Is Nokia's Windows Phone 7 Debut Absolute Garbage?

Depending on who you talk to, it might not matter. Earlier today, CNBC tweeted the following question: “How would you rebrand Research in Motion and its BlackBerry?” This inspired a few thoughts from my colleague, Sam Mattera, who said that he thinks Research in Motion RIMM should switch to Android but keep the keyboard. “[It could] be a premier Android phone with a keyboard,” he said. “There's a market for people who want a keyboard.” Indeed, I have known and worked with several people who said that one of the primary reasons why they would never buy an iPhone is because it does not have an actual keyboard. This suggestion was not in dispute. But as someone who values variety (and appreciates what good competition can do for an industry), I told Sam that I felt it would be a mistake for Research in Motion to play a game of follow-the-leader and bring Android to future BlackBerry phones. “I disagree, there's network affects,” Sam replied. “Reducing [the] number of [mobile operating systems] is ideal.” Sam's view is shared by one very prominent group: software developers. They would love to be able to design their apps for one platform, sell them on a thousand devices, and reach as many consumers as possible. This has been the software developer's dream for generations. They want it with game consoles, they want it with mobile phones, and though they know they'll never get it, they'd love to have it with computers as well. Nonetheless, I reminded Sam that reduced competition is never a good thing. “It is sometimes,” he replied. “Take HD-DVD and Blu-ray.” That's an interesting point, but it's not an accurate comparison. Video players, whether of the cassette or disc-based form, have one specific goal: to play and/or record video. While Sony SNE has added Internet connectivity and other features to its Blu-ray players, the core functionality has always been the same. How is this any different from game consoles, which have always had more than one format? With video games, you have a multitude of features to consider: graphic quality (ex: Xbox was more powerful than PlayStation 2), disc memory (PlayStation 3's Blu-ray discs hold more gigabytes than an Xbox 360 DVD), controller format (is the game better suited for a Wii remote or standard PlayStation controller?), and online services (Sony has PSN, Microsoft MSFT has Xbox Live, etc.). These are just a few of the variables that can vastly change a game's development. Consumers were essentially trained to play more than one game console. Through that training, we ultimately explored each offering, fell in love with select brands, and discovered the value of owning more than one game machine. This is a vastly different experience from that of a video player. A 10-year-old DVD player is still capable of playing my brand-new copy of Harry Potter. No, it can't play the Blu-ray version. But that doesn't really matter because the core function of the old DVD player is still being utilized with both old and new DVDs. The same cannot for game consoles. After five or six years, game consoles really start to age. We need new machines to keep pushing the boundaries of interactive entertainment. Without this ongoing evolution, we'd still be playing Pong. But without Blu-ray, we'd still have DVD. Without DVD, we'd still have VHS, and the world of movies would remain unchanged. If anything, streaming and digital distribution stands to change movies more than the cassette and disc formats. Then we have mobile phones. Sam said that we (consumers) want lots of different phone models, which is true. He said he wouldn't want 50 different operating systems, which is also true to an extent, but only because that would limit the amount of software that each device could run. “[Suppose] you want this app but it's only on this OS,” Sam explained. “You want [another] app [but] it's on OS 2. [That's a] pain in the ass for consumers!” Again, Sam is right – it is a pain for consumers. The problem is that if we sacrifice diversity for simplicity and universal connectivity, we are doomed to a world of stagnant growth and weak innovation. Right now, Apple AAPL is driven by its desire to produce the number-one mobile OS in the world. The iPhone maker knows that while Google GOOG is its biggest threat, there are other corporations that could be just as challenging. Thus, Apple continues to release iOS upgrades that are jam-packed with new features. Those features may not be everything we want. But more often than not they are a step in the right direction. Similarly, if it weren't for Google's fear of losing to Apple, the search engine giant wouldn't have pushed so hard to make Ice Cream Sandwich the best version of Android. Apple and Google are also threatened by Windows Phone 7, which takes us back to the subject of the story: is Nokia's NOK Windows Phone 7 debut absolute garbage? As I stated at the beginning of this article, the quality of Nokia's phone does not matter. American consumers have not been interested in the Nokia brand for a long, long time. They have already chosen their favorite phone manufacturers: Apple, Samsung and HTC. To most Americans, Nokia is an afterthought, Motorola MMI is dead weight, and Research in Motion is a sinking ship. The ironic thing about these consumer choices is that they could eventually create the two-horse raise that my colleague desires. Microsoft and Research in Motion won't perpetually produce operating systems if consumers aren't buying them. If that's the fate of the mobile market, then so be it. But we shouldn't oust the competition by default and make it easier for Apple and Google to get lazy. When that happens, consumers will long for the variety they once had but were too blind to appreciate. Follow me @LouisBedigian