
Windows Phone is failing because the seeds were planted elsewhere - bradleyland
http://www.bradlanders.com/2012/01/03/windows-phone-is-failing-because-the-seeds-were-planted-elsewhere/
======
tomkarlo
Windows Phone is failing because it arrived three years too late, and offers
too little innovation over iOS or Android. This is not a matter of Microsoft
"losing the mobile market"... they simply never had it.

They don't have the developer support (how often do you see your bank, or web
sites, advertising their "Windows Mobile App"?) They don't have the users.
Even if their product was materially better than the iPhone or Android, they
still wouldn't be gaining traction.

You can't arrive three to four years late with a "me too" product at a "me
too" price point, lacking the app ecosystem of your competitors, and honestly
expect success.

~~~
sliverstorm
_You can't arrive three to four years late with a "me too" product at a "me
too" price point, lacking the app ecosystem of your competitors, and honestly
expect success._

Funny, if you replace "three to four" with "two to three", that's almost
exactly what people said about Android.

~~~
gcp
Android phones are not at a "me too" price point compared to iPhones.

~~~
whamill
Most of the real headline grabbing ones are. Droid Razr, Galaxy Nexus,
Sensation XE, Galaxy S2, they're all in and around the same price point. And
these are the ones the marketing material uses to pitch against the iPhone for
the top end.

~~~
moe
_they're all in and around the same price point_

Not quite. The current top-of-the-line android (Nexus) is 20% cheaper than the
iPhone 4S right on release.

Android handsets also tend to fall in price rather quickly because they go
through 2-3 release-cycles during one iPhone release-cycle. The Nexus will
likely drop to half of today's price before the next iPhone is released.

~~~
whamill
Those weren't the prices I saw in the US or here in the UK.

Verizon launch price for Galaxy Nexus: $299 on 24-month contract. Verizon
launch price for iPhone 4S: $199 [16GB], $299 [32GB] on 24-month contract.

Sim-free pricing in UK was £500 for Galaxy Nexus and £500 for 16GB iPhone 4S.

I do agree that Android phones don't keep their value as well as the iPhone
line does. And obviously carriers and retailers are less likely to do iPhone
'deals'. I'm not picking sides for any OS here, just saying that the top end
Android phones are no cheaper than the iPhone.

~~~
moe
Interesting, in germany the prices are (converted from €): Nexus = £415,
iPhone4 = £522.

I had assumed the price-delta would be similar in other countries.

Either way, I think we can agree that in the midst of an iPhone cycle (~6mo
after release) you are pretty much guaranteed to get superior android hardware
for the same money.

This is not new and has been irrelevant for the longest time because the
Android-OS was never a match to iOS. However, this latter part has now changed
with ICS (and I'm saying that as the guy who ranted about the android
shortcomings to no end).

The next iPhone will need to be a significant upgrade if Apple wants to retain
their dominance in the premium segment. Another Siri is not going to cut it.

------
astrodust
At this point I kind of wonder if the best chance for success Microsoft has in
these sorts of markets is to create one or more aggressive well-funded,
startup-scale companies comprised of some bright people they already have and
unleash them on the competition.

If they're prepared to dump a few billion on the next Xbox, they could
probably get ten or twenty amazingly hot start-ups for the same price.

They're like a fat old bear now. Cranky, slow, but still enormously powerful,
just lacking reach.

Being forced to exist in Microsoft's stiflingly bureaucratic organization
can't help anyone. The original Xbox team fought to stay independent. The Bing
team had to go rogue to get anything done quickly. Both got re-assimilated
before they could achieve their full potential.

------
wmf
A good point. MS is trying to play by Apple's rules (or pretty close), but you
never win that way. This should be a lesson to the people who claim that
HP/RIM/etc. would be successful if only they'd copy Apple's playbook.

~~~
cooldeal
If WP7 was released at the same time Android was, it might have taken off. No
one is talking about the 500lb gorilla in the room... carriers. Verizon
launched Android into the mainstream with the Droid commercials as a hedge
against iPhones. Many people call even other Android phones the Droid phones.
Similar interest in WP7 is lacking from carriers.

~~~
cosmez
good point, WP7 came too late and the marketing is not as good as the other
two phones.

I haven't seen a single WP7 commercial in Mexico yet.

------
te_chris
This guy ignores the fact that Microsoft has a fair bit of experience being
the latecomer to a ( admittedly less dynamic and crowded) party.

The first Xbox was just a stake in the ground, a declaration of micrsofts
intention to play in a field that was already quite competitive and saturated.
It won a few people over but it didn't win the market. Then they released the
360 and the main consoles in the market are now in a 3 way battle, instead of
a two way one. Microsoft are, I hope, playing a long game that recognizes that
people don't stay with their current phone forever.

~~~
AndrewDucker
People bought an XBox because you had to if you wanted to play Halo.

I'm not seeing a similarly good reason to buy a WinPhone.

~~~
EwanToo
Wait until Microsoft spend $500 million on a WP7 exclusive app...

Well, maybe not $500 million, but Office for WP7 will be better than Office
for Android or iOS equivalents, even if it means MS have to buy those
developers first :)

~~~
AndrewDucker
Yup, if they can do something like that, then they'll get a big chunk of the
business market.

Provided nobody else can easily copy it, of course.

------
Spearchucker
Brad's post and the industry at large is accurately describing the outlook.
Right now. It's a mistake (IMO) to ignore the long term.

The Nokia angle is huge - people have and will buy a Nokia device just for
Maps and Drive. Nokia know this so have spent a lot of energy in getting it
right on the Lumia. Their killer feature is directions using public transport.
This will pay off for them, and consequently for Microsoft.

Some comments here say WP7 should aim for the gaming market. It already does.
I watched a 12-year-old kid pick up a WP7 phone a few weeks ago - he went
ballistic when he saw the Xbox tile on the home screen. His dad bought him a
WP7 for xmas.

Some comments here also say that WP7 should aim at the business user. This it
also already does. WP7 and the forthcoming Windows 8 tablets are going to the
the only phone/tablet combination that intergrate natively with Active
Directory, System Centre, Office and Office 365, DirectAccess, and so on. That
is a very compelling sell into a corporate market that is finding it difficult
to integrate and secure iPhones and Android phones in "the enterprise."

The last point I think is worth making is that for app developers WP offers a
very profitable marketplace.

The five-year plan is very familiar and comfortable territory for Microsoft,
and has historically shown it's effectiveness (IE/Netscape, Word/WordPerfect,
Xbox/PS, and so on).

------
nickmolnar2
One other fact that backs up the author's point is that while Apple has a low
percentage of the computer market as a whole, they have >90% marketshare for
PCs over $1000. That gives them a lot of loyal, high-end, customers who also
happen to be the early adopters for new technologies.

[http://betanews.com/2009/07/22/apple-has-91-of-market-
for-1-...](http://betanews.com/2009/07/22/apple-has-91-of-market-
for-1-000-pcs-says-npd/)

------
fufulabs
Here are two great steps for MS to put WP7 in the race:

1\. treat it like a game console. Make all your 1st party companies (Rare,
Halo company, etc) make killer games for it and put them on the market for
FREE. make money thru microtransactions if they have to.

2\. DOMINATE video editing and sharing ON THE DEVICE.

I think these two wedges will be enough to get the ball rolling to critical
mass in 2013 if they manage to do it mid 2012.

~~~
wvenable
1\. A phone isn't really a hard-core gaming device which is the type of games
their 1st party companies make. They're not going to make an Angry Birds or a
Tiny Wings.

2\. This is easily copied by Apple/Android -- Apple probably even has a head
start on it.

I think WP7 needs to stop concentrating on the consumer side and focus on the
business side. RIM is about to implode and Apple doesn't have a strong
presence in that area. Microsoft already has the necessary presence with
exchange and active directory. Windows 8 will unify their UI experience. They
are just wasting effort, time, and money trying to take on Apple and Android
on their turf.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
Re: 1. iOS runs the Unreal Engine 3 as well as iD's RAGE engine. Look at games
like Infinity Blade [1] and Rage HD [2], then try telling me that's not
serious gaming.

Re: 2. Yes, iMovie for iOS has been out for 18 months [3]. It's pretty darn
good.

[1] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDvPIhCd8N4>

[2] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl2bAiloQwQ>

[3] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j69pZU5d2cs>

~~~
wvenable
The iPhone is a very powerful gaming device, hardware wise, for sure. But the
real question is, how well do those games actually sell? I just don't think
you can save a phone platform by making it a serious game platform.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
Over half of all iOS apps sold are games. RAGE HD and Infinity Blade are best
selling titles, grossing millions.

That's not to say gaming is the answer for Windows Phone, I'm simply objecting
to the notion that mobile OSes don't have anything to offer to serious gamers.

~~~
wvenable
Yes, it wasn't my intention to imply that mobile OSes don't have anything to
offer serious gamers. It was more that serious gamers don't have much to offer
to mobile OSes. While people who have phones buy games, I don't think they'd
buy a phone _just_ for that -- at least not in quantities enough to make it
viable strategy.

~~~
Samuel_Michon
I agree, the percentage of smartphone buyers who are serious gamers must be in
the single digits.

I have no clue how MS could improve Windows Phone so that it will attract iOS
and Android users. I also don't see how manufacturers of dumb phones would
choose Windows Phone over Android, unless they're offered large sums of cash
(like Nokia). IMHO, Windows Phone is screwed.

------
icefox
It would be interesting if Microsoft "changed the game". Renamed it to the
xPhone and made it the best portable gaming device to the point of trying to
make it the replacement for the xbox 360. Give it some sort of reason to
exist, some reason why users might choose it.

~~~
latch
Personally I think they should have gone after the enterprise and business
users. They should have attacked RIM and they should have strengthened their
own position in areas like point of sale, medical, inventory, and so on.

It's too late now for the business users (a surprising number of corporate
shops are supporting (or looking to support) iphones).

As for POS/Medical/Inventory..it continues to be an ignored market segment
which is, unbelievably, still best served by pre WP7 windows devices.

------
kayoone
With iOS and Android there simply is no really good reason for WP7 to even
exist in its current form. They will need to distinguish themselves to
survive.

------
nextparadigms
This is very relevant (How great leaders inspire action):

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp0HIF3SfI4>

Hint: It's all about the beliefs of a company and how consumers associate
their beliefs with a company's beliefs. We know what Apple stands for (higher
quality and more beautiful products). We know what Google stands for (more
openess, more user freedom).

What does Microsoft stand for? Can you answer it quickly? The only answer that
comes fast enough is "money". I don't think Microsoft has an inbred culture
inside the company for much else, at least not anymore.

I also agree with the ending conclusion of the post, about Microsoft trying to
cater to the "people in the middle", like not wanting to be close enough like
Apple to deliver a great user experience, but not open enough like Android,
too. In fact WP7 is even much stricter than desktop Windows. So they aren't
addressing neither the Apple users, nor the Android users with this
"mediocrity" strategy.

Seth Godin likes to talk about how mediocrity is a bad place to be in, too:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqK6M_rTR40>

~~~
recoiledsnake
95%+ of phone buyers couldn't care less about the company beliefs, forget
about even knowing them. They go to their carrier store, where they see 10
Android phones and 1 Windows Phone in the corner which the salesmen steer them
away from.

~~~
bradleyland
I agree with the first part of your statement, depending on your definition of
"company beliefs". Corporate culture is pretty far from most consumer's minds
at the time of purchase.

You have to ask questions regarding the second half of your statement though:

1) Why are there 10 Android phones and 1 Windows phone?

2) Why do salesmen steer consumers way from Windows Phone?

In my view, the first has to do with Microsoft's approach to Windows phone.
Like Apple, and in contrast to Google, want tight control over the end-user
experience. This combined with the fact that they were late to the market is
creating a negative incentive for carrier's to put WP7 on handsets.

I still maintain that the second has to do with the enormous momentum of
consumer sentiment at this point. Phone salesmen spend a lot of time around
phones. Many of them are "in to phones", so they're more acutely aware, albeit
often misinformed, of the tech-punditry's view of these devices and the types
of consumers that buy them. WP7 also lacked a strong device at launch, so a
lackluster start resulted in negative feedback. The salesman is going to push
what he likes, and gadget people like Android devices.

------
myspy
He's right about how Apple users (like me) think and act. I like this
analysis.

------
maxklein
Windows Phone is failing because people are not putting it on handsets, and
people are not putting it on handsets because Microsoft charges a licensing
fee that needs to be pre-paid and that reduces already pretty thin margins.

------
recoiledsnake
I disagree. At the very most 3 to 5% of Android users use Android for the
openness. I believe the pundits need to spend more time with normal people and
not just geeks.

My friend has her iPhone 4 with the same OS as when she bought it a year
ago(never updated it), there are always 30 to 40 updates pending for the apps
which she never does. Talk to many Android users about what Android version
they're running and their eyes glaze over and they've never heard of
Gingerbread or ICS, forget about choosing Android for openness.

~~~
bad_user
I disagree with you - "normal people" love their live screensavers and
wallpapers and the countless other tweaks they can do that are prohibited on
both iOS and WinMo ;-) "normal people" also love that they can install
software from third-party sources. It does have the downside that piracy is a
problem, but we aren't talking about publishers here and normal people
consider this a bonus.

Also normal people buy Android phones _because of_ openness, even though they
may be unaware of it - because Android is open, carriers and phone makers also
love it. This is one thing iOS fans hate about Android and for some valid
reasons too, but if carriers/phone makers where too restricted in what they
could do with Android, then Android wouldn't be open, or as popular as it is.

~~~
danssig
No, he's right. Nearly no one is buying an "Android" phone. They're buying
Sony Ericsson, Samsung, HTC, etc. The're buying brands they trust.

Honestly, if MS could just see this is and would make a nice deal with these
phone vendors to get Windows on their phones I think Android would be down to
a few percentage market share within a year.

~~~
bad_user
In my country, Vodafone and Orange, the biggest mobile carriers in Europe are
doing commercials for Android phones like crazy.

And in every commercials I've seen, the Android brand is emphasized, which
doesn't happen when they are promoting feature phones with Symbian or
whatever.

That people aren't buying Androids, that's a myth promoted here on HN that I
haven't seen in the wild.

~~~
danssig
Companies may be advertising it, but users don't know and don't care. I know
tons of people who own Android phones and not one of them bought it because it
was "Android". They all bought out of brand loyalty or physical specs. Half of
them didn't even know what "Android" meant.

When they see the same brand they trust with a much more polished,
professional looking OS that has much better games, etc., they'll jump in a
heartbeat. MS just has to get the price low enough that the vendors will feel
compelled to push it at least half as hard as they're trying to ram Android
down everyone's throats.

