There are a lot of speculations written about Windows 7 Mobile as the choice of platform for Nokia to continue with. There are two areas which I would like to comment on.
1. Why Nokia had to chose Windows Mobile?
2. What will happen to Qt afterwards?
1. Why Nokia had to chose Windows Mobile?
Reason #1: Never the second mentality
Nokia wants to be number one and sort of what Microsoft is in the Desktop market. It does not want to be #2 or settle with a Niche eco system, what Apple is in the Desktop market. This is the first and foremost reason why Nokia is turning too fast looking for options, and even did not have time to amptly evaluate its own investments in Maemo and Meego. Looking at the steady growth rate from iPhone, it is too nervous that it would fall to the second place in the list. If someone becomes capable to push the giant Nokia from its first place to second place, probably its something too much for Nokia to risk.
Reason #2: Heavy competition
Symbian gave a boost to Nokia which others could not compete with initially. As it had a faster platform and a huge developer community, Nokia was the leader in the Smartphones arena. Now the stage is entirely different. With iPhone's innovative solutions, the success of Android, and the threat of cheap chinese mobile phones, now it has to compete both in the areas of hardware as well as software to retains its longheld place.
1. Apple has already proven that it can take the lead over Symbian. And the popularity of the recent Android phones too forces Nokia to search something beyond Symbian.
2. The other major threat comes from the thriving Chinese mobile phones. People can easily buy a Chinese phone for less then half the price of Nokia and get triple the features that Nokia would have provided for a such a price. The threat is much severe in third world countries where quality is seen as a luxury, and the recession has definitely affected the purchasing pattern of the western market.
Reason #3: The consequences of open-sourcing
It was almost unavoidable that Nokia had to open-source Symbian to transfer major development cost of the platform to the community while investing heavily on hardware to face the Chinese competition. Learning the hard way that it takes time to reap the benefits of open-sourcing in the mobile platform, the company took another smart approach. It tried to bring the benefits of already existing KDE applications into its new smartphone. Investing on Qt and polishing the existing KDE desktop applications would make a great smartphone suite with a relatively much less cost. There are only speculations why this was abandoned in the middle.
After open-sourcing Symbian last year, Chinese phones now appear in the market with Symbian support for as low as $50. Nokia might have learned that the benefits of open-sourcing is not exclusive to Nokia. Even if Meego platform becomes a huge success, Nokia will not gain anything more than what others like Samsung, Sony Erricsson and Chinese phone makers would gain. Going open-source would, of course, help Meego to foster but, the competitive advantage Nokia would get for championing the cause would be questionable in the long run. Instead, moving to Windows 7 based smartphones will definitely help to differentiate it from its Chinese competitors.
Reason #4: Nokia is running out of time
Nokia could stay ahead of the competition for a considerable short period if it invests in the success of Meego. The failure of Maemo as a platform could also be a reason to be reluctant. With heavy competition crushing it in the edges, Nokia does not have time to experiment.
2. What will happen to Qt afterwards?
First of all certain basic facts needs to be understood inorder to see the full picture a bit more clearly.
Fact #1: Nokia is a company. They want profits. They don't love open-source for it being open-source. Nor they are driven by the ideology of Software Freedom.
Fact #2: Their product is phone, not software. They had to enter the realm of software production only to differentiate their phone from the rest of the others, so that they gain competitive advantage. If Microsoft could build good software for Nokia with less cost, there are less reasons to say no.
Fact #3: They are going behind Windows Mobile. Meego and Symbian will get step motherly treatment.
Fact #4: They are corporate, and reading between their statements is necessary to comprehend what they truly mean. For example, when they say "We have future interests vested in xx", it translates to "We don't want xx now".
Based on the above facts it is simple to guess that Qt does not have a bright future inside Nokia.
Nokia has already almost turned down Symbian, Maemo, and Meego and all of them are well invested in-house products. Such a company will not hesitate to turn down Microsoft if it smells any issue or failure in the roadmap. In such a case, KDE/Qt/Meego would be the next and only "Plan B" it can currently think of. Some key contributions now and then would not anyway hurt for a giant like Nokia, if it can benefit from it at some point. So, definitely Qt and Meego will get some contributions.
Qt had always been actively parented by a company (previously by trolltech, and now by Nokia), unlike its counterpart gtk+ which is relatively more community driven. Given the fact that KDE is so much dependent on Qt as its fundamental toolkit, it is highly likely that it will forked off and maintained by KDE community. Will Qt maintain its current momentum of growth and refinement if it becomes community driven is a question only time can answer.
It should also be reminded that MFC libraries have been their with less improvement for longer time, and it is not necessary to change and improve radically to stay ahead and stay for long. Qt is currently state of the art and powerful enough to conitnue to empower the KDE platform for another five years, at least, without much overhaul. So, Qt will stay for another ten years, so is KDE. No worries.
If anyone is anxious about the future of Qt or KDE, then the anxiety is about what is out there after ten years, rather than will KDE or Qt die next year. Ten years is way too far to predict given the current pace of technological advancement.
1. Why Nokia had to chose Windows Mobile?
2. What will happen to Qt afterwards?
1. Why Nokia had to chose Windows Mobile?
Reason #1: Never the second mentality
Nokia wants to be number one and sort of what Microsoft is in the Desktop market. It does not want to be #2 or settle with a Niche eco system, what Apple is in the Desktop market. This is the first and foremost reason why Nokia is turning too fast looking for options, and even did not have time to amptly evaluate its own investments in Maemo and Meego. Looking at the steady growth rate from iPhone, it is too nervous that it would fall to the second place in the list. If someone becomes capable to push the giant Nokia from its first place to second place, probably its something too much for Nokia to risk.
Reason #2: Heavy competition
Symbian gave a boost to Nokia which others could not compete with initially. As it had a faster platform and a huge developer community, Nokia was the leader in the Smartphones arena. Now the stage is entirely different. With iPhone's innovative solutions, the success of Android, and the threat of cheap chinese mobile phones, now it has to compete both in the areas of hardware as well as software to retains its longheld place.
1. Apple has already proven that it can take the lead over Symbian. And the popularity of the recent Android phones too forces Nokia to search something beyond Symbian.
2. The other major threat comes from the thriving Chinese mobile phones. People can easily buy a Chinese phone for less then half the price of Nokia and get triple the features that Nokia would have provided for a such a price. The threat is much severe in third world countries where quality is seen as a luxury, and the recession has definitely affected the purchasing pattern of the western market.
Reason #3: The consequences of open-sourcing
It was almost unavoidable that Nokia had to open-source Symbian to transfer major development cost of the platform to the community while investing heavily on hardware to face the Chinese competition. Learning the hard way that it takes time to reap the benefits of open-sourcing in the mobile platform, the company took another smart approach. It tried to bring the benefits of already existing KDE applications into its new smartphone. Investing on Qt and polishing the existing KDE desktop applications would make a great smartphone suite with a relatively much less cost. There are only speculations why this was abandoned in the middle.
After open-sourcing Symbian last year, Chinese phones now appear in the market with Symbian support for as low as $50. Nokia might have learned that the benefits of open-sourcing is not exclusive to Nokia. Even if Meego platform becomes a huge success, Nokia will not gain anything more than what others like Samsung, Sony Erricsson and Chinese phone makers would gain. Going open-source would, of course, help Meego to foster but, the competitive advantage Nokia would get for championing the cause would be questionable in the long run. Instead, moving to Windows 7 based smartphones will definitely help to differentiate it from its Chinese competitors.
Reason #4: Nokia is running out of time
Nokia could stay ahead of the competition for a considerable short period if it invests in the success of Meego. The failure of Maemo as a platform could also be a reason to be reluctant. With heavy competition crushing it in the edges, Nokia does not have time to experiment.
2. What will happen to Qt afterwards?
First of all certain basic facts needs to be understood inorder to see the full picture a bit more clearly.
Fact #1: Nokia is a company. They want profits. They don't love open-source for it being open-source. Nor they are driven by the ideology of Software Freedom.
Fact #2: Their product is phone, not software. They had to enter the realm of software production only to differentiate their phone from the rest of the others, so that they gain competitive advantage. If Microsoft could build good software for Nokia with less cost, there are less reasons to say no.
Fact #3: They are going behind Windows Mobile. Meego and Symbian will get step motherly treatment.
Fact #4: They are corporate, and reading between their statements is necessary to comprehend what they truly mean. For example, when they say "We have future interests vested in xx", it translates to "We don't want xx now".
Based on the above facts it is simple to guess that Qt does not have a bright future inside Nokia.
Nokia has already almost turned down Symbian, Maemo, and Meego and all of them are well invested in-house products. Such a company will not hesitate to turn down Microsoft if it smells any issue or failure in the roadmap. In such a case, KDE/Qt/Meego would be the next and only "Plan B" it can currently think of. Some key contributions now and then would not anyway hurt for a giant like Nokia, if it can benefit from it at some point. So, definitely Qt and Meego will get some contributions.
Qt had always been actively parented by a company (previously by trolltech, and now by Nokia), unlike its counterpart gtk+ which is relatively more community driven. Given the fact that KDE is so much dependent on Qt as its fundamental toolkit, it is highly likely that it will forked off and maintained by KDE community. Will Qt maintain its current momentum of growth and refinement if it becomes community driven is a question only time can answer.
It should also be reminded that MFC libraries have been their with less improvement for longer time, and it is not necessary to change and improve radically to stay ahead and stay for long. Qt is currently state of the art and powerful enough to conitnue to empower the KDE platform for another five years, at least, without much overhaul. So, Qt will stay for another ten years, so is KDE. No worries.
If anyone is anxious about the future of Qt or KDE, then the anxiety is about what is out there after ten years, rather than will KDE or Qt die next year. Ten years is way too far to predict given the current pace of technological advancement.
No comments:
Post a Comment