What compels both their top level moves such as acquisitions and development of mapping and location based services, and the rolling out or new (Android) or revamped and opened up development platforms (Symbian), is the vision of \’personal broadband everywhere\’. that is not the same thing as the present state of mobile phones for several reasons (although it might have been argued that the mobile phone industry would have eventually arrived at the same point on its own – maybe 50 years after we were all dead! ;^); 1) Devices and development platforms and content will be driven to become less jointed at the hip. Devices will become more like what you see for PC, networks, and some areas of consumer electronics – more a \’write once, use many\’ development environment not atached a supplier of handsets. 2) Device types will vary from all-in-one mobile devices to embedded consumer products, to Mobile Internet Device, MID, class portables, to specialty devices. The development community will increasingly leverage across these devices with much less hassle and cost. 3) Operators will derive more of the revenue and much more of their profits from services aimed at customers that run on top of all IP (AIP) communications platforms. That renders mobile devices part of the Internet rather than its own realm with its own cloistered walled gardens.

Nokia has said in analyst briefings that they intend to morph the company from having 80% of revenues from handset and other hardware/systems sales to becoming 60% based on services revenues. That is a very dramatic shift for any business (or thought of on a personal level, for any individual\’s career). The multiple billion$ they have spent on acquisitions and development of new services oriented capabilities comes into focus when considered as part of their collosal long range plan.

What compels Nokia, Google, and even, to a clumsy degree, Microsoft and others, is the vision of personal broadband in which the user is the center of the stage rather than the itsy-bitsy squinty eyed mobile phone device.

The mobile-phone maker is increasingly selecting Linux for Internet-enabled mobile devices, with its CFO declaring of Linux, \

Nice article, we need more of similar comparisons. However, I have some comments to it.

First of all, I agree with Stefan that we have to wait and see the first devices. What they will offer, how usable they will be and at what price. We can’t talk about too much at this very moment just knowing the first version of Android.

Then I’d like to add the well-known problem of fragmented mobile Linux platform. The most popular variants are supported by different companies and these interest groups are competing with each other. Competition is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is too many times. Let’s see how the newcomer (i.e. Android) will fit in to the system.

Even though the licensing model of Android (Apache v2) might be tempting for manufacturers, but I suspect it’ll lead to more fragmentation. Why? Licensees of the platform will not have to inject their changes back to the common codebase, but make their own variants. Consequently, developers will have to take care of the peculiarities of each variant. Please note that the same problem would be present in Symbian (and actually it is) if S60 was not too dominant.

Finally, let’s not applaud the security system of Android, but wait and see how the average user will cope with annoying dialogs asking irritating questions, like “Would you like to grant this and that permission to the application being installed?” Everyone can imagine whom these users will blame if their phones become useless – since “… an Android application can do anything”.

Briefly, I can see lots of positive signs, but some warnings, too. Let’s wait!