There you go again... Brian and Skip, you are arguing that phones specs are not that important. That weight, design, display technology, user interface, infrared connectivity and other features are somehow frivolous and besides the point. For the love of god - they are the *only* point that matters.
"Handsets come and go".... indeed they do. But can't you see, if some company has a permanent 12-24 month lead over competition they will ultimately demolish it. Motorola phones in Europe were always that 1-2 ounces heavier, they always had that one line less text in displays, 50% less in standby times, etc. Small diferences? One step behind? Something that can easily overcome in time? Well, no. Nokia's edge does not depend on any particular model that can be imitated by competition... it depends on staying ahead of the pack.
Because whenever Motorola caught up with Nokia's previous models, Nokia had something new on the market. You can try to dismiss these individual technology differences among phone models, you can try to scoff at colored covers and belittle design solutions like sliding covers of 8100/8810 models. Motorola did. They scoffed and belittled their way from 70% global marketshare all the way down to 15%. The lead that Nokia had over Motorola in 1993 is still there today. The small problems brands like Siemens and Philips have in their phones ultimately destroy them.
Nokia's edge is in the way it is first to the market with most of the attractive new features consumers crave. Companies like Qualcomm face a serious danger in being two ounces heavy and a week short of Nokia's benchmarks. If you think this is not problematic, take a look at Motorola during the last decade. Qualcomm benefits now from the lack of competition and sufficient volumes in CDMA phone market. But the market will not stay uncompetitive. As soon as Nokia unfolds the 61xx CDMA phone range and Motorola drops the CDMA Startac price under 300 dollars we'll see how insignificant the phone specs are.
Tero
|
