How long are Microsoft, and those who write about it, going to continue with the delusion that Windows Phone's competition is Apple and iOS, instead of Google and Android?
I had spoken to Horace Dediu of Asymco in December for a story on what options Microsoft and Nokia had before them, and here are some of the relevant parts he told me (the article itself doesn't seem to have been put online at Forbes India, who I used to write for but no longer do):
>> Coming to the present, the biggest problem that Microsoft and Nokia will face is that of timing. Specifically, at what stage are we when it comes to global penetration of smartphones?
>> Today now that the market is over 1 billion users and going to very rapidly saturate, the challenge for Microsoft is their assumption of wanting to keep on trying hoping to succeed one day. It's hard to believe that after so many tries and so much saturation, they can succeed. Worse, their strategies are symmetric, meaning they compete against an Apple or an Android by claiming their Lumia devices are better.
>> If Microsoft and Nokia can pivot and become a low-end competitor then there may be an opportunity still available in emerging markets. But instead they’re pouring tremendous resources into the US and Europe saying Lumia is better. That will fail. The door for Windows Phone is closing not because of Apple and iOS but because of Google and Android. Nokia, the bulk of whose phome portfolio was in the mid-market, was defeated by Android. I could argue, with difficulty, that they can still get into the late stage market but I haven’t seen a message from them indicating that. They simply aren't humble enough to see that market as their core, but still see their platform as superior to all others.
> How long are Microsoft, and those who write about it, going to continue with the delusion that Windows Phone's competition is Apple and iOS, instead of Google and Android?
They compete with both. Iphone does not sell because it sucks outside of US. It is locked down severely restricted platform. It does not even have USB Mass Storage!
$50 Android smartphones are coming this year. They've actually existed for quite some time, but this year they will be more "mainstream", and you'll see a lot more models (in poor countries). The combination of the Cortex A7 CPU plus KitKat which is optimized for low-end will ensure they work pretty well, too, relative to other phones in that range with much fewer features and less functionality.
So I doubt Microsoft will have any chance at that market either. Android pours 1.5 million new units into the market every day, or about 500 million per year, and that's before these mainstream "good enough" $50 smartphones arrive, which I think will help Android double its unit grow rate within 12-18 months. Everything else will get drowned out.
Here in the US, I walked into an ATT store a few months ago. My options for a '$99' phone included a couple of Nokia 900 series Luminas, a Samsung Galaxy S3, an LG Optimus G Pro, and the iPhone 5c.
If you've had an iPhone for 3 generations like me, there's no way you would switch to another vendor, simply because of all of the apps that you've paid for. If there were some way to get the Android version of an app if you bought the iPhone version, that might make it a lot easier to switch, but without that, I can't be bothered with spending money trying to recreate the same environment I currently have.
I'm not convinced. While most people might have spent enough money on their iOS apps to feel this way, I doubt that buying the same apps (if their free alternatives don't exist) on Android would rack up more than a few tens of dollars.
There are things that iPhone and Apple products still do better than their Android counterparts. For example, you still can't do screen mirroring from your android device to a Chromecast. Meanwhile, AppleTV works like a charm.
But, when it comes to SmartPhones independently, I'm of the opinion that marketing is the only thing keeping iPhone alive. The list of things you get for free with Android that you can't get with the iPhone even if you paid for them are growing longer and longer... Off the top of my head, here are things I've heard from friends who recently switched:
Woa, how did I ever go without Widgets!
Swyping is supported by default, _and_ I can change the default keyboard?!
I can charge my phone with any USB cable, _and_ upgrade my battery?!
You don't _have_ to use iTunes for everything?!
...
People use iTunes? Genuine question - what for? I live in an all Apple world, work, home, friends (mostly) and family (mostly). I'm not sure any of them use iTunes. With the exception of having to dump video into it to find it on the AppleTV, I never use it. It is awful.
Music is via Spotify, or, rarely, via the music app which has content in the cloud. Spotify stores my music locally. The App Store doesn't have iTunes in its name on iOS devices (as far as I can see). If I wanted music on my device via the music app, I'd buy it from the store. However if I owned a CD (not sure how this would happen, binned them all ages ago) I would have to stick it in a Mac (not mine, it hasn't got a drive), rip it, put them on a memory stick, get it to my Mac, dump them in iTunes (argh), then wait for cloud sync.
It helps to not conflate iTunes (an application) with the iTunes Store (a service). The latter can be accessed either from the former or from a handful of roughly equivalent apps on the device itself (an App Store app, an iTunes Store app for media, a Podcasts app...) There are very few things one cannot do without the former — which is good, because odds are that, when someone is talking about how bad iTunes is, they're criticizing the desktop application specifically.
I had spoken to Horace Dediu of Asymco in December for a story on what options Microsoft and Nokia had before them, and here are some of the relevant parts he told me (the article itself doesn't seem to have been put online at Forbes India, who I used to write for but no longer do):
>> Coming to the present, the biggest problem that Microsoft and Nokia will face is that of timing. Specifically, at what stage are we when it comes to global penetration of smartphones?
>> Today now that the market is over 1 billion users and going to very rapidly saturate, the challenge for Microsoft is their assumption of wanting to keep on trying hoping to succeed one day. It's hard to believe that after so many tries and so much saturation, they can succeed. Worse, their strategies are symmetric, meaning they compete against an Apple or an Android by claiming their Lumia devices are better.
>> If Microsoft and Nokia can pivot and become a low-end competitor then there may be an opportunity still available in emerging markets. But instead they’re pouring tremendous resources into the US and Europe saying Lumia is better. That will fail. The door for Windows Phone is closing not because of Apple and iOS but because of Google and Android. Nokia, the bulk of whose phome portfolio was in the mid-market, was defeated by Android. I could argue, with difficulty, that they can still get into the late stage market but I haven’t seen a message from them indicating that. They simply aren't humble enough to see that market as their core, but still see their platform as superior to all others.