Bobs, please take a look at the above list of apps resources for Windows Mobile phones again - it reflects a couple of things. First, the notion that "apps" for mobile devices were first "innovated" by Apple is utter nonsense - though I will agree that our industry and main stream media certainly have been successful communicating the idea that it did. Second, it reflects not only diversity and broad choices, it also reflects a whole lot of developers and companies making real money on the platform and in an open and independent way - on, but not through Microsoft. Third, and most importantly, it reflects the market, which is made up of many unique needs, as defined by that market and not just one company. Enough about "apps" for the moment.
It is true that the appearance of complexity around Windows Mobile phones and their UI is manifest. The desktop metaphor, which works on PC's, seems out of place on the tiny screens found on phones. However, most business users never see that complexity and a good argument can be made that they do not have to. Surely there are numerous examples in the market where that complexity has been well masked - HTC Ozone, HD2, etc... (very different device types for very different types of users).
It is very probable, and I would submit, desirable that no one phone, carrier, or specific UI is going to be appropriate for all people. There have to be subsidized and unsubsidized devices of a great many types to suite individuals and the markets in which they live and work. It may also be that no one phone combines equally well, all of the characteristics you mention - not right away and I think that is exactly where we are. I reason we are at a very important juncture in mobile device computing and I am willing to bet that what is needed and desired has not been made yet - not even close. Apple's iPhone, despite its popularity in some markets, isn't the example, or benchmark. It's not even close in many markets for many reasons. Despite appearances, Ballmer and Microsoft had it more right from the beginning and while there is a lot of work to do, I think their approach is more consistent with what is needed. Having supported a pretty decent sized pool of companies that are also mobile device users, I see some of the diversity I have mentioned. "Cool" (read invokes desire in this context), is a huge driving force right now - as universally fleeting as that always is and likely will be. I've seen small business users rush to the iPhone and I've seen the same ones rush right back to Windows Mobile phones a month later. I've never seen a die-hard Blackberry user move an inch, no more than I have seen a WinMo user want to move off of similar form factors. This topic deserves a lot of debate and discussion and as a hint about what I mean, what bit of functionality do about ALL "Smart" phones license and hold out as key and important? It's software, for sure and a very big indicator that Ballmer and co. are a lot closer to the future than any other. That will troublesome for some, until they look back at that list of apps above again and realize what it means and represents. It means there is room for many, and not just one company and its tightly defined definition of what is suitable, or even “cool” for another. The very fact that Microsoft sustains such diversity at its own expense (in perception most often) slaughters any argument that the company represents any form of monoculture. That argument is silenced by the reality that over a billion people experience each day.
|