Stop this non-sense suggesting MS kill Windows Phone
WHAT IS UP WITH THIS?
People just don't get it. And I don't get how they don't get it. Yes, the acquisition of Nokia made Microsoft's position around phones more costly this year than in any year prior. Arguing it is too costly based on the acquisition of Nokia is absolutely bonkers. That isn't an ongoing expense, and it is one which should be amortized over a longer period than a single year, but not only that... they didn't just pay from some arbitrary lifeless thing, they acquired something that is also proven to generate some amount of revenue. Combined with the layoffs to streamline that revenue generating process you actually end up with a pretty smart investment.
But lets look at this article in more depth.
Robert Scoble said, according to the article... "Give up Windows Phone, go Android, and embrace and extend like you did with the internet...”. The problem with that statement of course is that isn't at all what they did with the internet. They still make IE and it is still a sizeable portion of the browser market. They not only did not abandon their own browser, they have continued with it to this day. And while they do, in some ways, extend and support 3rd party browsers the same can be said of their presence in mobile via apps and services like Office 365.
They then talk about their weak 4% market share. But that isn't a good argument either. 4% is larger than what Apple had for the longest time. And, 4% of the phone market today is VASTLY larger than 4% of the personal computing market was back when Apple was struggling. In fact, the phone market today is larger than the personal computing market today. Would it have been wise for Apple to abandon Mac computers in the late 90's or even early 2000's? Based on these arguments it would have been. But reality paints a much different picture.
The article also trashes Microsoft's ability to attract developers. And that is both not entirely true and misses a bigger problem Microsoft is facing. It is not entirely true because almost every app has come to Windows Phone, just in many cases MUCH later than to iOS and Android. The bigger problem I alluded to was that these apps generally come to Windows Phone before they do Windows if they end up on Windows at all. Which means, amusingly, that you can look at WP as a gateway to getting apps onto Windows. And universal apps are a large part of that story.
And that is an interesting point. In the PC market, Microsoft is still dominant with over half of the market share. And yet, it is the OS related that meagre 4% mobile market share which is helping drive a lot developers to their other platforms. Anyone who thinks Windows Phone isn't absolutely important on a holistic level of out of their minds. The same is true of Xbox by the way. It keeps development studios on the Microsoft stack which helps keep Mac and Linux development on the back burner.
Perhaps most amusing is that many of the comments made were applied to both iOS and Android at points in their respective lives. And definitely applied to Macs. And yet both of those markets are doing fine. Many of the BB faithful said these things about the first iPhone. Many said this about Android phones relative to iOS when it first hit the scene. They then, again, said these things when the first Android tablets launched against the iPad. Android on tablets actually fared TERRIBLY for fully 2 years if not more before getting any traction. And that in a market with only 1 major competitor at the time.
I'm not suggesting Windows Phone will magically turn around and beat out Android. That isn't likely to happen. Android has the sort of monopoly on smart phones now that Windows has on desktops. But, that doesn't mean that their market share can't and won't grow.
As I said before, getting developer support isn't about market share. If you have 100% of a market that consists of just 100 potential buyers no one will target. Smart devices are a good case study here. Right now, very few 3rd parties develop for smart watches. Even Android Wear has no real traction yet. But even prior to Android Wear, there were comparatively almost no 1st party apps for the Pebble or Samsung's smart watches. Should they abandon their pursuits as well?
Windows Phone may always be late to receive the apps. But the momentum behind 1st party developers getting on board has shown that the absolute size of Windows Phone's market is large enough to attract the developers, even if only as an after thought. It isn't ultra relevant if they aren't the first to receive the apps. Many people like the phones or OS but either ignored it in the past or left the platform because they weren't convinced that certain key apps would ever make it to the platform. We've hit a point however where apps are migrating to WP fast enough that those fears are disappearing. This will bring more people to the platform, which will in turn improve the turn around time on 1st party apps. It is a cyclical process which is starting to pay off for Microsoft.
While many feel that the market can't support a 3rd eco-system, I think that depends on how easy or difficult it is to develop for and support that 3rd ecosystem. This is the final piece of the puzzle for Microsoft. They have the best development tools, the most modern programming stack and the most stable platform. The reason why many of those 1st party app developers eventually DO make an app for a 3rd platform, largely, it likely only happens because so little time (comparatively) is required to make and support the app. If Microsoft's development stack were in the same state as Android's or iOS's, they WOULD be doomed. NO ONE would invest in a third ecosystem if it were the support nightmare of Android or leveraged the outdated/esoteric programming languages iOS utilizes.
At the very least Microsoft should give the platform another 2-3 years to see if the momentum, both from developer support and consumers, continues to rise. As long as their install base doesn't shrink, they have no reason to abandon it.
People just don't get it. And I don't get how they don't get it. Yes, the acquisition of Nokia made Microsoft's position around phones more costly this year than in any year prior. Arguing it is too costly based on the acquisition of Nokia is absolutely bonkers. That isn't an ongoing expense, and it is one which should be amortized over a longer period than a single year, but not only that... they didn't just pay from some arbitrary lifeless thing, they acquired something that is also proven to generate some amount of revenue. Combined with the layoffs to streamline that revenue generating process you actually end up with a pretty smart investment.
But lets look at this article in more depth.
Robert Scoble said, according to the article... "Give up Windows Phone, go Android, and embrace and extend like you did with the internet...”. The problem with that statement of course is that isn't at all what they did with the internet. They still make IE and it is still a sizeable portion of the browser market. They not only did not abandon their own browser, they have continued with it to this day. And while they do, in some ways, extend and support 3rd party browsers the same can be said of their presence in mobile via apps and services like Office 365.
They then talk about their weak 4% market share. But that isn't a good argument either. 4% is larger than what Apple had for the longest time. And, 4% of the phone market today is VASTLY larger than 4% of the personal computing market was back when Apple was struggling. In fact, the phone market today is larger than the personal computing market today. Would it have been wise for Apple to abandon Mac computers in the late 90's or even early 2000's? Based on these arguments it would have been. But reality paints a much different picture.
The article also trashes Microsoft's ability to attract developers. And that is both not entirely true and misses a bigger problem Microsoft is facing. It is not entirely true because almost every app has come to Windows Phone, just in many cases MUCH later than to iOS and Android. The bigger problem I alluded to was that these apps generally come to Windows Phone before they do Windows if they end up on Windows at all. Which means, amusingly, that you can look at WP as a gateway to getting apps onto Windows. And universal apps are a large part of that story.
And that is an interesting point. In the PC market, Microsoft is still dominant with over half of the market share. And yet, it is the OS related that meagre 4% mobile market share which is helping drive a lot developers to their other platforms. Anyone who thinks Windows Phone isn't absolutely important on a holistic level of out of their minds. The same is true of Xbox by the way. It keeps development studios on the Microsoft stack which helps keep Mac and Linux development on the back burner.
Perhaps most amusing is that many of the comments made were applied to both iOS and Android at points in their respective lives. And definitely applied to Macs. And yet both of those markets are doing fine. Many of the BB faithful said these things about the first iPhone. Many said this about Android phones relative to iOS when it first hit the scene. They then, again, said these things when the first Android tablets launched against the iPad. Android on tablets actually fared TERRIBLY for fully 2 years if not more before getting any traction. And that in a market with only 1 major competitor at the time.
I'm not suggesting Windows Phone will magically turn around and beat out Android. That isn't likely to happen. Android has the sort of monopoly on smart phones now that Windows has on desktops. But, that doesn't mean that their market share can't and won't grow.
As I said before, getting developer support isn't about market share. If you have 100% of a market that consists of just 100 potential buyers no one will target. Smart devices are a good case study here. Right now, very few 3rd parties develop for smart watches. Even Android Wear has no real traction yet. But even prior to Android Wear, there were comparatively almost no 1st party apps for the Pebble or Samsung's smart watches. Should they abandon their pursuits as well?
Windows Phone may always be late to receive the apps. But the momentum behind 1st party developers getting on board has shown that the absolute size of Windows Phone's market is large enough to attract the developers, even if only as an after thought. It isn't ultra relevant if they aren't the first to receive the apps. Many people like the phones or OS but either ignored it in the past or left the platform because they weren't convinced that certain key apps would ever make it to the platform. We've hit a point however where apps are migrating to WP fast enough that those fears are disappearing. This will bring more people to the platform, which will in turn improve the turn around time on 1st party apps. It is a cyclical process which is starting to pay off for Microsoft.
While many feel that the market can't support a 3rd eco-system, I think that depends on how easy or difficult it is to develop for and support that 3rd ecosystem. This is the final piece of the puzzle for Microsoft. They have the best development tools, the most modern programming stack and the most stable platform. The reason why many of those 1st party app developers eventually DO make an app for a 3rd platform, largely, it likely only happens because so little time (comparatively) is required to make and support the app. If Microsoft's development stack were in the same state as Android's or iOS's, they WOULD be doomed. NO ONE would invest in a third ecosystem if it were the support nightmare of Android or leveraged the outdated/esoteric programming languages iOS utilizes.
At the very least Microsoft should give the platform another 2-3 years to see if the momentum, both from developer support and consumers, continues to rise. As long as their install base doesn't shrink, they have no reason to abandon it.
Comments
Post a Comment