Posted Oct 13, 2012 0:44 UTC (Sat) by man_ls
In reply to: The story of Nokia MeeGo (TaskuMuro)
Parent article: The story of Nokia MeeGo (TaskuMuro)
The differentiation between UI on Android phones is a pretty strong indication that competing on hardware isn't enough - vendors need to compete on the software as well.
I don't see the UI as the major difference between Samsung, HTC and the myriad other manufacturers, but rather as a liability. The official look&feel is good enough; the big disproportion
between Android manufacturers cannot be correlated with their home-grown UIs.
My wild guess would be that the main differenciating factors are: hardware, openness and updates, probably in this order. Samsung excels at the three of them, and is at the top; HTC failed on the last two and fell a long way. As a free software enthusiast it is nice seeing that people value openness.
Distasteful as it may be, going Windows was a rational choice for Nokia.
You use a different value for "rational" than I do: a rational choice that leads you from being market leader to a platform with single-digit market share in two years
has to be questioned. Nokia had the in-house Linux expertise to build great phones even without the Android momentum; they just had to ride the wave building what they do, great hardware. The rational choice would have been to start building Linux phones many years before, not go to Windows (an unknown platform at best) as an afterthought to their declining market share.
to post comments)