I've been looking a lot at the mobile phone market over the past few months.  A lot has changed recently, with Apple and Google entering the game.  In particular, these high-profile players have increased the level of interest in smartphones.  Depending on who you ask, some 25-35% of phones out there are smart, and smartphones are expected to represent more than 50% of sales by 2012.  But... being a programmer by nature, I like to be able to define terminology.  Why are some phones "smart" and others "dumb"?

If we're asked to categorize a phone as smart or dumb, none of us has much problem associating each term with some brand names.

Smartphones:

• Symbian
• Windows Mobile
• iPhone
• Android
• BlackBerry
• Palm Pre

Dumbphones:

• Series 40
• Sony Ericsson's proprietary platform
• Motorola's proprietary platform
• Proprietary platforms from Samsung, LG, etc.

Why do we do this?  Is it just because the smartphone platforms have nice names?  Somehow, they seem like "proper" operating systems, because they have a brand name.  Surely, there must be some... technical reason?  I tried looking for some rules that can be applied to a candidate device, to judge its smartness.

"Smartphones Run Native Applications"

Don't think so.  BlackBerry apps are Java.  Palm Pre has no native API, so far as I know.  Android's primary application format is... well... not native.

BREW devices run native apps, but no one would say that an LG VX6000 is a smartphone.  (In fact, no one seems to mention BREW as a smartphone platform at all.  I'm sure some BREW devices must qualify as smart.)

"Smartphones Have Touch Screens"

Most BlackBerry devices don't.  Nor most Nokia Series 60s.  While most Windows Mobile devices run the Professional edition (touch), Windows Mobile Standard is built for non-touch screen devices.

Check out the Orange Vegas for a touch screen dumbphone.

"Smartphones Are PDAs"

Maybe, but what's a PDA?  A top-end Nokia Series 40 has an address book, calendar, task list, alarm clock, email client with POP3 and IMAP support, web browser, camera, MP3 player, streaming video over 3G, and can install new applications (Opera, Google Maps, etc.).  Sounds like a PDA to me.

"Smartphone Operating Systems Are Not Proprietary"

Well, except Apple's and BlackBerry's.  Oh, and Palm's.

"Smartphones Have PC-like Functionality"

Like what?  All phones have email and some kind of browsing.  Google Maps runs on everything.  Windows Mobile ships with Word and Excel, but most other smartphones only ship with viewers (if you're lucky).

"Smartphones Can Be Extended With New Applications"

So can anything that runs Java.  Nothing to stop you writing an "Excel" viewer (or even editor) in MIDP Java.

"It's About the Hardware"

Is it?  There are smartphones with no wifi, no GPS, no 3G, no touch screen, no keyboard.

"It's...a Certain Je Ne Sais Quoi"

Maybe it's a different thing for each platform.  For Series 60, it's the huge volume of sophisticated native applications.  For Windows Mobile, the "pocket pc" experience.  For iPhone, it's iTunes, and for BlackBerry it's push email.

Or maybe it really is just a brand name for the software platform.

One way or another, smartphones are "in", and every manufacturer will be trying to create the illusion of smartness for their products.

Does this mean anything for developers?  Does it mean we will all be writing C++?  Or JavaScript?  Or some new, more exotic flavour of Java?  So far, it looks like all of the above.