If you weren't aware, a war--more like a tug-of-war--is happening in the mobile space. The iPhone is quickly rising as the development platform to beat, despite its paltry share of market versus Nokia (Symbian), Java BREW, Blackberry and Microsoft Mobile. In addition, Google's fledgling open-source Android platform is also a challenger to the incumbents.
At a Mobile Web Wars Roundtable held by TechCrunch more than 20 mobile wonks discussed that state of mobile platforms (see the list of participants below). The purpose of the roundtable was to determine which mobile platform is best for developers. The iPhone has set a new standard for smartphones and most importantly developers are fawning over it, and iPhone users appear to be far more active users than those on other phone platforms. In the first few weeks of iPhone 3G more than 30 million applications have been downloaded.
Another iPhone advantage is that it takes the iterative model of Web development and extends it to the mobile client, said Jed Stremel, director of mobile at Facebook.
But the iPhone is not the universal answer from a business perspective. Loopt CEO Sam Altman said his strategy is choose a single platform (the iPhone) and if a feature becomes popular bring it to other platforms.
David Hornik and Tom Conrad
(Credit: Dan Farber)David Hornik of August Capital said that he is excited about iPhone because thousands of applications were distributed after it launched--living proof of the viability of the platform. Like Facebook applications, VCs see some potential in funding in iPhone developers. Having the iPhone app store and not having to go through the carriers to access applications is a bonus for distribution. Omar Hamoui, CEO of AdMob, said the value of ads on the iPhone served by his company is three times other platforms.
But the iPhone doesn't have a sizable market yet, compared to Facebook or Windows, Hornik said. "It's not venture scale," he said. Venture capitalist Richard Wong of Accel made the case that there aren't any developers creating applications just for the iPhone today. "It's about finding the largest addressable audience," said Walt Doyle, CEO of uLocate. Yahoo supports everything under the mobile sun and reaches 600 million devices with its mobile services, according to Marc Davis, chief scientist for Yahoo's mobile group.
Mike Arrington, Bart Decrem, Jed Stremel and David Rivas debate iPhone vs. Nokia Symbian and other topics.
(Credit: Dan Farber)The idea that the iPhone has invented or is reinventing the mobile Web is an overstatement, according to David Rivas, Nokia, vice president of Technology Management for S60 Software, citing Japan and Korea as far ahead of the U.S. in mobile usage. "The idea that there wasn't a mobile before the iPhone is absurd," Rivas said. He also defended Nokia's recently open-sourced S60 platform, saying that it has applications similar to what are available on the iPhone. On the other hand, it doesn't have the buzz or browser of the iPhone, but Nokia produces a phone every 14 seconds, garnering 60 percent of the market. Rivas was asked about a merging of Symbian and Android, and responded that there are no such plans.
Tom Conrad, CTO of music service Pandora, said that the iPhone is fundamentally better for streaming devices and as a multifunction device appeals to consumers in different ways than other phones. Regarding Google's Android platform, Conrad said, "I need Android like I need a hole in the head. The last thing I need from a technology standpoint is a platform that sits on top of buggy firmware, with hundreds of phone manufacturers and different screens."
Loopt's Altman gave Android credit for being more open and capable of running background processes. Jason Devitt of Skydeck gave RIM (Blackberry) props for getting email right and noted that Android has serious challenges ahead. "The biggest challenge for Android is that it is totally dependent on hardware manufacturers and for the carriers to deliver," he said. This is distinct from the iPhone and Blackberry approaches, in which the devices are completely controlled by Apple and RIM, respectively. Developers are taking a wait-and-see approach to Android, which lacks any user base currently.
In summary, developers are enamored of the iPhone and hope that Apple sells hundreds of millions of units, but they will spend their development time and dollars on whatever platforms have volume.
Mobile Platform War participants:
David Rivas, Nokia, Vice President of Technology Management for S60 Software
Walt Doyle, CEO Ulocate
Tom Conrad, CTO Pandora
Greg Yardley, CEO of Pinch Media CEO
Bart Decrem, CEO of Tapulous
David Hornik, partner, August Capital
Jed Stremel, Director of Mobile at Facebook
Guy Ben-Artzi, Founder of Real Dice and CEO of Mytopia
Jason Devitt, CEO of Skydeck
Gannon Hall, CMO of Kyte
Sam Altman, CEO of Loopt
Marc Davis, chief scientist, Yahoo mobile group
Omar Hamoui, CEO of AdMob
Richard Wong, partner at Accel
Andreas Weigend, former chief scientist, Amazon
Tatsuki Tomita, SVP of Consumer Product, OperaMike Rowehl, chief architect, SkyFire
Mary Ann Cotter, CEO Cooking Capsules
John Faith , GM and VP of Mobile for MySpace
In the post I wrote about Rich Miner of Google saying that the Android mobile software stack will gain more users than the iPhone, several people commented. The general consensus is that Apple is the BMW of the personal computer industry and is the standard for innovation that its competitors, with far more market share, follow. Android is a non-factor.
The challenge for Apple is to keep coming up with proprietary products that fuel its business model, which is based on innovation and R&D around both hardware and software. Since Steve Jobs returned to Apple, the company has had a series of hit products that don't dominate markets (with the exception of the iPod) but appeal to an elite and influential minority. Even Apple's advertising makes the marketing from competitors look tedious and uninspired.
Apple's tightly bound software and hardware provides unique differentiation in a world of mostly undifferentiated PCs and mobile devices. RIM's Blackberry also has had success by controlling its entire product.
Microsoft has made progress with its Windows Vista operating system, and its OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) have created slicker PCs and laptops to run the software, but the Macintosh is still considered a superior product overall.
Jobs is clearly making the right choice for now not to license the Mac, iPhone, or iTunes software to hardware makers. Getting into a battle for OEMs with Microsoft, Google, Symbian, RIM, and Palm, etc. is a losing strategy at this juncture. The best mobile operating system and user experience doesn't necessarily win the deals, even with Steve Jobs as the chief negotiator. Microsoft is extremely capable in working with OEMs and developers, which is a key factor in building out a platform.
On other hand, it would be interesting to see what developers could do if Apple open sourced the iPhone software. The mobile Web experience is the new center of attention and R&D spending in the tech industry. Google's Android will be a good test case. If Android were to become successful, due to its openness and developer community, Apple would feel the heat. An army of smart developers with Google behind it could create a next-generation mobile Web operating system and application platform that challenges Apple far more than the current set of incumbents.
But Jobs is uniquely talented and a master of total product design. Handset manufacturers come up with dozens of phone designs per year, but haven't been able to duplicate the user experience of the iPhone. You could say the Nokia N95, the HTC Touch, and other smartphones have similar capabilities, but they don't match the slickness, pinching, and other capabilities of the Apple device despite its flaws (no 3G network and inaccessible battery, for example). The iPhone is also part of a family of personal devices that will become even more integrated.
Throwing open-source Android into the mix could give mobile device makers a better platform to take on the iPhone, but they will be mostly competing with each other for market share.
The iPhone will continue to be the BMW or Lexus of mobile devices, with modest share and lots of profit and envy from other mobile device makers. However, Apple could stumble, failing to keep up the rapid pace of innovation, but I wouldn't count on it as long as Jobs is in the house.
Will Android beat iPhone?
Speaking yesterday at the Emerging Communications Conference at the Computer History Museum in Silicon Valley, Rich Miner, Google group manager for mobile platforms, predicted that sales of Android-based devices will outpace those of the iPhone.
In other words, the iPhone will be unlike the iPod-iTunes combo when it comes to dominating a market.
Could there be an HTC iPhone?
Miner uses the Microsoft licensing and open-source models to make his case. "When you have devices out there from Motorola, HTC, Samsung, and so on, there's a much larger potential market on Android than for the iPhone," Miner said.
In other words, having a mostly closed device (except to the iPhone hackers)--with one manufacturer and one carrier per country, as well as applications tied to the Mac OS--is not a formula for creating massive demand. Apple will sell in the tens of millions in a market for smart communications devices that is in the billions.
It's the same dilemma Apple has faced over the years. Should the Mac OS be licensed to any reasonably qualified manufacturer? Clearly, Steve Jobs has proven that he can create a great PC business with 5 percent market share.
The Open Handset Alliance contingent of Google's Android is really going after the business of Microsoft, Research In Motion, and Symbian with its open-source mobile-software stack and applications platform, which makes Miner's remarks about the iPhone unsurprising.
Any one of the big players can beat the iPhone in market share, if Apple continues with its proprietary approach.
What if Apple does free the iPhone software and touch technology? Would it become the dominant mobile-device operating system and application platform? Talk among yourselves.
- prev
- 1
- next
