Skip to main content

No, Microsoft Shouldn't Kill Windows Phone

In the last week or so more than one internet personality has called on Microsoft to kill Windows Phone. That's a terrible idea for any number of reasons and it's advice that Microsoft must ignore.

There's no question that Windows Phone has struggled up against the iPhone and Android. A market share of under 5% isn't a particularly noteworthy achievement either and whilst that number is growing that growth is coming very slowly indeed.

There are brighter sides though - in parts of Europe and South America market share is much better and Windows Phone is beating out the iPhone to second place in some markets. Those sales are almost exclusively at the bottom end of the market. The bargain basement Lumia 520 is Windows Phone's all time best seller, whilst the higher end devices barely feature on the charts.

That doesn't mean that those devices can't be profitable. Or successful, but there's more at stake than just market share.

Microsoft has to get developer and customer mind share. The two are inextricably linked and Microsoft can only drive both through getting more devices onto the market. It needs to get a hurry up on the merger of Windows Phone and RT as well. Applications should be code compatible in the same way that iPhone and iPad apps are. And Windows RT needs to be renamed Windows Tablet.

Ultimately Microsoft has to succeed in the mobile space because users lock into ecosystems. And Apple's tying of iOS and Mac OS X in Yosemite is absolutely going to push those iPhone and iPad owners into a Mac next time they replace their PC. If that kind of thinking filters through to enterprise Microsoft will be history.

It's less than six months since Satya Nadella's 'Cloud First, Mobile First' briefing, but if Microsoft has no 'mobile' to put first it's going to be fighting for space on it's competitors platforms. And up against Apple and Google that is never going to end well.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…