The Third World Smartphone
Great. I want one! I'll be the envy of all my friends.
This is one "win" Microsoft might not want to crow about.
Windows Phone has confounded the sceptics by beating iOS for the third consecutive quarter to take second place in the Indian smartphone market, but analysts have warned handset branding will be key to its future growth there in the wake of Microsoft’s Nokia buyout. Redmond was quick to issue a release online this week, touting …
Great. I want one! I'll be the envy of all my friends.
This is one "win" Microsoft might not want to crow about.
"Great. I want one! I'll be the envy of all my friends.
This is one "win" Microsoft might not want to crow about."
Have you any idea how insulting and outdated comments like this are?
I love Britain, but the days of empire are gone and whilst India has some huge poverty issues (and indeed may be termed third world) the dismissal of it as unimportant or an embarrassment (as your comment implies) shows either a real lack of knowledge or a huge excess of complacency - coupled with downright rudeness..
I suspect Microsoft would rather sell a phone to anyone in India than to Charles Manning.
You might no like his comment, but India has an average income of $1400 (US).
So the real headline is 'Microsoft come second when people can't afford an iPhone'
(Still a BlackBerry user)
Why wouldn't they? India is a major economic power house.
And it is better than being the official telephone of people with BA degrees.
And the wealthiest person in the UK most recent years has been someone from India.
The headline in the USA might be "Apple come second when people aren't smart enough to figure out Android".
I used simply get amazed that the level of xenophobia and racism in the Reg forums. Lately not so much.
I now understand that people like you simply cannot come to terms with the fact that the natives over whom your ancestors once lorded over are now better than you in most respects. It is you and your ilk, that have made your country the non-entity it now is, in terms if global economic/strategic power. '
Don't like to own a Windows phone because the natives like it? I guess you wont even drive a Jaguar even some gifted it to you. Is because its now owned by the natives or is it because you cant pay for the petrol since your job was outsourced to the natives?
India is a 3rd world country?
of PR spin in the morning.
It smells like....desperation.
The article did say 'up to 5.4%'. An unfortunate phrase since we hear 'up to 20mb broadband' so often. I have confidence that Ballmer can get the market share back below 3% before he leaves.
I suspect in this case it means "has increased to 5.4%". Clumsy wording, though.
Does anyone really beleive that a $600 Iphone has any chance of making any impact in a country like India where the annual average wage is something in the order of $1200........
So MS + Nokia manage to bring out a $150 dollar phone and want to make a Front Page spread about how well they are doing.....
Very long and very slow clap for MS and friends, they are becoming more amazing by the day.... ( Ballmer just retire, please for the sake of humanity retire).
Maybe companies should only brag about their sales of overpriced commodities to 1st world users?
I'm not surprised by this. Techies in India appreciate badly coded products. It's what they are good at
It is probably more an issue of how the outsourced employees are managed. Probably not as bad as working at Foxconn but I doubt it is nearly as good as we have it. Links related to working conditions for programmers in India are welcome.
Please don't get Steve Ballmer to retire early.
He's the one reason I wake up in the morning and read the news, to find out the next major cock up he's made. Whether it's bigging up Zune against Apple, or launching one screwed OS after another, alientating users with license terms that make no sense, blowing billions on companies that turn out to be worthless. The list goes on.
I would pay for this entertainment, not much admittedly and certainly not to Microsoft, but look how much pleasure he brings to the world. People like Steve need to be cherished and nurtured, not thrown onto the scrap heap just because he is (to be honest) a "fucking big mill stone around Microsofts neck dragging the share price down". Look, anybody who can raise the share price of Microsoft by 5% simply by announcing he's leaving can't be all bad, can he?
Here's some perspective for you: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/hardware/phablets-grab-30-of-the-smartphone-market-share-sales-up-17-fold-in-fy14-q2/articleshow/22424356.cms
The reason $600 phones is not making much sales is:
People are buying more tablets
Apple has nothing new to offer to keep pace with the fast changing expectations
Local manufacturers like Micromax have positioned feature rich models for $300 or less
Windows phones are being bought by college students and women
Annual Average wage is just that, an average. There is atleast a 150 million plus market for highend smartphones, provided there's value for money features provided by the manufacturers
Someone who have never actually dealt with them.
Techie gets out of Uni, gets first job low wages in support team. If they get decent they move to a higher paid place, from there they may go self employed.
The really good Indian techies work in Europe and US, or run companies in India and pay decent wages.
The poor ones stay in the low pay jobs.
I have dealings with a self employed programmer and he is pretty good.
> Does anyone really beleive that a $600 Iphone has any chance of making any impact in a country like India where the annual average wage is something in the order of $1200
Er, but it did.
Ok lets be pedantic
Does anyone really beleive that a $600 Iphone has any chance of making a MAJOR impact in a country like India where the annual average wage is something in the order of $1200
SHould prpbably use the specllechecker then. :-)
Nice of you to tag that on. So Nokia phones are not MANLY and are used by "students and WOMEN".
This is why IT is still in the f*cking dark ages and why it's populated by more virgins than a convent.
Have some RESPECT.
If you have an axe to grind against MS / Nokia, that's your lifestyle choice, using that to have a cheap jibe at a particular country / nationality / sex of people using a particular phone is pathetic and reprehensible.
Apple could sell its $150 phone for less than $600 in India.
The real problem is too many Indian have engineering and computer science degrees. And many that don't are businessmen and farmers. So too tech savy and too practical.
He said it did, past tense. The relevant point was the tense not the spelling.
You also have to remember than India has 1.27 billion people.
So 19 times the UK population.
The wealthiest 5% of Indian are the same size market as the entire UK. The wealthiest 10% present a market twice the size of the UK.
Boarderline racism aside: Of the phone ecosystems which have problems with rampant malware at the moment, it's the one based on Linux, rather than the one based on Windows. So, Google have done what I thought wasn't possible and made the one part of the PC market which you wouldn't want on Linux present on Linux.
(Yes, I know, Android is or isn't Linux depending upon what you're saying about it.)
Although it must be said, roughly zero of those viruses are present on devices that haven't been rooted or have a bunch of dodgy APKs sideloaded from Pirate Jimbob's Warez Emporium.
Now, being able to re-lock a rooted build with your own damn key, that would be something.
Microsoft have already started airbrushing Nokia out of their marketing.
Probably not an advisable move considering buyers in countries such as India tend to buy the brand, not the operating system. Nokia is still a well respected brand in India - Microsoft and Windows, not so much. Watch sub-continent sales plummet once the Microsoft Lumia hits the market...
Microsoft gets to use the Nokia brand name for at least 10 years; Lumias should have succeeded or failed long before then.
Nope, Microsoft is only allowed to use the Nokia brand on the Asha line (feature phones) not the Lumia line (smartphones).
Good to know. I missed the stories on the sale of Nokia or that line for some reason.
So it is a genuine problem for MS.
Here are the details of what was sold for anyone else who missed that story.
Looks like the call centre countries have just reached the "no one got fired for buying Microsoft" Phase of the modern business world.
Constantly amazed at the speed with which some people trot out the same tired old tripe every time any Windows Phone story comes out. Competition is GOOD - it forces entrenched market leaders to improve their wares, and if they're that good then they should be confident that they can overcome any competition. Look at what happened to Internet Explorer when it was so dominant that there was no effective competition - Microsoft basically declared it "done", stopped innovating and the world was left with a pile of crap for a browser. Strong competition came along in the name of Firefox and later Chrome, all of a sudden MS have to pull their socks up and improve their product. The same applies to phone ecosystems - MS are now the new kid (ok, for the second time around admittedly) instead of the 800lb gorilla in this market and if they bring something new to the table and cause Apple (particularly) and Android to up their games, so much the better for everyone. Why the quasi-bigotry about Windows Phone? It is far from perfect, but it does a lot of things very well. Embrace the competition, it's good for you!
By the way, a bit sad to see the bigotry extends past the operating system wars and into racism on here! Seriously, are you saying you wouldn't like a slice of the income from the 3rd biggest phone market in the world?
Yes competition is good, but given how much microsoft have done to stifle competition in other markets there are many of us who want to avoid them ever getting any form of traction in other markets out of fear of the same things happening again.
There are plenty of other competitors to android/ios who would be far better for the overall market.
"...many of us who want to avoid them ever getting any form of traction in other markets out of fear of the same things happening again."
... and all the while not giving two hoots about the fact that the market leader in this sector is built on the foundation of gathering and selling as much data about you as possible. So concerned about Microsoft's past that you don't see Google becoming the new Microsoft....
It's no secret that users of Google products are the meat for the sausage machine, rather than its valued clients. But Google needs willing victims to sell, a whole different deal than the prisoners that MSFT relies on.
Prisoners? What on Earth are you on about? Who are these people who have to buy Microsoft products because they simply have no choice? Have you ever met one?
"There are plenty of other competitors to android/ios who would be far better for the overall market."
There are plenty of other competitors who you'd PREFER to be better for the overall market, but they just don't have the mindshare, market share or strength to affect the overall market for the better. So, while they might be ethically preferable, at the moment they aren't better for the market as they're ineffective. Blackberry sadly seem to be dying a death, Firefox OS isn't winning any plaudits in its first incarnation, WebOS, Meego and a thousand Linux or Android forks are nowhere to be seen and won't have the tiniest effect on the planning teams working on Android and iOS until they can make themselves significant. Until then - and I do hope that day comes - WinPhone 8 is the best argument for Android and iOS to keep innovating and improving themselves regardless of Microsoft's past history.
Anyone seen "Rush"? The bit from Niki Lauda at the end sums it up - a wise man learns more from his enemies than a fool learns from his friends.
And how could 3rd or even 2nd place make them control anything? Especially when 2nd place is so far behind 1st place still.
I suspect one ought to worry about the system in 1st place more and be glad that there IS a choice for people not wanting ad-phones where designers of any kind appear to never have been employed.
I still feel terrible about owning a Samsung 'smart' TV, appalling software and the reliability is crap too.
> that you don't see Google becoming the new Microsoft....
If Google was like Microsoft it would buy Jolla and strangle it, threaten Samsung until Tizen was abandonned, and would never have let anyone use Android without Google services.
The difference is that Google succeeds, not because there is no alternative, but because Google provides better products that people want.
"Yes competition is good, but given how much microsoft have done to stifle competition in other markets there are many of us who want to avoid them ever getting any form of traction in other markets out of fear of the same things happening again."
Do you think firms engage in competition out of charitable goodwill to mankind? No! You as a commercial market actor engage in only as much competition as you must. If you could charge £10 million per year as your salary, you would. As it happens you're obliged to compete with other people presumably offering much less to provide what you do.
The only reason you're not complaining about Apple is they're a luxury goods maker. Customers of luxury goods makers queue up to be ripped off, that's the whole point. So nobody is accusing Apple of anticompetitive behaviour because they're simply not involved in markets for essential products. Their products are unless you're a graphic designer completely superfluous.
> The difference is that Google succeeds, not because there is no alternative, but because ...
You are implying that Microsoft only succeeded because there was no alternative in the same sentence that you're pointing out that one of the alternatives succeeded.
You mean 3rd time around:
WinCE / Windows Mobile
KiN / KiN OS
>> The difference is that Google succeeds, not because there is no alternative, but because ...
> You are implying that Microsoft only succeeded because there was no alternative in the same sentence that you're pointing out that one of the alternatives succeeded.
Microsoft succeeded _on_the_desktop_ and from _the_mid_90s_ because they eliminated the alternatives by various means. Such as illegal per-box pricing, vapourware, buying and killing application providers, bundling, and paying OEMs (via 'loyalty' discounts and direct payments) to _not_ offer or install alternatives.
Microsoft initially ignored the internet (in the first edition of 'The Road Ahead' there was no mention of the internet) and then tried to side line it with the original MSN which was a private network for Windows 95 users. They hoped to kill the internet and replace it under MS control. They gave away IE to kill Netscape (and killed Spyglass too).
Google became a large company in a quite different market by providing services that people wanted. For example in search it was Microsoft that tried to be an alternative to Google by configuring Windows machines to default to Bing and making it difficult to change, and by taking over Yahoo!'s search engine (Yahoo had earlier bought and killed Alta Vista).
Apple did far more to stifle competition than MS ever did.
There would be no MS is Apple had not worked so hard at stifling competition.
Apple didn't license its software, er huh, Wozniak's software, MS did.
Apple heavily restricts what add-ons can carry its label, MS is much lighter.
"prisoners that MSFT relies on"
Prisoners who prefer to pay for MS rather than get Linux for free.
We can argue about their choice, but you cannot call them prisoners.
"If Google was like Microsoft it would buy Jolla and strangle it, threaten Samsung until Tizen was abandonned, and would never have let anyone use Android without Google services."
If Google was like Apple you'd need to pay big bucks for Google-branded computer with a Core i5 in order to access it.
If Google was like Apple it would have fanbois saying how great those Core i5 computers were.
"The only reason you're not complaining about Apple is they're a luxury goods maker. Customers of luxury goods makers queue up to be ripped off, that's the whole point. So nobody is accusing Apple of anticompetitive behaviour because they're simply not involved in markets for essential products. Their products are unless you're a graphic designer completely superfluous."