You cannot argue with Charles Arthur's findings that Windows Phone (WP) is struggling in comparison to iOS and Android, but I agree with Brad Reed that 'Forking Android is one thing if you’re Amazon and you really only want to build a tablet that acts as a broader portal to your online shopping empire. However, if you’re Microsoft and you want to sell software with a comprehensive set of mobile services that rival Google’s then it may be much more of a challenge.'
I side with Reed, because Arthur's solution would have two immediate results:
- cause a bigger gap between WP and Windows 8 in terms of capabilities - WP codebase is a subset of WinRT (or Windows Store apps) with a good deal of crossover, much like iOS and OS X, enabling them to be increasingly merged
- dumb down the MS ecosystem - Android is designed to be simple and effective as a phone OS, which is why it struggles to upscale to tablets, while the MS strategy is to work into their OSes considerations such as built-in fonts and sophisticated text-handling
It is important that Arthur admits, 'Forking Android wouldn’t be trivial...', but he doesn't realise how significant this point is. Not only would an Android fork be far more than a trivial affair, but it would be a larger distraction than sticking with WP when all the company's energy needs to go into Windows 8 and what comes next.
Unlike Apple, where iOS outsells OS X and it is the thing that leads the company on, Windows 8 is gaining market share faster than WP. This makes WP part of the long game, like OS X.
As users and developers become used to iOS they start moving to OS X when the need arises, similarly users and developers will start at Windows 8 and once they grow used to Windows Store apps they will then start to consider Windows Phone.
This will take time, and MS will have to accept that they'll never have an OS monopoly across mobile and desktop operating systems, but working in this way they'll have a better long-term strategy and a better OS than simply panic jumping to Android.
Mary Jo Foley writes, in 'Windows Phone and Android to meet in "Normandy"?', that 'Microsoft's preference would be for ... handset[s] to be all Microsoft, with a pure version of Windows Phone OS inside. But an Android core with Microsoft apps and services is the next best thing, isn't it?'
I agree that MS should offer apps and services on Android and iOS, the thing I disagree with in the broader debate is that MS should build phones with Android cores at a time when people are turning (through experience) towards the pure Android experiences.
People aren't waiting for MS to sanitize Android before adopting it. Amazon has done that for them. MS need to stick with WinRT and WP and evolve them, not drop WP like a hot Zune.
Further reading
Nokia's Android phone: X marks the forked spot? (ZDNet)Windows Phone and Android to meet in "Normandy"? (ZDNet)
The future for Microsoft, Android and Windows Phone – analysis (Guardian)
Analysis: Satya Nadella must kill Windows Phone and fork Android (Guardian)
No, Microsoft doesn’t "need" to make an Android phone (BGR)
Neither Microsoft, Nokia, nor anyone else should fork Android. It’s unforkable. (arstechnica)
Sure, Microsoft Could 'Fork' Android—But It Would Be A Complete Waste Of Time (readwrite)
Comments
Post a Comment