Asha On Linux thoughts...
Well, it seems like Nokia was more than simply experimenting with Android. They were even considering it. Though not as a replacement to Windows Phone, but rather as a replacement for Asha. With Microsoft buying up this part of Nokia's business, there has been a bit of debate over whether or not Microsoft would continue investing or considering such a path.
I don't pretend to know which way they will choose to go. And in this case, I'm not even sure I have a solid recommendation. I can see pros and cons for either approach and they more or less cancel each other out.
If Microsoft chooses to go with an Android based derivative it will break their goal of essentially having some flavour of the Windows 8 kernel running on every OS they support. Which would go against what seems to be their current goal as a company. Also, it might be seen as an admission of defeat. But, probably the worst by-product might be that, even an Android fork on a neutered hardware might still end up being seen to have more apps and/or functionality than their smartphone OS offerings.
On the flipside however, Microsoft is good at OS's. Even if the public reaction doesn't always back that up. Having a Microsoft produced Android fork out there might curtail some of the anti-Microsoft sentimentalities floating around if they can deliver a better Android OS than Google, or Google's OEMs can.
On the Windows Phone side of the argument I think the biggest hurdle is a simple one. The Windows 8 kernel is far hungrier for CPU and GPU power than Windows Phone 7 was. So, where I felt Windows Phone 7 had a decent chance of making it, in some trimmed down fashion, into a feature phone. Windows Phone 8, at least for the moment, seems like the hardware requirements are too high to justify dumping it into a feature phone.
They could release an even lighter weight chunk of the Win8 kernel and Windows Phone 8 UI. But for a company aiming to consolidate all of their OS's, this seems like taking a big step backwards just before the point in time where they are going to be wanted to take a step forward on that path.
But, the positives, if they can make it work are simple. Retain a more common base across ALL Microsoft platforms. Potential to leverage a subsection of the existing Windows Phone apps (without touch, and the full sized screens, a lot gets left by the wayside, but start from something is always better than starting from nothing). Not that one should expect much in the way of apps on a feature phone anyway. Also, it avoids making Windows Phone seem like it isn't able to scale down as well as up.
With all that said and done however, image probably isn't the greatest concern here. The feature phone market is almost non-existent in the major areas where either Microsoft or its competition are big. So, while it is an interesting conversation, it probably isn't the most impactful.
I wager Microsoft will continue with Android, if that development is already at a point where it would be more costly to throw it away. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense to invest in a divergent OS when you're trying to move everything to a single kernel. It just complicates the support strategy and muddies the future.
In this particular scenario however, I wouldn't be surprised regardless of the approach MS took. And I wouldn't call either approach the wrong one.
I don't pretend to know which way they will choose to go. And in this case, I'm not even sure I have a solid recommendation. I can see pros and cons for either approach and they more or less cancel each other out.
If Microsoft chooses to go with an Android based derivative it will break their goal of essentially having some flavour of the Windows 8 kernel running on every OS they support. Which would go against what seems to be their current goal as a company. Also, it might be seen as an admission of defeat. But, probably the worst by-product might be that, even an Android fork on a neutered hardware might still end up being seen to have more apps and/or functionality than their smartphone OS offerings.
On the flipside however, Microsoft is good at OS's. Even if the public reaction doesn't always back that up. Having a Microsoft produced Android fork out there might curtail some of the anti-Microsoft sentimentalities floating around if they can deliver a better Android OS than Google, or Google's OEMs can.
On the Windows Phone side of the argument I think the biggest hurdle is a simple one. The Windows 8 kernel is far hungrier for CPU and GPU power than Windows Phone 7 was. So, where I felt Windows Phone 7 had a decent chance of making it, in some trimmed down fashion, into a feature phone. Windows Phone 8, at least for the moment, seems like the hardware requirements are too high to justify dumping it into a feature phone.
They could release an even lighter weight chunk of the Win8 kernel and Windows Phone 8 UI. But for a company aiming to consolidate all of their OS's, this seems like taking a big step backwards just before the point in time where they are going to be wanted to take a step forward on that path.
But, the positives, if they can make it work are simple. Retain a more common base across ALL Microsoft platforms. Potential to leverage a subsection of the existing Windows Phone apps (without touch, and the full sized screens, a lot gets left by the wayside, but start from something is always better than starting from nothing). Not that one should expect much in the way of apps on a feature phone anyway. Also, it avoids making Windows Phone seem like it isn't able to scale down as well as up.
With all that said and done however, image probably isn't the greatest concern here. The feature phone market is almost non-existent in the major areas where either Microsoft or its competition are big. So, while it is an interesting conversation, it probably isn't the most impactful.
I wager Microsoft will continue with Android, if that development is already at a point where it would be more costly to throw it away. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense to invest in a divergent OS when you're trying to move everything to a single kernel. It just complicates the support strategy and muddies the future.
In this particular scenario however, I wouldn't be surprised regardless of the approach MS took. And I wouldn't call either approach the wrong one.
Comments
Post a Comment