or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Alfiejr

my point is the UI is wrong for that. the general reaction in the USA is that WP 7 is "cool." well that's nice. but "cool" does not translate across cultures well. Nokia went to great lengths working with local telcos around the world to localize its products, inlcuding their top level of Symbian UI. that is one big reason why it had so many different models and strong global sales. i can't see WP 7 being as easy to localize, even if Nokia can keep its experienced global...
yup. but WP 7's tiles UI is too hip. very first world. i don't see it replacing Nokia's dumb phones globally. the local telcos will opt for something they can tailor more easily to their markets. Samsung and the rest will provide more generic OS options for them that they can localize.
the big question is will WP 7 ever grow into a major OS. MS is betting the Nokia partnership/take over will accomplish that. but it is also possible it will flop, and be the end of Nokia instead. i don't see the very idiosyncratic WP 7 replacing the much more generic Symbian phones worldwide. maybe in Europe at best, a niche. actually, MS' best hope is that the massive ongoing legal attack on Android brings it down in a year or two, and forces OEM's to look for...
there is no question IDC provides paid services to MS, that's a fact. eg, see this EULA, search for "IDC". they provide financial info for a lot of MS services. i have to assume they get paid for that.http://explore.live.com/microsoft-se...ement?ref=none their conflict of interest is blatant. but web "journalism" ethics are so pathetic anyway that no on calls them out for it.
IDC reports OEM shipments as if they were actual sales. of course they are not. and that is what their market totals are based on. so they're junk numbers. Apple just reports actual sales. i haven't seen any other OEM report of actual tablet sales to consumers/businesses. gee, i wonder why. IDC is the same outfit that predicts Windows Phone 7 will overtake the iPhone in sales in two years. while also getting paid by MS for services of some kind. gee, i wonder why.
sure. Google is not shy about blatently copying other companies successful products/services. and to be fair it invents/adds more of its own, like Google Voice. and all its voice UI stuff. A Google version of FaceTime based on your Google address book makes total sense. there is more to Skype, but Google wants to be your one stop shop for everything to do with communication and search. why wouldn't they go for it?
boy, are you missing the action. Google's ambitions go far beyond its extensive cloud services, and social is its main target today. which means Facebook. the widespread Google cloud is a great starting point for the attack. it already does a lot more useful communication/location things than Facebook can. meanwhile, Facebook's kid genius thinks he can rule the social world and then expand beyond that into ... and thereby be the next Google. or bigger. Skype is a utility,...
Apple is social platform agnostic. all its own social services - Gamecenter, Ping, the new MobileMe, and now Twitter - are offered as conveniences for Apple hardware owners, not as competition with Google or Facebook. same with FaceTime, there is no competition with Skype. Apple just wants good apps from them all. think strategically and get it clear: the War is Facebook vs. Google.
does/will Skype let you swtich back and forth to the forward facing camera image while on a call, like FaceTime does? i dunno. that comes in handy.
the Death Match for control of the "social web" of the future is Google vs. Facebook. both want to become your entrenched home page for everything you do on the web (like AOL and then Yahoo tried some years back). and "social" seems to be the best approach right now. and then monetize it all of course. MS also had such hopes once ... but never really pulled much together beyond XBox Live for hard core gamers (aka males under 30). Google has an advantage with Android and...
New Posts  All Forums: