows Phone at a 2.2% market share total. Early 2014 Q2 for the global picture reports does not improve these numbers much - in fact, seems to have flatlined. Windows Phone can sell at most 5-10 million units a quarter - and the market itself is growing, not shrinking.
  No, Windows Phone has a long, hard, and winding road to go before it can become a serious contender for third Ecosystem. As has all the other emerging platforms (Tizen, Firefox, Ubuntu and Sailfish OS). And the old ones (at this point only blackberry remains).
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
11. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-30 14:14 · Score: 1
  
  but the Nokia N9 was seen as a phone that quality-wise was even better than the iPhone
  
  That's another Tomi myth. The N9 was a terminal product. It was buggy and architecturally flawed. Certain aspects of it got good reviews and it was a cool "what might have been phone". That's it. Moreover there was no viable path to creating an ecosystem. Contrary to Tomi's nonsense the Nokia board, Elop and the Nokia executive team are not stupid. Had the N9 been much better than the iPhone they never would have abandoned MeeGo.
  
  Right, keep on living in denial, don't really care. [regarding sales figures]
  I gave you details from Kanter. We're done. You obviously have no respect for simple factual refutation, preferring to live in Tomi's world of paranoid delusion even when confronted with data.
12. Re:Windows Phone? by wertigon · 2014-07-30 21:05 · Score: 1
  
  Dude, the N9 had glowing reviews from several heavy names, that is irrefutable fact. The N9 was seen as a potential rival to iPhone, that too is irrefutable fact. And it sold like hotcakes in the few countries that released it, even with no future.
  
  Moreover there was no viable path to creating an ecosystem.
  Because Elop had killed any chances of it once the N9 hit the ground, yes? It still outsold Lumias once it was released, though.
  
  I gave you details from Kanter. We're done. You obviously have no respect for simple factual refutation, preferring to live in Tomi's world of paranoid delusion even when confronted with data.
  That doesn't change the fact that Tomi consistently had the most accurate predictions about current market share of the WinPhone platform and Nokia in and of itself. Or are you saying Windows Phone in reality does not have an installed base of around 3% of the market, today? Despite all the billions thrown at it, despite all the failures that Nokia had going WinPhone exclusive? Are you saying WinPhone did, in fact, consist of more than 2.2% of all phones sold in Q1 2014?
  I can't see any chance of WinPhone recovering. Not going to happen. It will be stuck below the 10% threshold for atleast a decade. Android won the mobile war, and any platform that is going to be a serious contender needs to be more open than Android to succeed. Because that is the only way to make a dent in the marketshare.
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
13. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-07-31 00:28 · Score: 1
  
  . And it sold like hotcakes in the few countries that released it, even with no future.
  No it didn't. It sold pretty well around the kinds of numbers one saw with Lumia. Go back and take a look at the figures.
  
  Because Elop had killed any chances of it once the N9 hit the ground, yes?
  No. This was all pre-Elop. The Symbian migration components and the modern interface components didn't work together. There were essentially two operating systems that they were trying to merge and were floundering. The N9 just used one of them. It was cool, but the MeeGo OS as it existed on the N9 would have had the same problems as any other new OS in attracting developers. Or arguably even worse ones because it had broken Symbian connection stuff making it harder to learn and use.
  
  . Or are you saying Windows Phone in reality does not have an installed base of around 3% of the market, today?
  Well first off I think the way Tomi does marketshare is ridiculous. It would be like counting airplanes, cars, bicycles and sneakers as transportation facilitation devices and then looking at Boeing's share compared to Nike's. This is more of a problem with his analysis of Apple who is exclusively at the high end. Even if you were going to measure marketshare you would use revenue not units sold. But even if you were going to do that, 2013 was a bang up year with Windows phone growth of 156%.
  Second are we talking sales or installed base? Windows phone has been growing installed base is going to lag by around 15 months a growth in sales. In Europe for example sales figures are:
  Android 70.7%
  Apple 19.2%.
  Windows 8.1%
  And those Windows numbers have been steady. Windows phone gained in most markets and lost a lot in the UK.
  
  I can't see any chance of WinPhone recovering. Not going to happen.
  Recovering? Recovering from what? Lumia is already selling more than Windows mobile did in its hayday. Obviously there was a huge dropoff caused by Android and iPhone but Windows mobile was not a global product then.
  
  It will be stuck below the 10% threshold (of global unit marketshare) for atleast a decade.
  OK quite possibly true. Depends on what price point Microsoft aims Windows phone at more than anything else. The growth in the market, in terms of units is at the bottom and Android right now has the best play at the bottom. Microsoft if they choose to change that tomorrow could for very little money. Just sell $50 phones at $5 below cost and bang they have 30% marketshare. But those customers are worthless for the ecosystem.
  Windows phone in the ranges that Microsoft likely cares about ($100+) has far more to do with where Android and or Apple becomes vulnerable. Lumia right now is doing well because low end Android is a terrible experience. They are sinking at the high end because Apple is cleaning out all the competitors at the high end including Android.
  During the Elop years Nokia had fantastic marketshare in dumbphones and was the #2 player in unit sales far bigger than Apple. Tomi didn't even count those phones. And for good reason, Nokia couldn't make money at those price points it did them no good at all. Windows phone potentially I would suspect does well in the midrange around 2017 as Android has trouble transitioning to next generation hardware. On the other hand, given Google's strategy of creating a Google Play layer on top of a base Android OS, Microsoft might decide to do the same thing and create a .NET layer on top of Android. Microsoft's goal is to sell Cloud services the mobility unit exists to facilitate that. Or in the other direction Microsoft might include a full featured GooglePlay in Windows phone with features that Google cares about (primarily search) and take essentially all of Android's share at price
14. Re:Windows Phone? by wertigon · 2014-07-31 21:26 · Score: 1
  
  First, if we're talking about getting to the "third Ecosystem" as a measurement of success, then you would need at least 10% of the market. WP is not gaining market share - it is slowly losing it. There are two ways one can gain those kind of numbers, now;
  1. Someone creates a consumer phone that is an order of magnitude better than what we have today, extremely well polished, and not based on Android/iOS. Since the bar has been raised ridiculously high the chances of that happening are very slim. Or to put it this way: had the first iPhone hit the streets today, it would've been laughed out of market.
  2. Carriers decide "Ok, we need to do something about this Android hegemony or forever be slaves to Google", and decide to take one of the open alternatives and collaborate on making it up to par. However, given the nature of carriers, that would be even more unlikely. Imagine Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint all go together to create a common platform, don't really think so...
  Second, the way Tomi compares the smartphone sales numbers seems legit to me. He takes all smartphone unit sales including legacy platforms still being sold today (e.g. Blackberry). If one is to ignore legacy platforms then yes, WP has a greater market share compared to Android and iOS.
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
15. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-08-01 00:11 · Score: 1
  
  Second, the way Tomi compares the smartphone sales numbers seems legit to me. He takes all smartphone unit sales
  
  No he doesn't. This was a much more serious problem about 18 months back. He excluded huge Symbian sales when the phone was sold without the intent to install many apps (the Asha line) so that Elop's numbers looked worse while including many of the Chinese Androids that are unable to install apps. He most certainly does not do that.
  The carriers in the USA are not threatened by Android hegemony they are threatened by iOS becoming a de-facto monopoly on the high end. That you got that backwards is yet again a reason you should be listening to someone other than Tomi's nonsense.
16. Re:Windows Phone? by wertigon · 2014-08-01 02:43 · Score: 1
  
  If the carriers in the US are not afraid of the coming Android hegemony, then they should be. The rest of the world already is - they've seen that the iPhone and iPod is heading the same way as the Macintosh two decades earlier did. Apple is repeating the same mistakes it did then. Apple will therefore slowly sink below 10% marketshare, just as the WinPhone is now.
  And regardless whether you choose to trust an expert with a most impressive track record when it comes to predicting the WinPhone market, well... Your loss. :)
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
17. Re:Windows Phone? by jbolden · 2014-08-01 03:10 · Score: 1
  
  In the USA among postpay customers Apple marketshare is over 70%. They don't care about global marketshare and they shouldn't care about global marketshare.
Re:smaller screens - YAY! by billstewart · 2014-07-28 18:46 · Score: 1

I used an HTC Aria for about 4 years, one of the smallest smartphones on the market. Unfortunately, it was running a heavily HTC-customized version of Android 2.1, and I hadn't successfully gotten it to upgrade to 2.2 before HTC Sync stopped working for me for a year or two, and sometime during that period Android Market got replaced by Google Play, which my phone didn't think was the same thing at all so stopped letting me install apps. And I couldn't find any other smartphone that small since then; they were all bigger, even the
I finally gave in and replaced it a month ago with a Samsung S4 Mini. It's longer and a bit wider, but thinner, which helps. The other phone I'd considered was the iPhone 4, but I preferred to stay in the Android side of the world rather than go over to the shiny side. (Samsung's Kies sync-over-USB program also seems hopelessly clunky, takes forever to detect a phone being connected, grub my calendar out of Outlook, and download, but it does eventually work.)

--

Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Undo mod by khchung · 2014-07-28 23:41 · Score: 1

posting to undo mistaken mod

--
Oliver.
The Jolla is already way ahead by Anonymous Coward · 2014-07-28 23:50 · Score: 2, Informative

The Jolla from Finnish ex-Nokia people has already released a phone with the GNU/Linux-based Sailfish OS, which _also_ (after installing a proprietary Dalvik engine from Myriad) can run Android applications really well.
So there's already a contender out there.
lol @ hope for windows phone by saleenS281 · 2014-07-29 02:41 · Score: 1

If they're smart, they'll take everything Blackberry had and then some. There's absolutely no reason they can't produce a better email experience interfacing with Exchange than any of their competitors have. There's STILL nothing that even comes close to the old Blackberry + BES + Exchange experience 10 years later, and that's sad.
Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' by saleenS281 · 2014-07-29 02:44 · Score: 1

Not really... Linux has basically 0 traction in the desktop market. There is OSX or Windows. OSX has basically 0 traction in the open systems server market, there is Windows or Linux. The various BSD distros have made noise every now and again from time to time, but they're an after thought, not a legitimate competitor (Solaris/FreeBSD/NetBSD/OSX/etc).