Is there such a thing as a bad Smartphone?

8 11 2012

If you go online and you look for articles on Smartphone’s you will no doubt find loads of reviews of particular phones, operating systems, features etc. and unfortunately you then more often than not get a biased warped view based on the authors preferred device, brand or ecosystem. Unfortunately actual facts and relative information back down to an average user is just lost or not present. Opinion in mobile is, well everywhere, and yet when we think about it, can we really purchase a bad Smartphone these days?

 

Dumb to Smart

It all depends on what you want from your phone, but many more of us now want our phones to be a useful device, be that just for searching the web, consuming some content or actually trying to carry out some small amount of work on them. This is illustrated by the amount of market share Smartphone’s now command across the globe. But if you are moving from a dumb phone to a Smartphone do we really need to know every feature of that device or ecosystem? Probably not…

 

Purchasing

My brother-in-law works for a mobile phone network provider here in the UK, and I always like to get his insight into the kind of people who come in and purchase Smartphone’s. The truth is that the majority of us just want a Smartphone, and because we have heard of the iPhone or Samsung Galaxy, that’s what we go in and ask for. We have no idea why we want those phones over another brand or device, just that these are the phones that people are aware of, and that’s great testament to both companies marketing capabilities. It also shows that many of us purchase mobile phones still very much based on brands we have heard of and what our friends have purchased. We don’t purchase a phone like we would a PC, spending time looking at the specification, the pro’s and cons of a particular bundle from the store etc etc. We still see phones as a short term thing which will get renewed in 12-18 months (if on a contract).

Obviously I’m generalising here. There are lots of people who pick their phone based on the quality of the device, the camera, the durability, performance and of course the operating system. But these types of people are the minority (though if you read blog posts or technology articles you would think everyone was a phone expert. We must remember that the majority of phone users do not go near a mobile phone blog or technology magazine).

As a mobile phone manufacturer or operating system, this all means that marketing and relationships with the network are the only way to shift mobile phones. The main audience therefore has to be those moving into Smartphone’s for the first time, mainly because anyone who has had a Smartphone for 24 months is probably attached to that operating system, and therefore more likely to stay with that particular device or brand. (Especially if they have purchased a large number of apps) For the likes of Nokia, RIM and HTC this means all is not too late, since Smartphone users make up just over 50% of the mobile phone market, that leaves another 50% of untapped customers. The battle lines therefore are still being drawn.

 

Consumer education

The problem for all mobile phone manufacturers, with the exception of Samsung and Apple, is that the 50% of potential new Smartphone customers are not that into the real benefits of a Smartphone device. Rather they are getting one because they can send the odd email, surf the web and perhaps use Facebook. Let’s be honest, any Smartphone therefore is a great purchase, and no doubt these customers will just request the phones they have heard of, so the iPhone and Samsung Galaxy.  That’s a problem…Though customers will be happy, they could have been a lot happier potentially with a different device or a different operating system, especially if they were shown or told about all the options.

An example is my own mother. She wanted a new phone, but was told to get an Android Samsung Galaxy, mainly because that’s what the sales guy had. He didn’t take into consideration any of her needs, requirements, what she was looking for neither in a phone nor from the OS. My mum actually wanted an OS that played nicely with her office work, an OS that potentially would tie up with her tablet that she is looking to purchase and something that was really easy to use, real easy. For me, that meant really only looking at the iPhone or a Windows Phone, of which the sales agent didn’t have much in-depth knowledge of. He could talk about the iPhone, but as for Windows phone devices or Blackberry, nothing to say at all….In the end I got my mum to pick based on the UI, what felt easiest for her to just pick up and use, and she went with a Nokia Windows Phone 610, an entry level Smartphone that does everything she wants and more.

The point here is that my Mum would have ended up with a phone that she would have thought was good, but not one that was great for her. I think that’s a problem manufacturers have to overcome with network providers and sales staff somehow.

 

Any Bad Smartphone’s?

Essentially, there are no bad Smartphone’s these days, technically. However, there are bad Smartphone matches for users. The problem is that sales staff don’t marry up what a consumer wants to any given device, rather they let the consumer just real off a phone they have heard of, or sell the device they have themselves. This means that a good Smartphone will feel like a bad Smartphone for a particular user because it simply didn’t fit their criteria, or they have since seen another device that better suited their needs….If sales agents and consumers treated phones like a very expensive purchase, one that needed to match to a consumers requirements, then we would see a very different mobile phone landscape of that I am sure, and there truly wouldn’t be a bad Smartphone….Until then though, status quo…

Advertisements




The Hacker mentality in development

8 11 2012

There is a lot to be said for hackers, many of them are, well quite simply, brilliant with computers and poses some great knowledge. I’m not approving of what they do, as I think those actions are disgraceful and show a blatant disregard for the law, privacy and peoples livelihoods. However, many companies build their software with a hacker mentality, which is “get on and do it, make it work” kind of thinking….Lots of doing, little planning….I can’t think of anything positive to be said about having a “hacker mentality” when developing a piece of software or a platform. Such a mentality is ok for building proof of concept parts of software, you simple cobble together a rough solution that shows the concept and you use it to overcome / address some technical difficulties you may see in the future. However, take that mentality and approach into the actual project and it’s only a matter of time before something comes back to bite you…

 

Facebook

Facebook is the biggest and most obvious example I can think of. The platform and social network is brilliant in many ways. However, spend much time trying to use it for business, for managing ads, campaigns etc and you get the feeling that everything really is “cobbled” together in true hacker mentality fashion. Things just don’t seem to play well or consistently and you seem hamstrung by so many restrictions which have been basically caused by not enough forward planning, rather developers just doing…You really do feel like the platform was built for its one role, and that everything else is almost stand alone trying to be bolted to the UI.

In recent weeks I have watched a digital marketing agency wrestle with Facebook in order to get it to behave how it really should. It’s not the agencies fault, far from it, once they managed to get someone from Facebook to talk too; it became apparent that most of the staff at Facebook are aware of the amount of bugs in the system and the restrictions that are in play. For me, the whole experience is at best “proof of concept” and essentially shows that there has been a real lack of forward planning. Facebook is a company though that was founded largely on “doing” rather than planning…

 

Don’t get me wrong, there are some impressive concepts with Facebook and many parts of it are implemented very well, but you cannot get away from the fact that anything outside its original core feels like its been added on as very much an afterthought and that its very “prototype” in terms of feel and implementation.

 

Technical Architecture

I’m not going to bang on about the right way to do things, rather just to say that any development project really needs certain key roles, and the biggest two are ETA (Enterprise Technical Architect) and TA (Technical Architect). These roles don’t fit in with the hacker mentality at all. If you have two people who fill these roles, and do their jobs well, you will find that as a project grows and new requirements come on board, that they can be added to the system in quite an efficient way. Tested separately and rolled out smoothly. The new additions become seamlessly part of the software and things don’t feel cobbled together and they don’t feel like prototype or beta software. Why? Well because these people plan for the unexpected, they see the bigger picture and look at what potentially one day may also be required from any given part of software. If you plan your system like that, when new requirements do come along, you can build them into the overall solution without causing any “jarring” effects within the software or for the user.

Having people who ensure you plan all components for the future keeps longer term costs down, and delivers software that can truly grow with your business. There is nothing worse than having to go back and re-engineer code because it was implemented with only that one function / requirement in mind…

 

Adaptive, SCRUM, RAD…

There will always be a better way to run your IT projects. New methods for ensuring you get code developed quickly, built to specification and future proofed. However, without having people who think ahead at an enterprise level (regarding technology, architecture etc) or people actually ensuring developers do the same, then no matter your methodology, changes further down the line won’t be easy, rather they will be quite troublesome, slow to implement and often result in a cobbled together field, ala Facebook ads management…

You simply can’t beat people who forward think…