Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Samsung Delays Tizen Phone Launch

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 months ago | from the enlightenment-deemed-too-cool-for-you dept.

Cellphones 112

New submitter tekxtc (136198) writes Slashdot has reported in the past that a Tizen phone is coming and that the design and photos leaked. But, it has just been announced that the launch of the first Tizen phone has been delayed because of Tizen's small ecosystem. Should it ever ship? Haven't Android and iOS completely cornered the market? Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen, Firefox OS, and Windows on phones and tablets?

cancel ×

112 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yes it should ship! (5, Informative)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 2 months ago | (#47553631)

Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.

Re:Yes it should ship! (2, Insightful)

Dan East (318230) | about 2 months ago | (#47553777)

Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. Microsoft and Blackberry had the bulk of the market share, both based on old OSes that had been stagnant for quite a while with no real innovation. Blackberry didn't even offer a touch screen device yet, and Microsoft's could hardly even be used without a stylus.

Apple introduced revolutionary new hardware - capacitive based multitouch technology - which IMO was one of the primary reasons for the success of the iPhone. The other was an OS UI built from the ground up for touch interface. That was a knockout combination.

So no, Tizen doesn't have much chance unless they can bring revolutionary advancements, either hardware or software, like Apple did (and they brought both at the same time).

Re:Yes it should ship! (4, Insightful)

msauve (701917) | about 2 months ago | (#47553809)

"Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. "

Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1, Insightful)

gmhowell (26755) | about 2 months ago | (#47556803)

"Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. "

Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.

And I bet if he had said something along the lines of "Apple came from behind in the smartphone market and knocked the heretofore industry leaders on their asses", you'd have an equally useless and snarky rejoinder.

Sometimes the inverse RDF is just as strong as the RDF itself...

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

Ksevio (865461) | about 2 months ago | (#47556837)

There's a difference between creating a product and creating a market for a product. The feature-phone/smartphone market was pretty much stagnating until Apple released their iPhone, at which point it took off. Android helped, but that was a bit later.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

msauve (701917) | about 2 months ago | (#47557129)

Yeah, right. Android came later than the iPhone the same way the iPhone came after the LG Prada.

It was when a convergence of technologies at the necessary pricepoint (capacitive touchscreens, high density color LCDs, low cost GPS chips, flash memory, higher speed cellular data, etc.) came together that the smartphone market took off - not any one vendor.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

Posthumous Arkansas (638458) | about 2 months ago | (#47556847)

"Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. " Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.

Both the iPod and iPhone so dramatically outclassed and outsold the existing devices in their respective categories that it seems fair to say they "created" those markets. The iPod achieved a measure of market dominance that's almost unheard of. The "MP3 player market" ceased to be something people talked about anymore, because there wasn't really a market. It was mostly just iPods. And Apple's only real competition in the smartphone market is a platform that didn't exist in the earlier market, and was specifically redesigned from the ground up before its release to copy the iPhone's most important features as closely as it could. Which is to say, the market that presently exists is a market for devices that didn't exist before Apple introduced them and which doesn't include substantial numbers of the sort of devices that previously constituted the smartphone market.

Re:Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47557335)

"Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market. " Well, that's one view into the reality distortion field.

Score:5, Insightful?

Re:Yes it should ship! (1, Informative)

kuzb (724081) | about 2 months ago | (#47553825)

>Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market

That's total bullshit. Microsoft was selling smartphones long before Apple ever was. The completely came from behind in the market.

>Apple introduced revolutionary new hardware - capacitive based multitouch technology

No they didn't. That already existed long before Apple came along and used it.

Apple trying to say they invented multitouch is a complete joke, and frankly is insulting to all the other people involved. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... [wikipedia.org]

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553891)

>.That's total bullshit. Microsoft was selling smartphones long before Apple ever was. The completely came from behind in the market.

Didn't the PalmOS phones have touchscreens and loads of apps? They could play music, videos, take videos and pictures, run games, send email, etc.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

narcc (412956) | about 2 months ago | (#47554009)

Yes.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 months ago | (#47555651)

I don't know whatever the iPhone had multi-touch like he claim either.

The Nintendo DS was released November 2004 the iPhone June 2007.

So even if you exclude the not so common devices it's not even the first casual / well spread / far reaching product using a touch screen.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 months ago | (#47555659)

And of course there's the Palm devices (March 1997). And especially Microsoft PocketPC (Windows CE 1996) and Compaq IPAQ (launched April 2000.)

Apple Newton February 1998.

Re:Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47557163)

History remembers the victor, not all the losers that failed. ./ is full of pedantic twats this morning.

Re:Yes it should ship! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47554133)

Really? There were phones with bitmapped displays and capacitive multi-touch screens before iPhone? Please enlighten us.

Re:Yes it should ship! (2)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 months ago | (#47555147)

They'd sold thousands of them. In a market counted by the millions that's very significant. Apple does that kind of crap. Take new technology that no one quite knows what to do with it, package it attractively, market it and sell the hell out of it. So yes, Apple did not invent the smartphone, just the idea that eveyone needed one.

Re:Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555605)

The perception that they almost invented phones and music players and tablets and rectangles comes from how successfully they have popularized existing things, most of which have been considered kinda neat but way too nerdy to use in public or to own in the first place. They are great at changing perception, like you said.

I was using a Windows Phone that I had equipped with MSN/IRC, email, newsstreams, my favorite sites, tools, games, etc. before the two new dominant platforms came along. The way I use my phone has not changed much since I was already doing half that stuff that's now common, even though it's much easier now.

The biggest change is that people don't tell me how much of a nerd I am anymore... and how sad I must be if I want to carry my instant messaging and email and websites in my pocket at all times and how I should get a life. Apple hasn't really ever invented anything [youtube.com] except how to tell people they want something and that it's cool to want it.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

gmhowell (26755) | about 2 months ago | (#47556823)

They'd sold thousands of them. In a market counted by the millions that's very insignificant.

FTFY

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 2 months ago | (#47559523)

You went and ruined the sarcasm.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

gmhowell (26755) | about 2 months ago | (#47565059)

You went and ruined the sarcasm.

Sorry. I missed it the first time.

Re: Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555463)

Yes - LG Prada predates iPhone by a year or so.

Re:Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47556139)

Yes, there were "smartphones" before Apple entered the market. They were all shit, meaning the market was 0.01% the size that it is now.

Then, Apple comes along with the iPhone, and Google releases Android. Now the smartphone market is the cellphone market. Even the guys at Google said they had to rethink everything after seeing what Apple did, and they were already on their way to release.

To say that Apple didn't create the market is to ignore what the so-called smartphones were before the iPhone - crap phones that barely did email right, and didn't do anything else worth a shit. Blackberry was fine for email, but required a stupidly expensive on-premesis server for it to be worth a shit. Microsoft's offerings were warmed-over PocketPC PDAs with a phone dialer, and they sucked just as bad as PocketPC PDAs ever did. Symbian was a player, but Nokia refused to deal with the future when it was staring them in the face. Palm phones were a joke.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | about 2 months ago | (#47554625)

Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.

Popularized it, perhaps, but I wouldn't say created it.

That said, I think the GP may have been talking about the Mac.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 2 months ago | (#47554829)

Actually, the "several times" referred to the Mac after the PC killed Apple ][, and again after the Mac clones killed their own market, and the iPod, and the iPhone, and... Well, they may not be anymore "and"s now.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

Posthumous Arkansas (638458) | about 2 months ago | (#47556689)

Actually, the "several times" referred to the Mac after the PC killed Apple ][, and again after the Mac clones killed their own market, and the iPod, and the iPhone, and... Well, they may not be anymore "and"s now.

It is rare to see such a large amount of incorrect information conveyed so compactly. Kudos for your brevity, but pretty much everything here is wrong.

The Apple ][ continued to sell well even after the introduction and subsequent success of the Mac, which itself began development before the IBM PC even existed. The original Mac wasn't really a response to IBM, famous Super Bowl commercials notwithstanding, and the Apple ]['s eventual decline was more due to success of the Mac than the PC.

Also, Mac clones didn't kill the Mac market. The Mac was already in free fall when the OS licensing program began. Licensing Mac OS was an ill-conceived, last-ditch effort to rescue an already failing platform. This failure did precede a bona fide comeback--the only one, actually, in Apple's history.

Finally, neither the iPod nor the iPhone is a good example of Apple coming from behind. Their first entries in each market were both immediately successful, and the previous market leaders eventually became irrelevant. Apple entered markets in which they had never competed and completely took them over.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

Ol Olsoc (1175323) | about 2 months ago | (#47556589)

Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.

Popularized it, perhaps, but I wouldn't say created it.

That said, I think the GP may have been talking about the Mac.

Some times people get the concept of inventing something crossed with creating the market for it.

Apple did not create the smartphone. But they did make the device that created the demand for smartphones, and therefore, the market tor smartphones

Re:Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555665)

Apple may or may not have come from behind, but Android-based phones did and without doing a lot different from the iPhone.

Re:Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47556073)

Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.

No they didn't. They came into a pre-existing market (smartphones) from nothing. That's the very definition of coming from behind in the market.
They did introduce a bunch on new concepts and technologies to the market, but that's a given if you want to come from behind and be successful. You don't come from behind doing the exact same the others are doing and expect to succeed.

But they didn't create the market. Not even close.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

Ol Olsoc (1175323) | about 2 months ago | (#47556739)

Apple didn't come from behind in the smartphone market. They created the market.

No they didn't. They came into a pre-existing market (smartphones) from nothing. That's the very definition of coming from behind in the market. They did introduce a bunch on new concepts and technologies to the market, but that's a given if you want to come from behind and be successful. You don't come from behind doing the exact same the others are doing and expect to succeed.

But they didn't create the market. Not even close.

The market is not the device.

Her is the car analogy everyone is looking for:

The Benz Patent-Motorwagen of 1886 is generally agreed to be the first modern automobile.

The model T of 1908 was the auto that really created a market for them.

This can be wordsmithed of course. There was a very tiny market for the autos produced before then. So in that respect Ford didn't "create" the market. That might even be wordsmithed to the market for steam powered vehicles in the late 1700's. There was a tiny market for those too.

So yes, people who cannot give Apple or Ford any credit for the initial creation of the market for Cell phones or autos can argue all day about it, but one thing they cannot deny is that the iPhone and the model T surely changed the hell out of the market.that was there

So most of us that don't froth at the mouth when we hear "Apple" do understand what is meant by "created the market". The created the demand for the smartphone as it is today.

Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast (5, Insightful)

ron_ivi (607351) | about 2 months ago | (#47553789)

If they just unlocked the bootloader on the rest of their phones and encouraged people to download and try Tizen on their formerly-android phones, it could grow the ecosystem fast. Just market it as a "now with no google spyware" phone, and I think many will go for it.

Re:Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast (1)

uCallHimDrJ0NES (2546640) | about 2 months ago | (#47554051)

If they just unlocked the bootloader on the rest of their phones and encouraged people to download and try Tizen on their formerly-android phones, it could grow the ecosystem fast.

Just market it as a "now with no google spyware" phone, and I think many will go for it.

Well said. I'd plus you if I had points left.

Re:Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555551)

Oh Yes!, Because Tizen is /so/ less likely to suffer from spyware/etc/etc just like any other OS/platform.

There will be spyware/location reporting/whatever you want to call it under the guise of marketing. You're buying something that can transmit and receive data with a GPS chip in it (and you don't even need that in some cases for decent location reporting as WiFi/Cell info will be good enough)

If don't want that kind of info going out, don't get a *mobile* phone, simple.

Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555669)

In addition, they should've adopted Qt (remember, Tizen is a collaboration between Samsung and Intel, the latter coming from MeeGo, which is Qt-based). Qt is already used by BlackBerry 10, Ubuntu Touch and Sailfish (itself a MeeGo spinoff). They're all underdogs to be sure, but teaming up with 3 underdogs, meanwhile tapping into the development community around those 3 would surely help to kick off your own community. Instead, they opted to use EFL which brings us back to the 90s of plain C programming.

Re:Samsung could make a big ecosystem fast (1)

raster (13531) | about 2 months ago | (#47557903)

and c++ isn't 90's too? :) really? it was invented and used much later than that (as opposed to c)?

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

aliquis (678370) | about 2 months ago | (#47554219)

Also of course Windows got a chance on tablets.

(and if they gained traction there they likely still have one on phones.)

Re:Yes it should ship! (5, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 2 months ago | (#47554311)

Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.

You've totally been taken in by Samsung.
Tizen was never meant to ship. Tizen is a threat weapon that Samsung cranks up each time Google thinks of asserting some authority
over Android. Its simply a boogie man waiting in the wings in case Samsung doesn't get its way. It doesn't have to be viable, or even
cost effective. All they have to do is trot it out and demonstrate something, ANYTHING once in a while.

As long as Google plays along, Tizen will never launch.

Tizen definition (1)

goombah99 (560566) | about 2 months ago | (#47554651)

Tizen is the german word for dingleberry-- those pieces of crap that cling to the hairs of your butt. I think if they ever intended to ship they might have checked that.

Re:Tizen definition (1)

rossdee (243626) | about 2 months ago | (#47554811)

They would just rename it in the German speaking market

Re:Tizen definition (4, Funny)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 2 months ago | (#47554833)

Or, not... That may work in Germany. I have seen what they call porn...

Re:Tizen definition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555529)

No, it's not. 0 points.

Re:Tizen definition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555961)

No, it's not. You might have mixed that up with Zentis, a german jam manufacturer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zentis

Re:Tizen definition (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47556319)

So in company speak:
Samsung "Don't do it Google or the next time you take a dump, there's be dingleberries stuck to your ass."

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | about 2 months ago | (#47557315)

100% this. Notice that Google announced Android Silver recently. All the sudden the head of that project gets fired, and Tizen mysteriously isn't shipping. The last time Samsung was "just about to ship", Google sold off Motorola and suddenly Samsung had delays.

It's absolutely Samsung's way of fighting back against Google pressure.

Re:Yes it should ship! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47554761)

Tizen will have moderate sales but given the NSA has put backdoors into everything (shooting American tech sales in the foot) there is a growing demand for OS that isn't American sourced. If I was a government I certainly would not buy any US technology if I wanted privacy. Since neither Democrat nor Republican politicians have shown much interest in stopping mass surveillance of foreigners (including allies!) ot follows that billions of sales annually will be eventually lost.

Re:Yes it should ship! (2)

davydagger (2566757) | about 2 months ago | (#47554787)

Samsung is the large competitor.

Given the fact that Samsung is the largest, arguably best manufacturer of android phones, they are litterally competing against another department in the same company.

You have one giant South Korean buerocracy, where they have to compete within the company for the CEO/Board's attention/funding against the companies big money maker.

Tizen is never going to ship a phone, ever.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

MachineShedFred (621896) | about 2 months ago | (#47556161)

Or, here's another look.

You are a massive semiconductor manufacturer, as well as a manufacturer of smartphone handsets. You've grown your phone business to being #1 in a market segment (Android) and you're one of the few making a profit, and people are actually buying in on your marketing. You've managed to do something that very few other companies ever get done, especially in a rapidly shifting tech marketplace.

But you are completely reliant on another company for your operating system, and they don't take their marching orders from you because they need to maintain relationships with your competitors.

We've seen this before (PC hardware), and we've seen what happens (Microsoft). Samsung is making a play to keep some leverage on Google - you fuck around with us, and we walk away taking half your market with us. The money spent on Tizen is simply for leverage on Google, to make sure that Google doesn't jerk their chain too much.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

davydagger (2566757) | about 2 months ago | (#47559695)

except in really large corporations, divisions of the company fight among themselves for the CEO's attention like other companies fight.

Tizen will never land a smartphone, because their biggest competitor is Samsung's Android device. They might get lucky enough to release other devices, such as invehichle consoles with tizen.

Also, since android apps won't run on Tizen, which as a new OS has a chicken and egg problem with apps, its at a major disadvantage.

There are other large Android vendors.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 2 months ago | (#47555261)

Just because there is a large competitor, you do not quit. Apple didn't and came from behind several times. Now if it is not profitable, let it go, but don't just give up and give it all to App/Goog(le) without a fight. Besides, 1% of a lot of people is still a lot of people.

Heck, when the iPhone was first released, Steve Jobs himself said he didn't expect to do much to the market - if he got 1%, he would be happy.

It's a big market.

Then again, Samsung controls around 90% of the Android market, and probably a majority of the phone market in general.

And yes, Tizen is probably just a threat tool - there was a point in time that it was supposed to be able to run Android applications. Samsung's got enough power in the Android market that Google may try to kick Samsung out of the OHA for trying to sell a non-Android phone that can run Android apps, but Samsung's got countermeasures. First, they are the only OEM who has complete replacements for every closed source app, including their own app store. Second, Samsung's got muscle - owning the majority of the Android marketshare means they can force their way if they have to.

And considering Samsung's got various OSes ready to go, I can't see it as more than a way to keep Google in its place - keep making the OS, we'll let you install your spyware/adware, and don't you dare threaten us.

Re:Yes it should ship! (1)

Parts09 (1656793) | about 2 months ago | (#47560031)

Oh Samsung, why do we need another OS for people to develop for. What do we have now, 5 or 6 major OSes on mobile devices? Which are the 2 that have a deep ecosystem of applications? That doesn't come overnight and will kill your market share.

I actually wrote a letter to Samsung. I am a long time Samsung supporter and advocate (bought 3 top of the line phones, a Galaxy Gear, Gear 2 and multiple top of the line tablets. Also got family and friends to switch to Samsung/Android devices. But if they don't stay with Android, I will be dropping Samsung like a hot potato.

I HAAATTTEEE Tizen on my Gear 2.

Also, their S Voice application is crap, their email and text apps are substandard and the first thing I do on any phone i get is switch out the homescreen launcher because touchwiz is poop. I would have to say that while Smasung makes AMAZING hardware. They should leave software to other people.

lol @ hope for windows phone (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553657)

Microsoft doesn't get it, Android is the new Windows of the phone world. Compatible & Powerful, thats it. Apple is the premium. What is Microsoft going to be??

Re:lol @ hope for windows phone (1)

MrDoh! (71235) | about 2 months ago | (#47555769)

Hmm... no idea. Been watching MS in this market for years, ever since 'Pegasus' and... They just wait to see what everyone else does, throw marketing dollars at it, and try again. For the last 20 years. THIS time... I really can't get it. They've been rudderless for years, we'll see if the new guy in charge starts showing an actual direction.

Re:lol @ hope for windows phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555805)

So far the smartest thing he could invent was "lets move production from Europe to Vietnam", and to unify already unified OS development. I predict that he won't be able to solve MS's problems.

lol @ hope for windows phone (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | about 2 months ago | (#47557357)

If they're smart, they'll take everything Blackberry had and then some. There's absolutely no reason they can't produce a better email experience interfacing with Exchange than any of their competitors have. There's STILL nothing that even comes close to the old Blackberry + BES + Exchange experience 10 years later, and that's sad.

foreen fones r taken ur jerbs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553673)

Nevr ship dat shit, it should be American-made, yo!!!

Maybe (2)

Imagix (695350) | about 2 months ago | (#47553689)

Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't. Why will the telcos push/carry this phone, and/or why will end-users demand this phone? Good answers to these questions will help determine whether it should be published. (And note end-users are the generic people, not the techy people. "It's more open source" isn't a good answer...)

Re:Maybe (1)

thieh (3654731) | about 2 months ago | (#47553759)

Well Android has some deree of hardware requirements. Which makes space in competition available in the not-so-rich places. But then again, there are used phones for that...

Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553693)

Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' If that was true Microsoft and Apple would control everything. Then Linus Torvalds proved that 2 ecosystems was not enough and people are still spouting this nonsense.

Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | about 2 months ago | (#47557385)

Not really... Linux has basically 0 traction in the desktop market. There is OSX or Windows. OSX has basically 0 traction in the open systems server market, there is Windows or Linux. The various BSD distros have made noise every now and again from time to time, but they're an after thought, not a legitimate competitor (Solaris/FreeBSD/NetBSD/OSX/etc).

Re:Who says there can be only two 'ecosystems' (1)

dkman (863999) | about 2 months ago | (#47560181)

That's what they keep saying, except there are plenty of people who use Linux on the Desktop. I dual boot my laptop over to Windows less than 6 times a year (averaging once every 2 months, and I would say that's high). I generally just suspend lubuntu and hitting power prompts for my password and I'm back in session. I rarely reboot at all.

I use Windows at work, and I have a surface pro 3 (which is still windows for the time being, but has linux in a VM). I use an android phone, i have 2 android tablets, and an ipad.

I find it difficult to pay the Apple premium for hardware, and difficult to pay MS for OS upgrades. It's not that I can't afford it, there are just better alternatives. Free and interesting is better in my opinion. However, I support other's freedom to choose those paths.

Well, (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 2 months ago | (#47553695)

>Haven't Android and iOS completely cornered the market?

Yes.

>Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen,

No.

>Firefox OS,

No.

>and Windows

Yes.

Re:Well, (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553785)

>>and Windows
>
> Yes.

    Hope of what? Of creeping up to 4% of the market, while losing MS millions in the process? MS has deep pockets, but they are not stupid. The only uncertainty is exactly when they will plug the plug.

Re:Well, (1)

MrDoh! (71235) | about 2 months ago | (#47555775)

Never. They've been trying to crack this nut for nearly 20 years and still won't give it up. They can't. If someone takes aware Windows/Office, MS dies. This market should have been theirs to own, but sticking to simply bust WindowsCE rebranded with a shiny interface stopped them doing what needed to be done. Still, they can keep throwing marketing dollars at it, and as long as they creep up %'s of ownership each year, they'll see it as a success. That they're offering their services on ios/android shows how scared they are, but they won't/can't give up.

Re:Well, (2)

sideslash (1865434) | about 2 months ago | (#47553797)

With regard to Windows Phone you may have a point. Microsoft and Nokia have really aggressively pursued the low end of smartphones, particularly outside the USA, and have been seeing some traction in terms of devices sold.

However, in terms of profits [fortune.com] , it's pretty much Apple and Samsung [running Android]. Bleeding millions of dollars has certainly done something, but I'm not sure what Microsoft's plan for the endgame is at this point.

... using non-Windows devices. (1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about 2 months ago | (#47553949)

MicroNokia has been pursuing the lower end of the smartphone market using non-Windows devices (actually I think they're pursuing the higher end of the feature phone market), even coming up with their own generic Amazonesque Android phone.

At the lower end, you don't need a Play/Appstore sized ecosystem. Just Angry Birds, Facebook and Twitter.

Re:... using non-Windows devices. (1)

John.Banister (1291556) | about 2 months ago | (#47555207)

I'm pretty low end, and I don't want any of those things. What I would like is LibreOffice Base where it's possible for numeric fields to be dialable. That way I can input 1500 contacts and make & save queries that generate custom phone books for me. Other apps I actually use on my phone now are: the one to record my phone calls, text messaging, easypark, gnuchess, and Garnet, the Palm OS emulator where I have my 1500 contacts and BTZS ExpoDev.

No (0)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about 2 months ago | (#47553707)

All is and will be Android.

Self-fulfilling prophecy (2)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 2 months ago | (#47553727)

Well shit, if you're so worried about the viability of the platform that you're delaying it, then of course you're going to have a hard time attracting developers!

Re:Self-fulfilling prophecy (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553747)

Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!

Re:Self-fulfilling prophecy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553799)

Without developers there will be no customers; without customers there will be no developers. It's a modern day chicken and egg problem.

No ! Try not ! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553755)

Do. Or do not. There is no try.

Re:No ! Try not ! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553805)

Never learn how do if never try. Full of shit Yoda is.

Re:No ! Try not ! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47554053)

What I meant with this (arguably crappy) citation is that if Samsung wants to try Tizen, they
  must embrace it fully, put all their weight, spends years and billions of dollars on it.

Making an obscure handset with no application is pointless.

It is not just about marketing. They must bet a lot, or decide to not even try.

Re:No ! Try not ! (1)

sideslash (1865434) | about 2 months ago | (#47553827)

Do. Or do not. There is no try.

Yeah, spoken like someone who has never had constipation. And looking at that stew the Jedi Master cooked in his little Dagobah hut, I'm not surprised.

Tizen was just a strategic threat (3, Interesting)

pieterh (196118) | about 2 months ago | (#47553815)

Samsung never intended to release a Tizen phone. They were the ones who leaked the design and photos. The whole point of Tizen was to get a stick against Google, after they bought Motorola. Samsung are/were paranoid that Google would give Motorola preferential treatment, and that Android was becoming a toxic platform for them. Tizen was their insurance. Google got the message and Samsung killed most of their Tizen team and went back to focusing on Android.

Re:Tizen was just a strategic threat (1)

Graymalkin (13732) | about 2 months ago | (#47553969)

Google got the message and Samsung killed most of their Tizen team and went back to focusing on Android.

They killed their engineers? Can't Google just call their bluff now?

Re:Tizen was just a strategic threat (1)

caspy7 (117545) | about 2 months ago | (#47563325)

Samsung killed most of their Tizen team

You'd think this would have made the news.

smaller screens (1)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about 2 months ago | (#47553829)

I don't care what the OS is. Just release a decently-spec'd phone with a 3.5-4 inch screen max. I'm tired of not being able to upgrade because everything from the last 3 years has been huge.

Re:smaller screens (1)

wertigon (1204486) | about 2 months ago | (#47554293)

Sony Xperia Z Compact? It's 4.3 rather than 4 inches but other than that seems to fit your bill...

Re:smaller screens (1)

BBCWatcher (900486) | about 2 months ago | (#47554915)

I found your smartphone(s). Apple's iPhone 5s is more than decently spec'ed, and it has a 4.0 inch display. Apple's iPhone 5c is very decently spec'ed -- specifications are a bit better than the iPhone 5 -- and also has a 4.0 inch display. The Blackberry Q10 also meets or exceeds your criteria. If you insist on an Android-based device then it depends on what you mean by "decently spec'ed." Possible candidates include Asus's new Zenfone 4, Sony's Xperia M, Samsung's Galaxy Ace 3 (the Ace 4 may be a downgrade), and Huawei's Ascend Y300. I think I'd pick the Xperia M within that Android group, but your mileage may vary.

Re:smaller screens (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555317)

werent you listening? there's nothing out there!!

Re:smaller screens - YAY! (1)

billstewart (78916) | about 2 months ago | (#47555509)

I used an HTC Aria for about 4 years, one of the smallest smartphones on the market. Unfortunately, it was running a heavily HTC-customized version of Android 2.1, and I hadn't successfully gotten it to upgrade to 2.2 before HTC Sync stopped working for me for a year or two, and sometime during that period Android Market got replaced by Google Play, which my phone didn't think was the same thing at all so stopped letting me install apps. And I couldn't find any other smartphone that small since then; they were all bigger, even the

I finally gave in and replaced it a month ago with a Samsung S4 Mini. It's longer and a bit wider, but thinner, which helps. The other phone I'd considered was the iPhone 4, but I preferred to stay in the Android side of the world rather than go over to the shiny side. (Samsung's Kies sync-over-USB program also seems hopelessly clunky, takes forever to detect a phone being connected, grub my calendar out of Outlook, and download, but it does eventually work.)

Re:smaller screens (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47556137)

That's called an iPhone. Maybe you've heard of it?

I sure hope these ship! (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47553847)

I am tired of Google's insistence I owning and tracking everything I do, and I would be happy to leave them behind for my own privacy benefit. I have no desire to move to Apple's walled garden either. I want the flexibility to do what I want with my device, and the privacy to know that my personal data and habits are not being tracked for the purposes of trying to sell me more crap I don't want.

Captcha: Vanities

Re:I sure hope these ship! (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about 2 months ago | (#47553931)

If not Google, then who? Pick your poison, for you will be tracked, mined, engineered. You have little choice in the matter save for the overt actors involved.

Re:I sure hope these ship! (1)

narcc (412956) | about 2 months ago | (#47554709)

I guess it's BlackBerry or FireFox OS for you.

I'd call that a win anyway, but ymmv.

"Killer app" (2)

uCallHimDrJ0NES (2546640) | about 2 months ago | (#47554055)

We have apparently forgotten that exclusive apps happen. If the most awesome value prop for an app in the world is on Tizen, then there will be a Tizen market.

Re:"Killer app" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47554453)

Would be suicide for the app developer, and Samsung themselves write the worst software ever. Samsung would have to pay some high profile developer for exclusivity.

Windows Phone? (2)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 months ago | (#47555215)

(from article) Is there any hope for the likes of Tizen, Firefox OS, and Windows on phones and tablets?

How did Windows Phone get in that group. That's the 3rd largest ecosystem and growing rapidly with multiple billions behind it. It has shipped and is shipping. Unitwise it is over 1/3rd of of iOS sales. Definitely 3rd place but not marginal, or non-existant.

Re:Windows Phone? (3, Interesting)

wertigon (1204486) | about 2 months ago | (#47555729)

Because of the Carrier boycott.

Windows Phone will most probably never see double digit market share. The reason? Skype. Microsoft owns Skype, the single biggest threat to current carrier revenue. The Skype/VOIP revolution will happen, but if you were a carrier, would YOU invest in technology that would kill you off, long-term?

Tomi Ahonen has a rather complete rant [blogs.com] about this topic from late 2012, and very little has changed since then.

Re:Windows Phone? (1)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 months ago | (#47556265)

Except it is total fiction. Tomi made it up. Nothing like that every happened.

http://dominiescommunicate.wor... [wordpress.com]
http://dominiescommunicate.wor... [wordpress.com]
http://dominiescommunicate.wor... [wordpress.com]

Re:Windows Phone? (1)

wertigon (1204486) | about 2 months ago | (#47564249)

Except it isn't. Tomi has rather damning evidence in his wall of text:

The FACT is, that Nokia CEO Stephen Elop told Nokia shareholders - and I quote - "Indeed, Microsoft did buy the Skype company as part of the ecosystem that comes with Windows Phone and Windows. The feedback from operators is they don’t like Skype, of course." Elop went on to explain why carriers/operators hate Skype " (because) it could take away from revenues."

This is spoken by Elop himself. Why do you think Nokia fell from being twice as large as it's biggest competitor to completely fall out the top ten in mobile in a mere three years? It's called Windows Phone, and nobody wants a windows phone!

The problem is not that retail does not carry WinPhone. The problem is that carriers - e.g. Verizon, AT&T, Sprint etc - Will not subsidize windows phones, and they started this ever since the Skype purchase. That is what is meant by the "carrier boycott". Oh sure they will sell those phones, but only at full price. Why is this a problem? Well, "you want this winphone for $49 a month or this androidphone for $29 a month?" is a serious problem because Joe Sixpack doesn't care about Android or Windows, he will take the cheapest alternative.

Is this a fixable problem? No, it is not. Skype is now an integrated part of Microsofts Cloud strategy. So this means Microsoft has to choose between Skype or Mobile.

Please do note that carriers do not wish to support technology that will one day make them a "mere data channel". Carriers have built their business on exclusive services in their own networks. By subsidising Windows phones, they are funding technology which will make them obsolete one day. Sure they are only delaying the inevitable, but that's how they roll.

Re:Windows Phone? (1)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 months ago | (#47564313)

Tomi has rather damning evidence in his wall of text:

Read the links. Elop never said what Tomi attributes to him. At a time when Lumia phones didn't even have Skype, Elop was asked about the operator / Microsoft relationship... There was no mention of a boycott in his response. He mentioned that among the reason those operators that were hostile to Microsoft were hostile Skype was the reason. That's it as far as facts. In terms of the companies supposedly boycotting is Verizon who spends money enhancing Skype.

Why do you think Nokia fell from being twice as large as it's biggest competitor to completely fall out the top ten in mobile in a mere three years?

For the same reason RIM experienced a similar decline. Better products emerged from the USA: Android and iPhone.

It's called Windows Phone

There was a huge drop in Symbian marketshare 6 months before Elop came on as CEO. Causes cannot happen temporally before effects.

. The problem is that carriers - e.g. Verizon, AT&T, Sprint etc - Will not subsidize windows phones... Oh sure they will sell those phones, but only at full price.

Last year at many of those carriers the subsidies on Windows phone were higher than on iPhone. No one until that point had beat Apple ever. Take a look at the prices today they aren't at full price as we speak. Symbian had problems being subsidized because of the terrible Nokia relationship with USA carriers, Windows phone does not and never has had that problem because Ballmer and co. assisted.

Carriers have built their business on exclusive services in their own networks.

Lync (commercial Skype, same protocol) is for most of those carriers something they are spending tons of money to support better. You are simply wrong.

Re:Windows Phone? (1)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | about 2 months ago | (#47557311)

How did Windows Phone get in that group. That's the 3rd largest ecosystem and growing rapidly with multiple billions behind it. It has shipped and is shipping. Unitwise it is over 1/3rd of of iOS sales. Definitely 3rd place but not marginal, or non-existant.

Are they "growing rapidly" in any developed market like the USA, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, New Zealand? The only person I know who has one lives in Taiwan and she admitted to me she bought it for cost reasons but would have preferred an Android or iPhone. And billions of what, exactly, behind it? If you mean sales then that is certainly not true. If you mean Microsoft is throwing billions of dollars at trying to get suckers to buy them, maybe. They don't even advertise Windows Phone on TV any more in the USA and at least a few years ago they were doing that.

Re:Windows Phone? (1)

jbolden (176878) | about 2 months ago | (#47558409)

Are they "growing rapidly" in any developed market like the USA, Canada, EU, Japan, Australia, New Zealand?

Yes.
France 10.5% latest figures up from 1.9% two years ago
Japan 0% to 1.4% 2 year
UK 4.1% to 9.1% 2 year
etc...

They don't even advertise Windows Phone on TV any more in the USA and at least a few years ago they were doing that.

Nokia has reduced their push in the USA market. The USA market is too different than their model, for structural reasons. Obviously the USA is important to Microsoft so I'd expect that to change post acquisition.

Re:Windows Phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47563653)

Windows phones are selling for less than ancient feature phones *without a contract*. Of course, they are going to get some sales, but even when their competitors are priced 6-12x higher, windows phone can't compete. So, yes, it belongs in this list of insignificant / has been players. Nobody goes out wanting to own a windows phone, they get one because it is super cheap, and they can get a real phone after they save up a bit.

Even being practically given away, on the college where I work's wireless network, windows phone (per mac address prefix) is almost non-existant. Its mostly Android with Apple getting about 30%, and you can count the windows devices that connect in any day on one hand (out of 10,000 students).

If Microsoft unlocked the bootloader, they would sell a ton more devices. None of them would be running windows, but Microsoft could pretend, and use the fake boosted numbers to get more carriers to feature their devices.

Is there a market (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555337)

I don't care. I don't want iOS and android as my only options. I read about and really like firefox os but all the devices it runs on are weak. give firefox os on decent hardware like an s4 or s3 and i'd totally get one even just to use on wifi only at home. apple is doing good but google is steadily going downhill

Ironicly Named (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555535)

Ironic. Tizen is an English homophone which means a women who overstates desires but doesn't meet them.

whats with the windows phone haters (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47555717)

I love my windows phone.
Yes I have had/have the others but for easy of use and usefulness, nothing comes close.

Plus free upgrades from wp7 to 7.1,7.5 and 7.8, the 8.1 from 8.

Each upgrade just is getting better.

Try one for a week you will not go back

Undo mod (1)

khchung (462899) | about 2 months ago | (#47556103)

posting to undo mistaken mod

The Jolla is already way ahead (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47556133)

The Jolla [jolla.com] from Finnish ex-Nokia people has already released a phone with the GNU/Linux-based Sailfish OS, which _also_ (after installing a proprietary Dalvik engine from Myriad) can run Android applications really well.

So there's already a contender out there.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?