Insight Community

The thing about open platforms is that you don't have to worry about whether they initially support each other.  Because they are "open source", anyone could make a system that would be compatible with all of them.  Therefore, the worry is unfounded.  That worry about compatibility only applies to a mixture of closed-source environments, where it is unlikely that anyone would share with anyone else lest they lose what they consider a trade secret or a competitive advantage (meanwhile, it doesn't work that way, but that's a separate discussion). 

 

Each open-source project will have its own specialties, and yet the ability to integrate all of them will still exist.  This will put continued pressure on closed-source projects such as Apple or Microsoft to integrate their own offerings, and it should eventually drive them either out of the industry, or drive them to open-source themselves to remain compatible.  

It is too early to say how the mobile platforms compare to each other, but because in theory installing a different one should be free, users will likely gravitate towards the most fully-featured or "best" version quickly (simply because they have that option unlike with closed source, where each switch would cost a fortune assuming it was even possible).

Although "Nokia buys Symbian" sounds a dramatic headline, the effect in the real world will be far less dramatic. Nokia already accounted for well over 90% of Symbian OS sales in the Western World, running into the hundreds of million 'smartphones'. In contrast, no Android-based phone has even been announced, let along shipped, while the LiMo alliance is in just a niche place as Linux on the desktop.

The biggest effects will be on:

• Symbian itself. Although no longer a separate commercial company, the public/tech-world perception of Symbian will be greatly simplified. By 2010, even the term S60 will have fallen into disuse and we'll be able to talk about 'Symbian' handsets, with full compatibility and interoperability.
• Microsoft. Google aren't too worried about competition for Android - their aim was to stir the market up and generate Google-focussed activity. But Microsoft are suddenly faced with the elephant in their room suddenly becoming free to license - and open source to boot. The only way Microsoft can compete in the next few years, at least in terms of growing their market share, is to make Windows Mobile also free - though it's doubtful whether they will want to go the extra step of going Open Source as well.

Apple won't be affected at all, going its own sweet way as usual, with proprietary OS and managed ecosystem. But Apple are good enough to make this work and be very profitable. As ever, they're the exceptions to any rule. The iPhone and its direct descendants will remain relatively niche however, compared to global sales figures (Nokia sell 100 million S40 and S60 phones a quarter).

Can the Android, LiMo and Symbian Foundation communities work together? Not officially, although there will be many developers who port their code to work on more than one open platform, what with the booming phone economy (and thus potential customers, all now much more app-aware than in the past). Innovation and development will be faster,  now that the source code is going to be more open and its 'secrets' will be laid bare.

It sounds an anti-climax to proclaim that not much is going to change in the short term (other than Microsoft panicking and UIQ laying off their staff), but in terms of effect on phones in the High Street, the setting up of the Symbian Foundation  is a strictly long term move. Still, ask me about all this in 2010!

Open Mobile Platforms are Worthless Without a Vibrant Community

Even though a clear cut recipe for success may not exist for building and growing an open source community, there are some common patterns that emerge when considering currently successful projects. Though mobile devices really are a different and unique medium, many concepts that drive open source overall apply here too, especially as platforms like Google Android, Symbian and Openmoko continue to seek new talent and expand their communities.

First and most important, any new open source project that's looking to add quality members needs to seek them out in sufficient numbers to create a diverse set of perspectives. Once that's in place the conversations tend to take on a life of their own. Google Android began its community by relying on the search giant's ubitquitous reputation in creating easy-to-use and free software. Google generated lots of buzz by making an announcement that it would be supporting an open source mobile platform and people flocked toward the idea.

But, even with Google's name behind the project, Android is facing delays.

Another feature that Google emphasizes in most of its projects is easy communication between members. That's key because then the exchange of ideas and points and counterpoints encourages innovation and the discovery of new efficiencies.

A problem that occurs more frequently with open source projects than with their commercial counterparts is the availability of documentation. How will a new user learn to use the system? Are there easy-to-understand manuals that speak in a language anyone can understand? Sometimes open source projects have a very active and large communities but they begin to ignore new visitors, instead just expecting everyone to begin at their water level. Nothing will push a new visitor away faster than a difficult to understand interface with no appropriate documentation.

Here is a list of items that will significantly influence the success or failure of an open source initiative -- including mobile open source platforms like Google Android, Symbian (new to the open source landscape) and Openmoko.

• Large, regularly active community
• Direction for the hive mind, provided by a core team of respected experts
• Tools for easy communication d2d and d2c
• Public change log to publish changes between versions
• Easy-to-use documentation that quickly brings a new user up to speed
• Strong marketing arm that creates a unique brand identity and ensures the community is easily findable online
• Forum moderators that make sure questions by end users are answered and a baseline of professionalism is established

Direct parallels between movements towards open source mobile operating systems and Linux can be drawn,

 How many consumers think to use Linux over the traditional offerings of Wndows or Mac OS? it's still very much the remit of technically minded individuals.  Despite the best efforts of communities like Ubuntu with their more user friendly solutions the take up is low.

The reason is that of time and effort spent making it all work together.  Having many versions of seemingly similar operating systems will confuse the average consumer.  Cell phone usage is so ubiquitous that the vast majority of users want something they buy, charge up, turn on and start using.  They don't want to or even know how to reinstall a component that hasn't worked properly.  The average user's approach to upgrading their operating system (if they care at all) is to buy a new phone not update the firmware.

 Some form of standards will be required if true interoperability is to be achieved but this doesn't even happen in the well established Linux communities.

The net effect will be the major players sticking with what they know, or an open version of it, i.e. Symbian.  Potential uptake of niche handsets for the uber-geeks that want to play with features, assuming they will work on their network.

The bottom line is that a phone is designed to be used.  Many operators with branded handsets disable some phone features as they know they won't work on their network.  Therefore any open source projects will need to either limit the functionality they deliver or run the risk of their applications only working on one (or limited numbers) of operators around the world.

At some point open source phone operatong systems will be absorbed by the phone companies.  This is already happening with Linux (Suse to Novell, MySQL to Sun etc) so any open source movement will have a finite life.  I would question the need to add to the momentum.

I think open sourcing Symbian was probably a good strategic move given the explosive potential for Google Android to shake up the market as it becomes widely adopted. Nokia appears to be trying to maintain the market share for Symbian at some initial cost - Symbian gets about 2.50-5.00 per mobile device and this may go down, perhaps even to zero, with the competitive pressure from Android.

I think initially there will be competition but as developers work with both systems there will be pressure to adopt increasing levels of standardization, so I see Symbian and Android as the two key mobile OS flavors going forward. Users should be winners here as the pressure from Android and consumers and the abundance of new mobile devices force all players to create highly innovative new devices.   With the iPhone as the *starting point* of the new innovation, look for large numbers of great new phones to hit markets by Christmas of 2008.    Sprint's new touch phone is a quality addition to the landscape, and many more will be coming soon.   Rather than device differentiation, I think there will be a lot of attempts to bring every possible feature into single devices - sort of the Swiss Army Knife approach.   I think this will succeed thanks to the small form factor innovation we have already seen, where very powerful phones can be packed very tightly and stylishly. 

How will the closed software systems fare in a landscape where "open innovations" are the new "proprietary innovations"?   They will open, and probably fast.   iPhones have already opened somewhat and this trend will continue. 

As the key market leader for mobile operating systems Symbian is likely to be around for a long time, but it will face increasing challenges from Android to innovate and work with developers to bring users a great mobile experience.

Lastly, note the following consumer technology benchmarks which are a very clear indication of how much broader this market will become in the coming years:

• 291.6 million mobile phones shipped in Q1 2008
• 1.7 million iPhones shipped in the quarter ending March 2008
• 10.6 million iPods shipped in the quarter ending March 2008
• 2.18 million BlackBerry subscriber accounts and 4.4 million devices shipped in the quarter March 2008
• 1.24 billion mobile phones will be shipped in 2008 according to Strategy Analytics
• Total smartphone sales will break the 1 billion unit mark by 2010
• Only 69.5 million PCs were shipped in Q1 2008 (all desktops, servers and laptops)

Source: Symbian

 This Symbian statement suggests they don't feel threatened by Android, but I don't believe it.  I think the key threat to Symbian is Google Android and the open handset alliance. The phones that will come from this massive partnership will offer the same type of functionality as Symbian phones. However, given the staggering size of the market there is plenty of room for many players in this space. Although makers will want to work with Google they'll insist on the stability and reliability Symbian has provided them, and it seems likely handset makers will work with all parties as long as it is not cost prohibitive. Android started with a bang and now one hears only whimpers so it is not clear that the early promise will be realized for Android. Nonetheless good advice to Symbian is to be prepared to adapt to the rapidly changing market conditions that start .... yesterday.

Symbian is likely to remain competitive on the basis of stable and tested quality deployments, existing relationships with handset manufacturers (especially Nokia which owns about half of Symbian), and their renewed committment to open architectures. Unless the Android open source community shows more promise than it has in these early days of the Open Handset Alliance, Symbian should have several years to consolidate and grow its market position vis a vis Android. That said, I would predict a massive shift to cheap and full featured handsets that will be made in China according to cutthroat pricing standards. Symbian's current cost per instance of approximately 2.50-5.00 may have to be reduced to keep the OS competitive with a free Android OS as Android improves.

Look for geolocation and geotagging via your mobile device and superior photography and video capabilites such that you'll take a picture or video, upload it to the web, and immediately have the picture tagged with your current location. Social applications will explode in the mobile space to include complex Massively Multiplayer Gaming experiences as well as dramatic improvements to standard web gaming on your mobile device. Although collaborative work environments will need to be supported such as quality mobile versions of calendars and documents, I think the social and gaming space is where the amazing applications and amazing development will come together in exciting ways.

It's an exciting time for cell phones. Open source platforms hint at great new features to come and maybe even new devices that take advantage of a powerful, ready-built OS.

At this stage it's the developers who care most about the platforms, but consumers will make the most important contribution: an enthusiasm for new applications. That energy will ultimately drive the mobile revolution — creating the demand that leads to sophisticated social networking, real-time multimedia, mobile commerce, and exotic new ways of navigating. And it's nice to know that the wireless "internet of the future" will be interfacing with a new universe of devices in which the vast majority are running open-source operating systems.

But consumers may also have to bring a lot of patient, just to troubleshoot the installation of these new applications on a bewildering variety of devices and operating systems. It's inevitable that the rival platforms will all want to offer the most popular new cell phone applications. This may eventually be a driver for compatibility, but in the beginning developers will be faced with competing fiefdoms — and so will consumers. This won't be a problem if Android, Symbian, and Openmoko adhere closely to a set of standards, but I still remember attending a limited interoperability exhibition at Digital Equipment Corporation way back in 1990. For nearly 20 years the technology industry has been chasing the holy grail of universal interoperability. If these open source platforms can work together, we may finally realize that dream. But it will take a few rocky years to get there.

In the short-term, each platform will be stronger in specific ways, creating niches where one platform is favored by users and developers, but over time these differences should start to disappear.

Microsoft won't surrender easily to their new competitors. Cynics will describe a history of familiar tactics — arguing against open source platforms while heavily leveraging their huge installed base for Windows and touting easy compatibility for Windows Mobile with Windows desktop machines and Microsoft servers. But they'll be fighting in a new and emerging market, against powerful (and well-financed) innovators like Google, Apple, and Nokia. Microsoft may hold on to a chunk of the cell phone market — but I don't think they'll be able to dominate it.

Eventually a standard suite of compelling applications will emerge, which will run on all the platforms. But here's the real reason I'm excited about open source mobile platforms. I lost my keys this morning, and was wishing I could tag all my possessions with RFID chips. Car keys, reading glasses, the remote for the TV — all of them would turn up on an old school radar cathode tube which could ping my apartment in a counterclockwise circle.

And I'd like it to be running on Google's Android platform.

That's the beauty of open source platforms. Geek hobbyists can adapt them for crazy new projects no one ever anticipated. Google and Nokia can nurture this creativity by offering developer forums, tools, and even some educational seminars. But they've already created the most important piece — by offering up a huge base of users just waiting for new applications.

And the open source developers will do the rest.