Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Ignoring the problems with WP7, if Nokia were to produce phones with other 'external' OSes why would they stick with just one?

No one criticizes Samsung and they are pretty much a mobile-OS whore: SHP, Bada, WP7, Symbian (albeit a year or so ago), Android, Limo, etc.

N.B. Regarding SHP: I can't remember the name properly but this was the old/existing Samsung feature phone platform, it probably has got rolled into Bada, although Bada has two configurations (with and w/o the Linux kernel).




> No one criticizes Samsung

Except me, maybe. I don't know anyone who's been satisfied with a Samsung device. I certainly wasn't with mine.


I'm thrilled with my Wave and the Bada OS.


IMO, that's because Samsung doesn't have a clue and would rather hedge their bets. Most people I know who has a Samsung Galaxy, Captivate, etc have complained endlessly about the wait for updates.

Samsung's business is in selling phones, not developing a software platform and therein lies the problem. They make their bread and butter on planned obsolescence and in the process screw over their customers.


> that's because Samsung doesn't have a clue

Maybe they just want to focus on selling profitable phones... Not every business model should depend on a single software platform.


But this points out a potential weakness with the model of taking someone else's OS and slapping it in your device.

Once the operators (typically) have added their crap on top it leaves you little margin to extract extra cash until you get someone to buy another device.


Seems to work alright for Apple - even though they're doing gangbusters on App sales, it seems the majority of iPhone's profitability comes from hardware sales themselves, and this is without any real shades of planned obsolescence.

Nokia is renowned for their hardware build quality - well in advance of LG, Moto, or Samsung. I think the market has spoken that they want the full experience - solid software, beautiful hardware, and impeccable integration of the two. Samsung IMHO has fumbled that ball up until now, producing cheap-y hardware coupled with lazy software integration. There's a lot of room for someone who knows what they're doing with Android to come and eat their lunch.


Except Apple is a bad example as it makes it's own OS and own the end to end user experience with out a dependency on a 3rd party?




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: