Software architect working in Symbian/S60 area since 2000 and still being enthusiastic about mobility. Please visit my introduction page on Forum Nokia Champions web page.
tote_b5 | 01 July, 2008 14:15
My regular readers may wonder why I've been silent on the great news of the mobile industry: Symbian is going open-source.
The reason is simple: I was so shocked to hear it in the news that I
just sat back watching the flood of new blogs and comments trying to
digest this new information. But I've been digesting it, too. Other
people whom I respect and think knowledgeable in this area have written
their opinion and I'm now about to collect some of them in a blog and
share it with you.
Andreas Constantinou from Vision Mobile
was one of the fastests in commenting the news. He concluded that it
was a logical move from Nokia (and Symbian, etc.) both from technical
and business point of view:
Simon Judge over at Mobile Phone Development comments that " ... full access to the platform code allows for much more innovative applications using facilities that are currently hidden" and all this "only" for $1.500 is definitely a step forward.
He also cleverly notes that "Nokia and Symbian now see licensing the OS as a dead end" - I wonder what Microsoft will comment on it?
Finally, he raises his concerns on a technical question, backward compatibility: "... [the announcement] doesn’t explain whether this is source code, binary or application compatibility" - we wouldn't like to face with such a big break as what we did with the introduction of Platform Security, would we?
Mobile Opportunity's Michael Mace hails Nokia for their courage. He suspects, though, that "...
the announcement is actually half cleanup and half power move: ... The
power move is that it challenges Android ... The cleanup is that the
ownership situation of Symbian was unstable and had to be changed
eventually, and SonyEricsson clearly wanted to get out of the UIQ
business".
He also asks what will drive Symbian developers after this change? While he believes that developers "respond to user excitement and the chance to make lots of money", he fails to see how the new Symbian strategy drives either one.
Finally,
Michael points out that the longer it will take for Symbian Foundation
to kick off, the bigger the advantage for Apple and Android. What about
Microsoft? "This is Microsoft's ultimate open source nightmare, becoming real.
Rafe Blanford from AllAboutSymbian has written about Symbian Foundation unwrapped.
He says that the tranformation of Symbian OS to a royalty-free,
open-source system is according to today's industry philosophy and
whilst it's a logical move forward it would not have been possible 10
years ago, since "...companies would have been unwilling to let Nokia or anyone else have such a dominant position". The new Symbian OS will challenge LiMo, Android and the likes on their own strength and "negates their key advantage". Apple's iPhone might be not affected, according to Rafe, since "it
is difficult to see how Apple will expand to become a significant
overall player in mobile space (rather than an individual niche player
with lots of press attention)".
The hypothetical ("10 years old") problem Rafe was referring to is supported by The Register, too. They say, "the
most damaging problem is that Symbian's licensees may have no desire to
make Nokia stronger now that it owns the operation 100 per cent".
They also worry about that "the 'Foundation' may also prove to be an expensive liability for Nokia".
Finally they write that "it's largely Nokia that must be blamed for failing to make Symbian phones remotely 'enchanting' ..." and "...
today it's the iPhone which has the enchantment factor. ... Symbian has
done everything its original designers asked of it - a twenty year
lifespan is not bad at all. But it's now Apple's business to lose."
Apple
and world dominance. What about Microsoft? They're still bigger than
Apple at least in terms of mobile OS market share, aren't they? Well,
we've already got used to the style Microsoft comments similar
announcements, thus it must not have come as a surprise that they have welcomed this move. To be more accurate, they have "welcomed
the transformation of the Symbian mobile-phone platform into an open
source project, because the software giant contends the change will
create a host of new problems for the Symbian community." Sweet, isn't it? They use FUD referring mainly to the big 'F', fragmentation, saying that "there are more Linux consortiums that come and go than there are Linux phones".
Which might be true, actually. But don't lump Symbian and mobile Linux together. David Wood, EVP of Research at Symbian, has written a lengthy article
about how he (and Symbian) sees this problem. He argues that 1:
fragmentation really is a problem, 2: Symbian has the experience and
ability to handle it. As opposed to Google, for example, says the
side-note. :)
Finally, it's worth paying attention to Ajit Jaokar's article, who warns that "it is not possible to compare Symbian vs. Android; or Symbian vs. iPhone .. because it is not possible to mix operating systems with ecosystems". These are like "apples and oranges" in terms of "iPhone, Ovi and Android are ecosystems. In contrast, Symbian and Limo are operating systems or Operating system consortia". It's another lengthy article that is worth reading.
So I've been silent and haven't commented this news yet. Why? Because there are so many people to listen to ...
What about you?
Tote
Software architect working in Symbian/S60 area since 2000 and still being enthusiastic about mobility. Please visit my introduction page on Forum Nokia Champions web page.
RDF Facets:
qfnZtopicQUqfnTopicZbusinessE5fopportunitiesE5fservicesQ
qfnZtypeQUqfnTypeZBlogContentQ
qfnZtypeQUqfnTypeZBlogE45ntryQ
qfnZtypeQUqfnTypeZCommunityContentQ
qfnZtypeQUqfnTypeZWebpageQ
qmarsZlanguageQUxhttpE3aE2fE2fswE2enokiaE2ecomE2flanguageE2d1E2fenX