Nokia vs iOS vs Android

[vonkas]

Where is Nokia's strength vs iOS vs Android? Can Nokia survive and prosper, how?

The ancient adage "The software is the computer" still applies. I believe iOS' enormous success is due to a disciplined, stringent app development & distribution environment, paired with engineers' vision for excellent hardware. I strongly believe the market follows a well implemented vision.

I perceive Nokia as a confused player in smartphone market. A new direction is needed. Actually, I think all the requirements exist at Nokia, they just need to be made to fit and pulled together.

Concentrate on a consistent OS. I like Symbian - it is light-weight, yet flexible (please please don't go Microsoft!). What's bad is the haphazard implementation across the range with features wildly differing and annoying subtle differences between models. Hardware is almost GREAT. I'm looking at 2710 Nav.Ed., C3-01 and C7. Battery life is good on these. GPS and Ovi maps are fantastic value. I use an iPhone and I'm annoyed because unlike my Nokias I cant even update my contacts via Bluetooth and have to charge it all the time. Things require many steps to do. I prefer my Nokias in many cases. But the deal breakers are: C3-01 - no VoIP via 3G, no GPS, launching email takes AGES. 2710 - no 3G. Combine the 2 and you'd have an almost perfect low-end phone. Make the Ovi store WORK! Far too much ad-based crap - time wasters. Make over-the-air updates WORK.

Look after your customers, give them lifetime support for the phone they bought. Make new models compelling, do not force people to upgrade by withering support for their phone - they will jump ship! Have clearly defined ranges of phones - currently even seasoned sales staff is over-challenged to give good advice re features.

Emphasise Nokia's strength - smaller size, less weight, long battery life, easier use, fast. Keep user inteface and app inclusions (social media) up-to-date with over-the-air free updates - make sure they work! In other words, create and maintain product that remains exciting for years. There you go…

[rahulvala]

Quite good analysis,, But this is developer Forum.

Device specifications are not decided here, but based on the device specification ,the applications are invented, So give us the application related ideas.

We can not change the device specifications, we can just use it in application.

Best regards

[petrib]

A new direction is needed. --- (please please don't go Microsoft!)

Nokia thinks it already has a new direction (re. the February announcement and the decision to go the Microsoft way, at least with smartphones).

[evilp]

So could someone, in a easy way, explain to me the difference between the ios/android/Symbian^3?

I have searched around and all the information I find is people writing how (some) games ported to Nokia do not have the same quality as the ones for ios/android.

I am (surprise, surprise) clearly not a developer but I am trying to see the big picture here (other than that ios/android is doing well among the end-users but it cannot be that easy, can it?).

QT is promoted here and there but what is the deal, is it not "powerful enough" to be used in similar games developed by, ie Gameloft ?
Ok, the developers behind "Angry Birds" praised QT in a article but let's think some kind of FPS game or similar which I assume would "pull more hw juice" than slinging a bird (not bashing the game/devs, I think its brilliant) into something.

If anyone would have the time to enlighten me I would appreciate it a lot.

[wizard_hu_]

So could someone, in a easy way, explain to me the difference between the ios/android/Symbian^3?

They come from different vendors. Like the Windows-Mac OSX-Linux triumvirate in the desktop world.

I have searched around and all the information I find is people writing how (some) games ported to Nokia do not have the same quality as the ones for ios/android.

That has not much to do with the operating systems themselves. Perceived quality of games is far more affected by the underlying hardware, especially by the memory and graphics capabilities (resolution, presence/lack of hardware acceleration, etc.).

I am (surprise, surprise) clearly not a developer but I am trying to see the big picture here (other than that ios/android is doing well among the end-users but it cannot be that easy, can it?).

Well, people around here are developers. Actually a large part of the difference is made by the users. What they buy.

QT is promoted here and there but what is the deal, is it not "powerful enough" to be used in similar games developed by, ie Gameloft ?
Ok, the developers behind "Angry Birds" praised QT in a article but let's think some kind of FPS game or similar which I assume would "pull more hw juice" than slinging a bird (not bashing the game/devs, I think its brilliant) into something.

Qt (QT is something different) provides a friendly development approach for Symbian devices. Qt applications are still native applications, they are equally powerful as the ones developed in the original way. Qt is not praised for a mistake, if it came earlier, the market might look different now.
On the other hand, 3D engines are not part of any of the 3 operating systems (the OS-es supply standard Open GL), they come from 3rd party vendors (like Unity), or created by the game developers.

[evilp]

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

They come from different vendors. Like the Windows-Mac OSX-Linux triumvirate in the desktop world.

Well, I understand that. I was more thinking in terms of difference in regards of Application/Game development.

That has not much to do with the operating systems themselves. Perceived quality of games is far more affected by the underlying hardware, especially by the memory and graphics capabilities (resolution, presence/lack of hardware acceleration, etc.).

And in your mind, how does the current new Nokia Smartphones (not considering the Windows ones now) the stand in comparison with the ios/droid?

Well, people around here are developers. Actually a large part of the difference is made by the users. What they buy.

Absolutly but since I am not a developer I find it hard to understand why companies are neglecting a market that consists of several millions of users. And, from what I understand, the current Nokia Smartphone models (ie N8/C7/N9 and so on) are supposedly as "powerful" as the current competition.

Unless there are some details in the game development for the Nokia that makes it either more time consuming and/or the need for certain experience, in contrast of ios/droid? I'm not saying anything here, I would simply like to know.

Qt (QT is something different) provides a friendly development approach for Symbian devices. Qt applications are still native applications, they are equally powerful as the ones developed in the original way. Qt is not praised for a mistake, if it came earlier, the market might look different now.
On the other hand, 3D engines are not part of any of the 3 operating systems (the OS-es supply standard Open GL), they come from 3rd party vendors (like Unity), or created by the game developers.

Which brings me back to the tail. Are there certain aspects of the ^3 platform that makes it a challenge to create a 3D/Game Engine in comparison with ios/droid? If so, would someone like to specify these aspects?

[mikkovtr]

Which brings me back to the tail. Are there certain aspects of the ^3 platform that makes it a challenge to create a 3D/Game Engine in comparison with ios/droid? If so, would someone like to specify these aspects?

In my opinion there isn't much difference creating (or porting) games to any of these platforms. Typically only difference between these platforms from developers point of view is how to handle user input (touchscreen, keyboard) and how to create and setup an application window. These are rather minor issues if program is written keeping portability in mind. Then there is some practical issues such as tools and SDKs provided by platform vendor.

[wizard_hu_]

I do not think that technical details of the OS-s would have mattered a lot in the past, and they probably even matter less in the present with the availability of Qt. Touchscreen is not important either, there are many games which could be better played with a keypad. And the technical potential was also there, the N93 and the N95 are rather old devices with hardware accelerated 3D, the latter having acceleration sensors too (for tilt-control).
It is more like the big players did not even think about Nokia when the application store boom happened. Check the dates on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...mobile_devices
Nokia has a long history with application stores, the one launched in 2009 is not their first attempt actually. However when the competitor stores were launching, Nokia+Symbian was still deeply inside the process of proving that distributing and selling applications is a complicated procedure in general, and practically impossible to accomplish by individuals. Even when Nokia Store (Ovi Store that time) launched 0.5-1 year after its competitors, another 1-1.5 years had to pass to allow individual developers into the market.
I am good at missing the whole picture, but in my opinion it was an important issue. Users do not check sites where nothing happens (Nokia "Download" or what, say, 4-5 years ago), and a fistful of top game developers can not release new games every week. While thousands of enthusiast hobbyists can. They do not necessarily create five-start content, but they keep the market "spinning", users check back, download something from time to time, and even pay for a percentage of it.

[evilp]

Well, thanks a lot for taking the time to reply.

If someone would have anything to add but for some reason dont wish to do so in public, feel free to PM me.