Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
| AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
| AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
| Twitter
Sean Fallon
| Twitter
Jack Loftus
| Twitter
John Herrman
| Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen
| Twitter
Rosa Golijan
| Twitter
Chris Jacob
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Kyle VanHemert
Comment Account Questions:
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
12/07/09
12/07/09
Not to mention its a VZW launch would give the phone more exposure in the first week than its had over in the UK in the first month.
In any case I'm not particularily upset. Wind Mobile got delayed probably into January and this phone is ugly. By the time I need something, we might have more info on what Google is up to. Oh, and this phone is super ugly.
12/07/09
This is more of a media thing than a real world statistic. Around here, I see even middle aged women toting phones like the TouchPro 2 just because it has a flashy UI and it looks and feels great. Chances are, a lot of them don't even know what OS runs in it. Hell, the average Joe outside the US and perhaps the UK still returns a blank stare when they hear the name "Android". The OS simply needs more time for market penetration.
HTC had officially stated that WinMo is their flagship OS (And thus, getting the best hardware at any given time point) and will remain so for a while. This is the basis for my statement.
BTW, the cost of WInMo per handset is barely USD 20 or so.
12/07/09
12/07/09
I think the sudden shift to Android is more than enough proof that the $20 per handset cost is in part kind of a big deal. Something as little as $20 per anything, when unnecessary, has the tendency to affect EVERYONES bottom line in the long run when factored by numbers in millions. Call me crazy, but in my experience free will always be better for your bottom line when figured into your overall production cost. Do you know what HTC's profit margins are on smartphones btw? What about smartphones running Win Mobile vs Android? Do you know if HTC enjoys Apple like returns on every smartphone sold? Don't fool yourself whatever the case, it's always all about the Benjamins. I personally believe that one of the main reasons HTC is in part still sticking with Windows Mobile is because of some dirty back alley cash deal (read about Microsoft paying News Media Group to delist from Google for reference).
12/07/09
...because they ARE productive. Far more than most competing systems. Be it full Bluetooth profile support, Full MS Office capability out of the box, ability to work with high security Exchange servers, etc.
Make no mistake, I like Android. But you're just fooling yourself if you think that no market exists for WinMo. Or that every WinMo user caan and will be Satisfied by an Android handset. The end customer doesn't care if he's paying a hidden charge of $20 as long as his needs are met. And as long as there's demand, the manufacturers would push the paid alternatives.
...going by your logic, 95% of the PCs in the world would be running Ubuntu, right? Right.
p.s. The reason HTC is sticking with WinMo is... (Now take off your rosy tinted glasses) Because they wouldn't be anything without WinMo. In their own words, no less. Most people have a false vision that HTC is this company that takes an OS and does some black magic on it to cover up its deficiencies. But the truth is, They work very closely with MS for all the innovations seen in their handsets. Things like the capacitive screen on the HD2 happened because of extensive help from MS's engineers. Again, HTC's words. You don't bit the hand that has fed you for long.
Translation: Don't hold your breath to see a WinMo less HTC. You'll get your Android. Be happy.
12/07/09
You make a ton of invalid points based on what I'm guessing is conjecture, and assumptions about me, while never answering any of my questions from the previous post. While I DO use a Android phone now as my primary device, I never said they were going to only make Android based devices moving forward. :/ I've actually used WM and definitely see the draw there, it's just not my cup of tea. I also never argued that Windows Mobile wasn't productive or of any value to any manufacturer (that's an argument you're having with yourself, all by yourself). My argument was one based on numbers and cost, and how it's just plain foolish to dismiss the cost vs savings value the Android platform inherently brings to ANY device manufacturer competing/looking to start competing in the smartphone space (HELLO Dell, also It's a FREE cutting edge smartphone OS!). The smartphone space is super competitive with established and entrenched contenders (like say, Nokia) getting their asses handed to them quarter over quarter by the likes of relative newcomers like Apple and RIM, who are also changing the way the financial world sees and marks success in that sector of the CE space (with market share vs profit per device).
I think what you've failed to see/acknowledge is the shift in focus occurring at HTC's core (as you mentioned above). While they may have started out as a smartphone maker solely focused on productivity as evidenced by their choice of Mobile OS (WM), their new emphasis and shift to Android (covered here on Giz a couple of times) indicates a move away from niche market/specialty boutique market device maker to mass market player. While there was a time that productivity was their core focus, I don't necessarily feel that that is the case with them anymore. Now, I'm not saying they're completely moving away from WM, however in it's current incarnation it's no longer their primary focus either for obvious reasons. Need more proof? Look at their Corporate tag line and corporate ethos in regards to device making for that (some would say it's the polar opposite of what WM has come to mean to people who have used it)...
As to your comparison to the PC market, well that's just plain retarded or a straw man argument at best... Please refrain from saying your using my logic. The only thing the two markets have in common is that Microsoft is a competitor in both of them (if you even want to call them that at this point). What's WM's worldwide market share at this point btw? It may have been relevant if Windows Mobile shared the type of market share in the mobile space that it does in the PC space, but it doesn't. They're two completely different beast with very different market demands. See how dumb it is to make that comparison now?... If you wait a couple years we may see what's happened in the PC world happen in the mobile world, except with Android (a FREE OS) as the established OS of choice...
With all of that said, please take a moment to take off your green tinted fanboy glasses and smell the reality of what's going on in the (mobile) world...
12/08/09
My points are based on direct quotes from HTC themselves. I highly doubt if your opinions hold a higher value than those.
People talk a lot about WM's shrinking marketshare, but what they fail to understand is that the market itself has become larger. The number of devices sold with WM remained more or less stagnant while the market made room for the newer players.
- Why is HTC using Android?
Because they want a larger share of the pie.
- Does it mean their focus has shifted from WM?
Not according to me, not according to HTC.
There, a simple, concise answer to about 2 paragraphs worth of accusations and allegations from you.
The comparison with the PC market was done to show that a paid alternative is still relevant. Do you have a problem with using MS as an example in the mobile realm? Fine. Here's another one.
There exists this certain OS called Symbian which just happens to have the largest marketshare, arguably the largest number of developers and excellent productivity. It wasn't free or open source until a few months ago. Meanwhile, Samsung, LG and later, Sony Ericsson licensed the OS from Nokia for use in their handsets. WHILE Android was around. Yes, they made (Or are developing) Android handsets, but why bother with a paid option if (According to your stance) free is the answer to everything?
Because while free is good, it isn't the answer to everything. And I repeat, the end customer doesn't care about a 2 figure hidden cost as long as their needs are met. Exactly like how people choose "Free" Windows on their PC over free (Without quotes) Ubuntu or something. Again, read in context before you blow your lid.
The world mobile market isn't limited to the USA. Read up a bit and you'll realize that Android is still taking baby steps while Symbian and WM are still very much relevant.
Oh, and lay off the "Fanboy" allegations, will ya? It's a stupid word and I use Symbian anyway.
12/08/09
(Please don't read any of this as me being facetious or flippant btw, I'm just asking honest questions is all.)
You keep bringing up these OS market share examples that I feel won't matter in a few short years. I'll tell you why I feel this way, we've in a round about way been avoiding and talking around the obvious elephant in the room, Google. They've already changed so much in the software space, why is it so hard for you to fathom that they won't overtake the traditionally paid for volatile mobile OS space soon?... All of the analyst and talking heads believe that this is the way the market is heading, and they have a ton of data to support just that! Is it that hard to believe that this may happen in a few short years, especially when most of the general public, as you yourself stated, doesn't care what OS their smartphone is rocking? Why then would a phone manufacturer pay for an OS?...
Let's be perfectly clear, right here right now. Nokia is the primary producer of Symbian based smartphones, and they owned over 40% of the overall WORLDWIDE phone market not too long ago, right? Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Nokia and Symbian losing more and more of that same market share at a steady decline to other OS's and manufacturers quarter over quarter? Yes, they're still relevant, but they're also in a marked DECLINE. If you don't believe that, then there are several thousand ex-Nokia employees that want to talk to you. Also, let's be extremely honest with ourselves, Symbian is nothing like Android as far as the user experience goes (Google web based services built in at it's heart, UI design, inbuilt App Store, and scaleability for different application usages). Also, Google is backing Android and not Symbian, a VERY big deal. Basically, free Android does not equal free Symbian, and just because it's also free doesn't mean all manufacturers want it. I just don't see the parallels you made in your examples, it all just seems a little like FUD to me.
Sooo Here's the long and short of it, using your logic. If the general user doesn't care what OS they're using tbw and HTC is just going to dress it up however they want anyways, then why should they spend more of their own money to develop something for a niche market with no potential growth when they're trying to get a bigger piece of that larger ever growing pie? As you yourself stated, WM's market share is stagnant, so why invest most of your money in something like that? Where's the business sense in that? Things change btw (including stances), and you can't always take what people say at face value, especially when it's coming from a companies PR Representative or Executive! You have to read in between the lines and see what the company in question is actually doing! What would they stand to gain by announcing a total departure from WM, like say Motorola did? Is it in the companies best interest to say everything is cherry when they have a storied history and vested interest in something like WM (how would that make Microsoft look? You don't think Microsoft has a stake in something like that, or some kind of say?), a huge inbuilt community of die hard followers (your niche community), and investors to think about before making a big change?...
I too up until recently owned a Symbian powered device, and until recently it was my OS of choice. We obviously agree to disagree, and that's fine. I feel like I could sit here all night writing thoughtful responses to your responses, only I have other things to do.
-Best,
Mike
12/08/09
Everything that I've said in this thread is based on actual quotes and facts while your counterpoints are based on the romantic notion that Android is the future and nothing else is.
Symbian is on a decline. Definitely. Why? Because they did a halfassed job of adopting to touch UI. Also because the midrange market, which made up the majority of Symbian's core market, is on a decline as a whole. But the decline isn't drastic by any measure. And neither did Android gain the direct marketshare that was lost from Symbian. BTW, Nokia didn't lose any more employees than most other companies affected by the recession. And even with it, a significant part of the retrenchments were directly related to their network backbone services.
If I am to take into account your opinion of what MIGHT happen in the future w.r.t Android, we might as well talk about what MIGHT happen once the Symbian Foundation OS is out. Or What MIGHT happen once WM7 is out. Or what MIGHT happens when the Aliens finally make contact.
" Also, let's be extremely honest with ourselves, Symbian is nothing like Android as far as the user experience goes"
...and let's also be extremely honest and admit that Android is nowhere near Symbian as far as productivity goes. Where are my bluetooth profiles? Or the ability to install apps on expanded memory? Or proper syncing with High security Exchange servers? A comprehensive task manager? A comprehensive file manager? Media handling capabilities? And so on.
"Things change btw (including stances), and you can't always take what people say at face value, especially when it's coming from a companies PR Representative or Executive!"
It came from the company CEO and it's factual that MS works the closest with HTC among all their partners. Again, your OPINION and SPECULATIONS are not a valid or credible counter argument material.
I answered all your questions perfectly without adding personal opinions to spice it up. If it's too dense for you or if you are indeed too busy to comment on lowly internet blogs, feel free to walk away. Your mind is too closed to understand the difference between facts and opinions anyway.
12/07/09
12/07/09
I haven't used sense for any appreciable amount of time admittedly. When I did use it I enjoyed it but not all that much more than stock android. I mean some of the sense widgets are nice but at this point I've found the same if not better of everyone.
I was actually pretty happy to see that the bravo didn't looked skinned with Sense (maybe it is couldn't really tell without seeing the dock tab).
12/07/09
12/07/09
Dev dreams have the plucky little guy on the back too.
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/15/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
@NorwoodIsMyHero: #androidtabletvegaicd
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09
11/13/09