Commentary

Dave Methvin
 

Microsoft Chooses The A-Bomb

The final Windows Phone 7 software has been released to the phone makers. Next month you can drop by your local carrier's mall kiosk and grab a new phone and a Starbucks. Although Microsoft would love to take on the iPhone, it's more likely to try and grab some of Android's surging market share.

The final Windows Phone 7 software has been released to the phone makers. Next month you can drop by your local carrier's mall kiosk and grab a new phone and a Starbucks. Although Microsoft would love to take on the iPhone, it's more likely to try and grab some of Android's surging market share.There are some interesting perspectives in this article at Business Insider about the WP7-vs-Android choice. It starts with the money aspect: Windows Phone 7 costs a phone maker about $15 per unit in licensing to Microsoft. The article argues that the costs of customizing and adapting Android might be higher than that. Let's take a look at some of those points.

It's true that phone makers and carriers have often customized and tweaked Android. Some of that is because early Android builds lacked features. The fact that Android could be endlessly customized -- they have the source code after all -- is a trap that the phone makers fell into, and they didn't realize what a mess they could make until they deployed phones and had to update them. (Or at least wanted to update them to get new Android features.)


More Windows Insights

White Papers

More >>

Reports

More >>

Webcasts

More >>

The latest Android 2.2 Froyo offers a pretty extensive set of features right out of the box, without any customization. Device makers can choose to use a stock distribution if they want. Yet it wouldn't surprise me if carriers still want to add or change things because it lets them customize the phone for their marketing needs. If a carrier wants to make a change, Microsoft will need to make it happen. For example, imagine if AT&T will only carry a WP7 phone if they can make Google the default search engine, because Google is paying for that privilege.

Just as importantly, carriers often want to restrict features to maximize their profits. WP7 may have to adopt a least common denominator if it wants the stock build to be used by carriers. For example, will WP7 match Android 2.2 ability to act as a Wi-Fi access point to share the wireless data connection? What if the carrier wants to disable that in favor of an extra-cost tethering plan? If many carriers disable powerful features that WP7 offers, it hurts the products reputation; if WP7 doesn't allow carriers to disable features it may not even get in the door.

Microsoft's patent protection is probably the strongest card they can play, in order to scare phone makers off Android. Any time a business can eliminate risk it's a good thing; Microsoft's cross-licensing and patent portfolio mean that they can generally defend themselves against these suits better than smaller companies. This leaves a bad taste in my mouth, though, because it's trying to convince phone makers to stop making the Android phones that consumers want. I'd prefer to see a situation where WP7 wins by customer demand.


Related Reading




Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

InformationWeek encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, InformationWeek moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. InformationWeek further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
T-Shirt Giveaway T-Shirt Giveaway: Each week we're selecting one great comment from our readers. The author of the comment will receive an InformaitonWeek Community t-shirt. So get posting!
Subscribe to RSS

Resource Links