Posted by: Lee | July 4, 2010

Dear Nokia

Introduction

As one typically does at 3am on a Sunday morning, I thought I’d dispense some advice to Nokia.

Now, before I continue lets set some things straight. I’d like to point out that I’m by no means an expert on the mobile industry, I’m purely a tech enthusiast observing from the outside looking in. I’m quite open minded and I’m not particularly religious but like to think I subscribe to the “Church of the Bleeding Obvious” i.e. common sense tends to prevail in my world . I’ve been using Nokias as my main phone for many years, but have now switched to Android (HTC Desire), I’ve also dabbled with Sony Ericsson and currently have a Windows Mobile phone as well (I will shortly have a Blackberry Bold 9700 too). I can see the merits of the iPhone and it’s eco system for some, for me personally I choose not use that platform as I like the freedom to think for myself (get me and the controversial lines).

Right, so why have I moved away from Nokia? Two reasons really, number one is of course the phones and the second is OVI. I shall elaborate.

Reason 1 for Leaving Nokia – The Phones

So for years Nokia was at the cutting edge of mobile devices, we all waited with baited breadth for their latest miracle device with more features crammed in than you could possibly imagine. Symbian Series 60 was introduced as the OS for these devices in 2002. Now Fast Forward to 2009 and the last Nokia flagship device…the N97. It was promoted as the uber phone, an iPhone killer, touch screen, 32GB of storage, Sat Nav etc etc. Brilliant we all thought, and then the N97 turned up at my door, crushing sinking dissapointment. Yes at the time I said I loved it, but it was more loving it for being my new toy than loving the device itself. I tried to love it I really did but 7 years after S60 was released the latest flagship was still running an iteration of this now very old OS, the new botched touch screen version of it. Also in the day and age of fast processors, masses of storage, dirt cheap memory and mobile apps the flagship had a 434mhz processor, 128mb of RAM and 60mb of internal storage…….seriously Nokia what the hell were you thinking?

The N97 really burned me, the OS was archaic and the hardware outdated before it was even released (To be fair it might have been cutting edge when it was originally announced which was about 100 years before it was released). Yes the hardware requirements could run the OS without problem but the minute you started to install and runs any apps you hit problems which kinda defeated the object of a smart phone.

Nokia was no longer producing cutting edge devices. Yes it tried to fix things by producing the N97 Mini and rushing out the N900 but neither device was amazing. The Mini was still slow and the N900 was more of a test bed “look what we’re working on” device.

In the mean time devices running Android were starting to become more and more sophisticated and sleek starting with the Nexus One (1ghz processor and 512mb of RAM) and because these Android devices like Nokia were open they were very tempting. The release of the HTC Desire was the final straw, it was the Nexus One re-packaged with HTCs sleek Sense UI on top and even more RAM (576MB). The Desire made the N97 look like a sloth.

Reason 2 – OVI (Nokia Services)

Ovi, Ovi, Ovi, where to start, OVI is a group of disjointed, developed completely separate from each other services and I hate it. Most people in the internet world exist in at least one of these environments, Google, Windows Live, Yahoo, Facebook. The common sense approach would be to develop a set of services for Nokia phones which could plug into these services. Of course Nokia did not take this approach, they decided to create their own services in OVI. Mail, Contacts, Calendar, Store. I had contacts, calendar and mail in Google, why would I possibly want to use the far more immature limited OVI services that didn’t even integrate with each other i.e. why re-invent the bloody wheel?? OVI Contacts sync was an embarrassment, you had to manually initiate it on the phone and it always created duplicates. OVI Contacts and OVI Mail were completely separate in that you had to create your contacts in both services, granted this has been fixed but why wasn’t it like that in the first place?

Yes there is the Nokia Messaging app which is very good for email but is yet another example of a Nokia service being developed separately, it’s not an OVI service yet is a service from Nokia and the app is different across phones. There is no consistency.

When you compare the integration experience of the N97 to the Desire there is no comparison. On my Desire, out of the box there is instant google contact and mail sync between my device and the cloud. Facebook contacts are synchronised to my address book and linked to existing google contacts so that only one entry is displayed per person. With Windows Live adding exchange connectivity I could have the same integrated experience using that as well.

It is possible to set up sync of Google and soon Windows Live using Mail for Exchange (MfE) on the N97 but for some reason there is no HTML support for email in Mail for Exchange on the N97 (there is on the E Series, yet more inconsistency) so you have to set contacts and calendar sync up in MfE then email in Nokia Messaging and only a techie could do this due to the messing required. On the Desire you just tap in your email address and password and bingo, away you go.

As you can now no doubt tell I have immense frustration with the Nokia/OVI world.

Dear Nokia – The Advice

Nokia, if you have read the above you will be able to tell that my experience with present day Nokia is full of frustration. It is tales of underpowered hardware, out of date software and disjointed services. This can’t go on, you need to act fast or you will be left even further behind. I get that you operate in different target markets with different requirements but I really think you should do the following:

  1. C and E Series phones should be a single variant of Symbian. No repeat of S40, S60 and the stupid feature pack 1 and 2 rubbish. One strand of Symbian which is componentised if needed so you can control the relative features for each product line.
  2. C and E series phones should be developed together by the same teams which should also develop Symbian for them as well to allow consistency
  3. N Series should be Meego only, there should be no Symbian in the N Series line.
  4. N Series should be its own entity in which the devices and Meego are developed together this allows cutting edge devices to be developed which have an OS which supports and takes advantage of all the hardwares features from day one
  5. Learn how to market. Stop announcing products 6 months in advance, the consumer gets bored with waiting. Most people have lost interest in the N8 as it’s been so long. Products should not be announced until they’re almost ready to ship.
  6. Realise cutting edge should be cutting edge. If your latest high end device has less memory or slower CPU than existing devices then it’s not cutting edge (N97???)
  7. Sort your services out, OVI is a mess, a real mess. It might work well in emerging markets for email etc but in the established markets it’s terrible. Consumers want an integrated seemless experience with whatever online service they use (yes it’s ok to focus on the main ones, Google, Windows Live, Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter etc)
  8. Sort out the OVI store, it lacks basic features like telling you when an update is available.
  9. Realise it’s not just about Carl Zeiss Lenses or Ovi Maps Sat Nav, it’s about the whole experience. We are living in world where most things are in the cloud, consumers who buy smart phones want to be able to see the same info across multiple devices not just take great pictures.

I really do hope Nokia sort themselves out, they used to be revolutionary……..sadly at the moment the revolutions are now happening elsewhere. Now I must go to bed.

Lee

Posted by: Lee | July 1, 2010

Froyo is on the way…N8 still not surfaced

So Froyo (Android 2.2) is now on the way. It was released for the Nexus One the other day and HTC and Motorola are promising updates for their main phones during this current quarter. I wonder when that will be?? I’m eager to see what difference the supposed performance improvements make, lets face it devices such as the Desire are pretty darn quick as it is anyway.

Of course now 2.2 is on the way, rumours of Gingerbread (Android 3.0) are circulating, with supposed minimum specs of a 1ghz processor……yikes!

As for Nokia….well the Nokia N8 has still not surfaced in retail outlets, the gap between Nokia’s phone announcements and actual delivery is far far too long. Chances are, like the N97, the N8 will be out dated even before it gets released. It’s been that long that most enthusiasts are bored of the N8 now and are talking about the N9 and the Meego operating system instead. The iPhone 4 has also been announced and released in that time. Nokia need to get their act together.

What are you looking forward to in the mobile world, Android 2.2, Nokia N8, Nokia N9, Meego etc etc??

Posted by: Lee | May 30, 2010

Where’s Wally?

Cool poster by the Wommies

Posted by: Lee | May 11, 2010

Nokia N8 vs HTC Desire..which would you choose?

So the first Symbian ^ 3 Nokia handset the N8 is due to be released soon and the latest and greatest Android handset the HTC Desire is available now.

image image

Both pack a serious punch so which would you choose and why?

Do my goggles look big in this?

Posted by: Lee | April 30, 2010

Another #N97MiniTrunk Package Arrives

What could it be?

Posted by: Lee | April 29, 2010

Apple’s Thoughts on Flash

Mr Jobs himself has posted his thoughts on Flash and why he doesn’t think it’s suitable for his devices:

Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there are few joint interests.

I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.

First, there’s “Open”.

Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.

Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.

Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.

Second, there’s the “full web”.

Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video.

Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.

Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.

Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.

In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?

Fourth, there’s battery life.

To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.

Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.

When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.

Fifth, there’s Touch.

Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary multi-touch interface doesn’t use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?

Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.

Sixth, the most important reason.

Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.

We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.

This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.

Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.

Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.

Conclusions.

Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short.

The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.

New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.

Steve Jobs
April, 2010

I can understand some of his points but others are certainly questionable, for example, Flash does not crash OSs, it’s poorly written flash applications which do that so it’s a bit unfair to pin the blame on Adobe’s baby. Also the argument about Flash being closed and Apple Open…hmm is all I can say to that.

What do you think?

View the original at Apple.com

Lee

Posted by: Lee | April 29, 2010

Nokia X2 Announced

Nokia have just announced another great little sleek looking candybar device over on Nokia Conversations, the X2nokia_x2_sideThe announcement says the following:

Taking more than a little inspiration from its bigger brothers the Nokia X3 and the Nokia X6, the candybar X2 offers a 2.2-inch QVGA screen and measures in at just 13mm thin and 81g light.

The Nokia X2 also packs dual speakers, dedicated music keys, FM stereo and support for up to 16GB of storage via microSD card make for a nifty mobile music device.

Bluetooth 2.1 is supported for wireless music enjoyment whilst hardcore music fans can opt for the 3.5mm headphone jack. Full speed USB 2.0 makes music transfer quick and easy and music can be managed via the Ovi Player PC client or Windows Media Player 11.

It’s not just a musical maestro, the X2 also offers direct access to Facebook from the homescreen and comes with Nokia Messaging goodness for email and Instant Messaging. Other notable feature include instant access to apps from Ovi Store, a five-megapixel camera and a video recorder.

The Nokia X2 will be available for an estimated retail price of €85 before taxes and subsidies.

Check out the whole article and more pictures at the Nokia Conversations Website

Lee

Posted by: Lee | April 29, 2010

The “Vail” is lifted

image

On Tuesday Microsoft released to the world the first official preview of Windows Home Server Codename “Vail”. Vail is the successor to Windows Home Server (WHS) a superb product from Microsoft which sadly has not received enough credit or attention.

Home Server is designed to sit at the centre of your home network, backing up all your computers, serving up media and allowing remote access to your data…amongst many other things. It presents all connected Hard Drives (Internal and External) as a single storage pool meaning users don’t have to worry about drive letters etc . It will replicate data across drives to make sure data is not lost should a drive fail. But the real beauty of WHS is that it’s designed for the home user, manageable from a single console, all the techie stuff is hidden in the background (but still accessible if you want it). It’s also  extensible using Add-ins written by 3rd party companies, developers an enthusiasts making it possible to use it for all sorts of wonderous things. The HP version even has support for Macs.

WHS

The original WHS was built upon 32 bit Server 2003 Release 2 SP2, a nice stable Server OS, but Vail is built upon 64 bit Server 2008 Release 2, an even better and well performing OS. It promises to take all that is great from Version 1 and build upon it.

Vail

So far the list of improvements is quite extensive, rather than explain them all here, I suggest going to We’ve Got Served one of the best Windows Home Server websites out there. It has an incredible amount of information and detail in a dedicated Windows Home Server Vail section.

The preview software is available to all and can be downloaded from Microsoft Connect.

Home Server is  really great product and deserves a lot more plaudits, I highly recommend you check it out.

Posted by: Lee | April 28, 2010

Apple Bashing

Got your attention?….thought I would :-)

There is a phenomenon now a days which is troubling me more and more. A phenomena that distorts reality, ignores the facts and bends the truth…what is it..it’s Apple!

Now before you start attacking me, let me tell you this, I admire Apple, I admire their ability to take a product and create an eco system surrounding that product, no one does it better, many many companies try and struggle to emulate this. I admire their ability to take a product (a product sometimes missing some basic features) and make it appear like it is the single best device/appliance known to man…..you know that happens. I also admire there ability to take something and bundle it into a sleek looking device that works.

Apple are also able to exert complete control over their devices as they develop and maintain all aspects (hardware, software, eco system) leading to a more satisfying consumer experience (caveat: if you only want to do what Apple says you can).

The problem that seems to have occurred as of late is the amount of press/media attention that Apple commands, especially global press. Now whilst Apple is certainly a big player in the states, around the rest of the world they are smaller yet they command just as much attention. (This is not to say they are insignificant, they are anything but that. The iPhone and it’s slick OS shuck the mobile world when it was released).

Apple’s Mac Computers enjoy only single digit market share globally and the iPhone is only in the mid teens (depending who you believe stats wise). Basically Windows computers and Symbian smart phones wipe the floor with Apple share wise and by the looks of it Android is gaining fast on the iPhone, especially in the US.

Now despite all this, whenever something is rumoured are leaked about an Apple product the worlds press and media come scurrying, this results in lots of free column inches and publicity for Apple. This is even though Apple will never actually confirm or deny anything, they stay silent. Apple are famous for their secrecy, almost to the point of paranoia….maybe this is why the media get so excited, getting info on future Apple stuff is like gold dust??

A couple of recent incidents have highlighted this unfair sway towards Apple. Recently a prototype iPhone 4G was leaked into the wilderness after being left in a bar. The worlds press went crazy and are still talking about it now a couple of weeks after the event itself. The same thing happened to Nokia at the weekend regarding their new N8 device, what did the press do….well there were a couple of small articles on a few tech sites. Nokia are the biggest smartphone seller on the planet by a long long way and the N8 boasts some incredible features yet there was hardly a ruffle. Why?? Nokia as a company are far more friendly towards their consumers than Apple. They engage with the customers to find out what they want and try to achieve it. Apple tend to trend towards telling you what you want. You can’t ignore Apple telling the world that you don’’t need 3G when the iPhone first launched, Edge is fast enough, or you don’t need Native Apps, Web Apps are the future only to do a complete turn around on both and various other statements.

Next example, the iPad…..world goes crazy again when this is announced and still are, despite it’s limitations. HP are developing something very similiar with more features yet barely a mention.

Now Nokia aren’t perfect either, far from it,  the recent N97 was a massive massive let down on various levels, the intial software was bordering on atrocious and the hardware underspecced. Nokia justifiably recieved a lot of critcism and they held their hands up. They’re still trying to recover from the negative press now. iPad is found to have issues with WIFI signal strength, Apple say nothing until eventually saying it’s not a problem if you use an Apple router….what kind of a response is that?? Press barely utter a word of criticsm. Apple delay the sale of iPad globally to prioritise American market, hardly a word spoken.

Final example, Microsoft released Windows 7 late last year, it surpassed Apple total market share in the space of a month, press don’t care. On it’s 6 month birthday it was announced that Windows 7 is on 10% of all desktop computers in the world…it’s officially the fastest selling Operating System of all time…again hardly a blink.

Apple make good products, no denying that, but I can’t understand why they get so much more attention than others given their relative size……..why do the media love Apple so much? It seems to let them punch well above their own weight even though they refuse to engage with the media apart from at product launches. I don’t think that is fair and wish the media would realise this.

Apple seem to have found a secret magic formula, it’s like the secret ingredient to Coca Cola….every other company in the world would love to have it

Lee

P.S. References to Media/Press mean Newspapers, magazines, tech press, website, business markets etc etc

Older Posts »

Categories