Love the data, hate the graphic

One of the key themes we're focused on at the moment is the multilateral asymmetric contest amongst major platform players (Apple, Google, Microsoft and Nokia in particular), device vendors (Apple, RIM, Nokia, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, LG, Motorola, HTC in particular), service providers (Google, Apple, Amazon in particular) and network operators (Verizon, Vodafone, FT Orange and so on). There's some interesting data from Silicon Alley Insider illustrating the size of the stakes...

The cash resources of some of the major players

While the numbers are interesting, I have to confess I hate the graphic... It looks like an area chart, but it's actually a line chart. Tufte's head would explode...

And I'd love to see the analysis extended to include Nokia, RIM, Samsung and so on. And in this context, who cares about Intel, other than ARM and Qualcomm?

Another alluring Android

For Sony Ericsson's forthcoming X10:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPw-yKyxAuU&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1]

À propos the 'app phone'

David Pogue has a review today of Motorola's Droid which includes some discussion à propos how to categorize and name devices of this type.

Motorola Droid

He promotes the noun 'app phone' for them, attributing it to @mentalworkout.

[Cool app, BTW, for those who have fear of flying. I took the Virgin Atlantic flight to London earlier this week; if you're lucky enough to fly in Upper Class, it's such an extraordinarily soothing experience that you probably don't need the app.]

I really like 'app phone' , and suggest that we all adopt it for this class of devices:

• Apple's iPhone


• all current Android 'phones


• most modern BlackBerrys - post Curve


• Palm's Pre


• Nokia's N97 and N97 Mini running the latest version of Symbian

This post re-surfaced for me, however, one of the key topics that we have found ourselves debating frequently over the last many months; what is a 'smart phone', and what should we call it?

This is a common challenge in high-tech; how do you think about new phenomena? How do you build robust mental models? We believe that having the specialist expertise to do this, and the relevant experience of having done this, is one of the key things that differentiates Endeavour Partners.

First, what are the key criteria:

• downloadable applications - in which case do BREW and Java devices qualify?


• user interface, such as (responsive) touch screen or QWERTY+touch pad/trackball interface to allow easy navigation for the web and similar applications


• running multiple applications - which disqualifies the iPhone?


• great at browsing - typically with a full WebKit browser


• third party applications have to be available, affordable and accessible


• what about size - is there some constraint here, because otherwise a laptop could qualify?

And what about the additional capabilities that are now part of the competitive benchmark:

• fast graphics - for video, browsing and gaming


• accelerometers


• GPS - for location services


• WiFi

There are several specific devices or types of devices that illustrate this challenge, and the grey areas involved:

• older BlackBerrys with thumbwheels but without trackballs - great at e-mail web but suck at browsing


• the Nokia E71, a great (particularly when it launched) device handicapped by its click-pad for navigation (which on one occasion proved enormously frustrating as the cursor moved in clicks that circumnavigated a small target without ever being able to actually click on it, on a site that should have been designed with mobile devices in mind - Handango)

Nokia E71

• many of Nokia's myriad Symbian S60 devices that have 12-key keypads, lacking either a touch screen or a viable navigation method for browsing


• and what of the forthcoming Nokia N900 - is this a smartphone, or not?


• and given how unresponsive the touch screen on the N97 and N97 mini can be, and some of the usability challenges that remain with Symbian, do the N97 and N97 Mini qualify?


• almost all Windows Mobile devices, that lack a touch pad, requiring a stylus or arrow keys for what is enormously painful navigation (Sony Ericsson's Experia X1 is one of the few devices that overcomes this challenge)

On purely pragmatic grounds, and notwithstanding flame wars from some purists and Verizon's new advertising campaign, clearly any definition that excludes the iPhone on the technically focused grounds that it does not run multiple applications at once, except for some built-in apps such as Mail and Phone, does not make much sense. Although this may be an important consideration, it clearly does not deter users, and the ease of switching amongst applications mitigates this significantly.

The related question was what to call these things? We tried the term 'smart device', to emphasize the that the capabilities went way beyond making a call. Unfortunately that promotes confusion as it embraces some very devices that do not have 'phone capability at all.

So, let's endorse the term 'app phone' for these high end devices, and use the term 'smart phone' for the broader group of which these are a subset.

Is a PSP Phone just make believe?

It seems that Sony Ericsson's adoption of the make.believe tag line has prompted at least some commentators to call again for it to release a PSP Phone:

But Sony Ericsson’s only real hope for the long-term may be a PSP-branded phone that leverages Sony’s traction in the video game space. While the market for gaming-centric phones is questionable — see Nokia’s history with the Ngage — such a device could prove popular with a young, data-hungry mobile set. And it would be a better investment than a branding facelift.

There's clearly potential, as one of my colleagues, Brad Hagedorn noted a couple of months ago:

The potential for a PSP phone is clear when we compare the iPhone & iPod Touch’s growth with early sales of the PSP

Global growth of the iPhone, iPod Touch and PSP

Calling the iPod Touch a comparable, if less gaming centric, match to the PSP we see that their early growth is quite similar.  What is interesting though, is the gap between iPod Touch and iPhone + iPod Touch sales, which represents sales of iPhones.  Since the iPhone is essentially a Touch with phone capabilities, this gap is the oppotunity that Sony may be missing out by having a PSP, without having a PSP phone.