Former MS VP Speculates on Windows Phone's Slow Adoption
Windows Phone reportedly isn't selling well because Microsoft has imposed strict hardware and software restrictions that are unattractive to manufacturers and carriers. Google is doing the exact opposite, and currently commands the mobile sector.
From January 2009 to August 2011, Charlie Kindel served as General Manager of Microsoft's Windows Phone developer experience. According to his LinkedIn profile, he built and ran the engineering team that shipped the application platform. He also drove the developer marketing and evangelism programs, leading to "thousands of great applications and games." Now he's the founder of an unnamed startup company while serving on the board of advisers at Buddy Platform, Inc.
In a recent blog, Kindel claims that Windows Phone is superior to Android. However the problem with Windows Phone's lackluster sales -- in addition to the fact that the smartphone market is simply saturated with Google's mobile OS -- is that Microsoft's OS has an "impedance mismatch with the carriers and device manufacturers while Google's approach reduces friction with carriers and device manufacturers at the expense of end users."
Google's approach, according to Kindel, is to develop Android and then throw it at the device manufacturers. They in turn modify the OS to their liking and specific needs for the hardware at hand. Once those devices are completed, Google steps back completely and allows the carriers to throw in their bloatware and market the devices as they see fit. As Kindel puts it, Google built Android to reduce friction between all sides of the market.
With Windows Phone, Microsoft has taken a different approach. "WP raises it’s [sic] middle finger at both the device manufacturers and mobile carriers," he writes. "WP says 'here’s the hardware spec you shalt use' (to the device manufacturers). And it says 'Here’s how it will be updated' (to the carriers). Thus both of those sides of the market are reluctant. Especially the carriers, but also the device manufacturers."
"Carriers own the marketing money and spend billions a year," he adds. "The money is provided by the other sides of the market: OS providers & device manufactures, but the carriers get to spend it; they are the aggregation point where the money actually gets spent. The carriers choose what devices get featured on those TV ads. They also choose what devices to train their RSP (retail sales professionals) to push. They choose to incent the RSPs to push one device over another."
He claims that Windows Phone has not sold well because it's easy to spend marketing dollars on advertising Android devices -- devices that essentially allow for carrier customization to distinguish them from devices offered by other carriers, thus are more worthy of advertising dollars than those with imposed limitations. It's also easy to get RSP's to push those Android devices as well.
That said, spending marketing dollars to advertise Windows Phone requires a direct push from Microsoft itself on the carriers who are somewhat reluctant to push devices they can't customize. Getting RSPs to push those devices means Microsoft must push hard on the carriers to "incent their RSPs correctly." In other words, if Microsoft simply handed over Windows Phone to manufacturers like Google, carriers may be less reluctant to push the devices.
"The question in my mind is whether Microsoft’s continued investment in WP and close partnership with device manufactures such as Nokia will eventually enable a breakthrough here," he said. "I know that MS can be very persistent & patient; it’s been so in the past. We will see. In the meantime Android devices will continue to sell like hotcakes and fragmentation will continue to get worse and worse."
To Microsoft's defense, Apple uses an even stricter closed system, creating just one iPhone model at a time (it doesn't even license out iOS). So far the company seems to be doing just fine. Maybe Windows Phone just needs time to mature?
- China Unveils New 500 km/h High-Speed Train
- JXD Releases 7-inch Tablet With Gaming Controls
- Threat Predictions 2012: Advertisers will Become Spammers
- AT&T Completes $1.9B Purchase of 700 MHz LTE Spectrum
- More Apple iTV Supplier Rumors Surface
- Company Sues Former Employee for Taking Twitter Followers
- GameStop: iOS Trade-ins Have "Exceeded Expectations"
- Archos Android "Home Phone" Coming to the U.S.
- Kindle Fire Hacked to Run Early Version of Android 4.0 ICS
- Apple Has Idea for Fuel Cell Battery That Would Last Weeks
- The Pentagon Approves Android; iOS Still in Testing
- Amazon: It Was The Best Holiday Season Ever for Kindle
- Report: Apple Revealing Two iPad 3 Tablets in January
- LG Revealing 84" 3D UDTV at CES 2012
- PS Vita Sales Plummet After First Week on Market
- Rumor: Nintendo Building Apple-Like App Store for Wii U
- Headphone Concept Puts Turntables On Your Ears
- Rumor: HP Wanted $1.2B For webOS, Didn't Get It
- Android Sees 3.7M Activations Over Christmas
And how is this different than what Apple did and does?
MS should have learned that only Apple can get away with strict rules.
The main problem is that Windows adopts way too slowly. It (still!) supports only single-core CPUs and that won't change till Q4/12. At that time, though, we'll talking quad-cores, not even dual-cores anymore. Also, the tile design doesn't look overly appealing to me. Tiles waste so much space and in contrast to widgets can't even be used to control an app. Apart from that, I'm extremely happy with the overall rather consistent design of the OS. Also the browser for once seems to be superior to Android and iOS.
Throw in a dual-core and 4G support and I'm sold. Played around with one at the Verizon store, the OS is very nice.
Again this shows MS's lack of leadership and vision at the top. MS is not Apple, MS success is based on it's "open" approach (and I used Open here loosely). MS can't copy the Apple model, cause the Windows Hardware ecosystem is not controller by MS. In this case MS would be better of following the Google approach for Android here; unless they follow my suggestion and ONLY offer WP through one platform on the Nokia hardware - similar to the Apple model. Controlling the HW and SW does work; MS did it on the the XBOX platform, and can be do it by limiting the WP platform to the Nokia HW.
The main problem is that Windows adopts way too slowly. It (still!) supports only single-core CPUs and that won't change till Q4/12. At that time, though, we'll talking quad-cores, not even dual-cores anymore. etc.
Rubbish.... I really don't care about cpu, gpu etc. All I care for is if the phone does what I want when I want it. I want to be able to store my pics and music and I want good battery life. If they use a decacore cpu at 10 Ghz, or a single core at 500 Mhz, I don't care, just give me a phone that works.
Difference from Apple is that Apple doesn't have to face the manufacturer issue... As for the carrier issue, this is a result of a stupid US system. In normal countries, carriers don't touch the phone. You buy SIM and the phone separately and everything is unlocked from the start.
MS keeps saying that, but so far I haven't seen any proof...
Now, can someone explain me how's WP ""superior"" to Android?
Although, really, gimme any OS that can make full use of phone's hardware and that's all I care about
It's because Apple has a fanatic customer base and M$ has none.
"imposed strict hardware and software restrictions" Again Microbloat is trying to copy Apple and failing with inferior crap.
And how is this different than what Apple did and does?
Apple makes it's own hardware. MS is trying to dictate to other companies what they should do. Big Difference.
Apple makes it's own hardware. MS is trying to dictate to other companies what they should do. Big Difference.
Huh? Not quite... even Google has specifications on WHAT has to be on an Android phone (home, back, menu buttons). MS put out minimal specifications to be an MS Phone maker... and those stats are currently below was is found on most phones.
Android phones have 4 main buttons, on screen or hardware... Personally, I'd PREFER actual PHYSICAL buttons for the HOME, back buttons. Menu & Search are not as important.
MS stats 3 main menu buttons and a dedicated camera shutter button... which would be very handy and better than pressing on the touch screen, Make more sense than on Android in which the power button becomes a LOCK button... which is stupid.
And as stated, to not allow the mobile OS to become the fragmented mess that is Android.
I kindof like that MS isn't allowing carriers or manufacturers to customize the OS the way they want it. It keeps it the same, although it may make it harder for man. to differentiate their model to the public.
The problem is that the stores cram the single WP7 handset over by a moldering Blackberry and have employees that actively discourage the consumer to purchase one.
~~Also, the tile design doesn't look overly appealing to me. Tiles waste so much space and in contrast to widgets can't even be used to control an app. Apart from that, I'm extremely happy with the overall rather consistent design of the OS.
Try using WP7... Since I got my Samsung Android phone over a year ago, its obvious that its basic functions is a copy from iOS... same icon layout... that's about it.
On my main screen, I only kept the basic icons there (locked bottom row) + 3-4 others... why? because you have to aim more for the right button to push. Sometimes pressing the wrong on. Or the phone doesn't register the press because again, tiny buttons.
Then with ICE CREAM, Android now shoves 5 buttons into its main row! Like as if the buttons weren't small enough before!?
So, go to the Android Market and download the free WP7 Launcher. It gives you the WP7 look and feel (not exactly of course) and some of the functionality of WP7. *I* LOVE IT.
First time I ever enjoyed my Samsung phone is replacing the default launcher with WP7. The buttons are a lot bigger, they TELL you something (I know how many calls I missed, how many messages are waiting). I use blue as my default color, but you can custom color any button) - so my Dialer button/tile is green. My messaging button is off blue. My Alarm tile shows the time. I can arrange the tiles any way I want.
There are no SCREENs to remember... is that APP on screen 4 or 5 as it is with Android. With WP7 Launcher, I scroll down a bit to the hidden ones, where I put them.
Then the quick click to ALL APPs is there all the time. Everything in Alphabetical order. And the cool thing with WP7 Launcher, I can remove the carrier apps off the main list (doesn't remove them, of course..., ugh) but are still accessible under Filtered Apps.
Google SHOULD have made their own interface... maybe a 3x4 "tile" setup (3 across)... something that is different from Apple and MS.
I want the phone to work well as a phone first. Games and playing music are secondary and only suck up battery life... which kills the phone functionality.
Difference from Apple is that Apple doesn't have to face the manufacturer issue... Now, can someone explain me how's WP ""superior"" to Android? MS keeps saying that, but so far I haven't seen any proof...
The interface. For the most part, Android works like iOS when it comes to the launcher.
Refer to my statement above. Its more different than "superior" - but I like it better than Android... and so do many other WP7 users.
Next year when my contract renews (free phone), I'm more than ready to ditch my Android for a WP7/8 phone.
Oh.... Amk-aka-Phantom: Just download the WP7 launcher for your Android phone and try it for a week. Its easy enough to uninstall or turn off.
Here's a tip for Microsoft, don't call your phone "Windows Phone 7". Its a terrible name.
Apple: iPhone
Google: Android
RIM: Blackberry
Keep it simple Microsoft, its the one thing that you've never been good at as a company!
And how is this different than what Apple did and does?
Very different. MS does not provide the hardware and the marketing. They are not providing the complete solution while at the same time trying to dictate terms. Apple provides everything, hardware software, application store, support and the marketing. All the carrier has to do is say they have the phone. How many times have you seen a IPhone specific commercial from a carrier? All that stuff costs money.
In Microsoft's defense though, they have to be able to define hardware requirements to make sure that the OS performs the way they intend it but their is a limit to what you can demand if your OS does not have mind share. It looks like a nice OS though and I would not mind using it.
Oh.... Amk-aka-Phantom: Just download the WP7 launcher for your Android phone and try it for a week. Its easy enough to uninstall or turn off.
Okay, I'll try that! Though, I don't have any problems with tiny icons or them not telling me about missed calls... I don't use my Android device as a phone
Get some brains, customers. That's one thing you were always missing. - fixed
Too bad that Android's lax rules have created android-haters out of two of my family that got a particularly bad-performing Samsung Transform that runs like molasses, crashes constantly, and cant run the majority of the android market apps.
Too bad that Android's lax rules have created android-haters out of two of my family that got a particularly bad-performing Samsung Transform that runs like molasses, crashes constantly, and cant run the majority of the android market apps.
That is a great point. You have to have some some rules and set some guidelines. I understand the appeal of having a so called unrestricted OS but when you have a OS with out any sort of standardization of hardware you run into issues where you can not use it for much more than the base functionality because it does not have the capacity to do much else.
It is like when people would buy the cheapest computer they could find and it had Windows XP and everything on it but it came with 256 meg of ram. Ran great for the first day you used it then it is virtually unusable a week later.
People who understand computing know that these devices are not toasters. The why pay this when I can pay for the same thing does not apply as much with computing devices. You get what you pay for on these devices. Cell Phones are pretty much the same way.
Very different. MS does not provide the hardware and the marketing ~~ All that stuff costs money. ~ It looks like a nice OS though and I would not mind using it.
There have been a few carrier iPhone ADs (AT&T has data while on a call).
Download WP7 Launcher from the Android Market... it'll give you the look and feel of WP7... make sure you play with the settings.
Your points about requirements and cheap are good and valid.
@amk-aka-phantom : You can't fix stupid. Avg people can only do so much... even us techies can learn and do so much. A phone should be EASY to use. Why take 3-4 clicks to do something that should take 1~2? stuff like that.
Maybe it's just because people are so wary of Microsoft and their monopolistic tendencies that no one in their right mind wants that to happen on the mobile platform. I know I would never own a MS phone if I had any kind of real choice, I don't care how great it is.
Same goes for Android. I hope Apple keeps making a great product, so Google doesn't become complacent or become a monopoly.
Here's a tip for Microsoft, don't call your phone "Windows Phone 7". Its a terrible name.Apple: iPhoneGoogle: Android RIM: BlackberryKeep it simple Microsoft, its the one thing that you've never been good at as a company!
Think you could be a bit more consistent? iPhone is a phone, iOS is the software that runs it, Android is the software while the phones are called MANY different things. RIM is the only one who kept is the same, Blackberry for phone Blackberry OS for the software.
Slow adoption is because of a lack of apps and a lack of high end phone options... If they wanted to get a lot of volume penetration, they should have focused on the pre-paid market. They should have absolutely flooded it with subsidized phones.
And how is this different than what Apple did and does?
Android didn't exist when Apple started doing it.
The main problem is that Windows adopts way too slowly. It (still!) supports only single-core CPUs
You know, I hear this argument a lot, but I have yet to see a good example of this holding them back in terms of functionality. The software is clearly happy with what it has. Don't get me wrong, they'll eventually need more cores, as the single-core solutions are only going to scale so far. MSM8255 is plenty for this iteration of devices, given good optimization.
"But.. but it's not dual core! It won't be able to... uh... err... IT ONLY HAS ONE CORE!"
And no, I don't own a WP7 device, and given Verizon's WP7 lineup, I doubt I will. As a hilarious side note, if you walk into a Verizon store and ask about one, they try and use the Jedi Mind Trick on you to get you into the phone that gives them the largest kickback that month - usually one of the latest Android phones.
I have a W7, not bad, does what i need it to, outlook, gmail, contacts.
Doesn't have skype which is part of MS.
Doesn't have MOC which is part of MS>
iPhone has both of these.
Why?
He makes sense in his speculation, and I'd wager this is actually the case.
Apple can get away with their super-closed ecosystem because they have the brand appeal like Louis Vuitton. At the same time, Windows Phone does not.
Both iOS and WP7 runs very smoothly on (comparably) outdated hardware, while Android still lags even with dual core.
Carriers are also a big factor in driving innovation, like NTTdocomo spearheading the development of 3G and 4G LTE but when you've got a carrier like AT&T then consumers end up hurt.
In the end, it would be nice to see Microsoft either loosen up, or provide some form of incentive to make WP7 attractive.
I have a W7, not bad, does what i need it to, outlook, gmail, contacts.Doesn't have skype which is part of MS.Doesn't have MOC which is part of MS>iPhone has both of these.Why?
I'm pretty sure Skype will be integrated into WP7 in an upcoming update. Tango, I'm guessing.
I love my Windows phone, Its so damn smooth.
Most WP7 users are probably MS employees and their families.