[chaslam]

Now, Ive owned the galaxy S for a few weeks now, and I love it. Its a really great phone. However, I am having 1 issue that I cant find anything about online and its really frustrating, and has happened twice now in the space of 2 weeks. Basically, ill use my phone, sending texts and receiving them, and then suddenly, I will look and all of my text conversations have been wiped! It just says no conversations. I am a heavy texter and I use my conversations for reference alot, and its really frustrating when I go back to my phone and everything (over 2000 messages) have been deleted. Is this an issue anyones heard of or does it sound like an issue with my handset?

Also, if this is a known issue, does any android users out there have any good way of backing up your text conversations or ideally the whole phone, so when something like this does happen, you can just restore like you can on the iphone?

Thanks guys.

[3GScottishUser]

Not had that problem so far but i am having a problem finding how to access draft messages. I have had a couple which it said were saved to drafts but I cant find the drafts folder!

?????

[miffed]

Are you both using the default SMS client ? ...if so , switching to Handcent SMS may solve your probs (better than the default app too )

[Hands0n]

I can also recommend ChompSMS quite highly. It integrates superbly into the Android OS with a screen widget that does a lovely job of it.

A quick scratch around the Interwebs revealed a discussion on the Handcent website ...

I think I know why this is happening. If you remember back to the days of pre-handcent, in the stock application there were several settings for thread size, auto delete, etc. When a message or thread is deleted from your stock app, it IS ALSO deleted from Handcent. So if you are having this disappearing issue, I would look into your settings on your stock messaging app. Hope this helps!

URL: http://bbs.handcent.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=881&p=4310&hilit=deleted+messages#p4310


Also, on the CyanogenMOD forum:


there is an option in messaging that deletes messages after you get 200, so try unchecking that.

I also saw that with that enabled it would delete NEW messages before I could read them, and had to disable it to make messaging work properly.

URL: http://forum.cyanogenmod.com/topic/1628-losing-text-messages-in-508-stable/

Worth an explore ...

[Ben]

How does Android at 2.2 not have a rock solid native SMS app? A third party app to use basic cellular SMS seems somewhat strange!

I'll have to try some out - native one looks nasty.

[miffed]

I don't think there is anything "wrong" with the default app , it just a bit plain and "stock" , begging to be replaced with the 3rd party app of your choice , which may just be the point !

[chaslam]

Yeah will try a 3rd party one out. I have been pretty happy with the stock sms one apart from this issue. What I have done is downloaded an sms backup and restore program, which allows me to backup my sms onto my memory card and restore them to my phone if I want to, which is quite useful anyway. I did think about this auto delete, but I didnt think It would delete all my messages! Just the earlier ones in the conversations to make way for newer ones. Anyway ive since turned that off. Will give a 3rd party one a try and let you know how I get on.

[The Mullet of G]

How does Android at 2.2 not have a rock solid native SMS app? A third party app to use basic cellular SMS seems somewhat strange!

I'll have to try some out - native one looks nasty.

Agreed, or at least one that doesn't include stupid options that delete your texts. Also for the record Symbian has the ability to backup messages and other content individually, this has been the case for some time now, and people claim Symbian is out dated. :D

[Hands0n]

@Ben - this issue appears to be particular to the Samsung Galaxy. I have not read or heard about this with other Android makes. Quite likely they screwed up something in the customisation to their device or possibly the branding.

SMS/MMS backup has been available via Android Market since ages ago. Yes, Symbian may very well have it built in native, but the whole point of the current day's Android and iPhone is the ability to install precisely what functionality you require from the apps store. I don't think that diminishes Android against Symbian necessarily.

Before I completely consign Symbian to the mental scrapheap I'm waiting to see what Symbian 3 has to offer. The N8 videos showing pre-production versions of the OS are interesting but not without the inevitable untidinesses. Can Nokia catch up with the rest of the pack using Symbian? Thats a wait and see game right now.

[The Mullet of G]

How does Android at 2.2 not have a rock solid native SMS app? A third party app to use basic cellular SMS seems somewhat strange!

I'll have to try some out - native one looks nasty.


@Ben - this issue appears to be particular to the Samsung Galaxy. I have not read or heard about this with other Android makes. Quite likely they screwed up something in the customisation to their device or possibly the branding.

SMS/MMS backup has been available via Android Market since ages ago. Yes, Symbian may very well have it built in native, but the whole point of the current day's Android and iPhone is the ability to install precisely what functionality you require from the apps store. I don't think that diminishes Android against Symbian necessarily.

Before I completely consign Symbian to the mental scrapheap I'm waiting to see what Symbian 3 has to offer. The N8 videos showing pre-production versions of the OS are interesting but not without the inevitable untidinesses. Can Nokia catch up with the rest of the pack using Symbian? Thats a wait and see game right now.

To be fair I've been using Symbian in the same way for over half a decade, minus the app store. I would however still expect basic things like text or data backup to come as standard on a decent smartphone.

The N8 is an interesting prospect indeed, and it'll be interesting to see how the retail model shapes up. Also aren't both Nokia and Symbian still market leaders in their respective fields? With that in mind its up to the rest of the pack to catch them. :)

[miffed]

Yes , and the Honda C90 is the best selling vehicle of all time.

I agree it does seem to be unique to the Galaxy S , I've had 4 Androids and never encountered this problem at all .

The customisation of Android devices is not a cop out in lieu of a decent UI , it is central to it IMO - I didn't really catch onto this with my first Android (HTC Magic ) and found the experience pretty bland for a while . But once you strart to download customisations and widgets , the platform really comes into its own ... Not only do you create a great UI ,but it is tailored EXACTLY how you want it ! Of course , manufacturers do supply skins / customisations of their own , but these are simply "training wheels" IMO , so you can use the device while you learn .

[The Mullet of G]

Yes , and the Honda C90 is the best selling vehicle of all time.

I agree it does seem to be unique to the Galaxy S , I've had 4 Androids and never encountered this problem at all .

The customisation of Android devices is not a cop out in lieu of a decent UI , it is central to it IMO - I didn't really catch onto this with my first Android (HTC Magic ) and found the experience pretty bland for a while . But once you strart to download customisations and widgets , the platform really comes into its own ... Not only do you create a great UI ,but it is tailored EXACTLY how you want it ! Of course , manufacturers do supply skins / customisations of their own , but these are simply "training wheels" IMO , so you can use the device while you learn .




Actually it isn't, the Honda Super Cub is the best selling vehicle of all time, also known as the Honda Cub, Honda C50, Honda C100. The C90 is simply a model in the Honda Super Cub range. That aside whats your point? Are you going to tell us that the Honda Super Cub is no longer classed as a vehicle simply because you feel there is better out there? :)

[Ben]

Don't defend your throwaway comment, Mullet :p Yes, Nokia and Symbian are market leaders, and both are rapidly losing market share. Last quarter compared with the year-ago quarter Symbian lost 10%. 10%!

[miffed]

Actually it isn't, the Honda Super Cub is the best selling vehicle of all time, also known as the Honda Cub, Honda C50, Honda C100. The C90 is simply a model in the Honda Super Cub range. That aside whats your point? Are you going to tell us that the Honda Super Cub is no longer classed as a vehicle simply because you feel there is better out there? :)

Actually , I can picture you sitting on a C90 preaching similar delusions of its adequacy to the motorcycle fraternity as you do here with Symbian sounding cool as ever .....till they all ride off !

[The Mullet of G]

Don't defend your throwaway comment, Mullet :p Yes, Nokia and Symbian are market leaders, and both are rapidly losing market share. Last quarter compared with the year-ago quarter Symbian lost 10%. 10%!


It wasn't a throwaway comment it was cold hard facts. Symbian aren't rapidly losing anything, they still have a 41% market share, their nearest rival has 18%, it doesn't matter how you slice it thats an embarrassing statistic for the competition. :)


Actually , I can picture you sitting on a C90 preaching similar delusions of its adequacy to the motorcycle fraternity as you do here with Symbian sounding cool as ever .....till they all ride off !

So your now saying that the best selling vehicle of all time is inadequate? Also to quote a line from the janitor in Scrubs + a slight edit - " It's been three years. How do you not get how this works?" I'm going to let you into a little secret, I own a Symbian based phone a Windows Mobile one and an iPhone, I only usually champion one over the others as a means to curb stomp people for my own entertainment. ;)

[Ben]

[cleaning up by moi]

Did you find a solution to this issue, chaslam? Surely must be affecting others as well.

[3GScottishUser]

After a couple of weeks I have yet to come across this one with the Galaxy S. Still pretty blown away with the features and facilities of this handset and can't wait to see how Android 2.2 improves things.

[miffed]

The more I read about how great the Galaxy S is , the more I am totally baffled by the build quality !! Paul over at Modaco has expressed his disgust at how his is looking after a few weeks of careful use

http://android.modaco.com/content/samsung-galaxy-s-s-modaco-com/316002/quality-of-finish-on-the-galaxy-s-epic-fail/

Of course , a simple case can neuter this issue if used early enough , but the thing that frustrates me is that if Samsung had put that little bit of effort into the build quality (to be fair most samsung's I have used have been fine / good in this respect) - then we'd undoubtedly be looking at top notch device . After the failure that was the ...erm , forgotten its name ? first Samsung Android ? it seems ridiculous that they'd get SO much right with ths Galaxy S, but skimp on the casing !!

[chaslam]

Well, had mine about a month now, and honestly had no problems like the ones in the article above. Ive now found a SMS back up software which im using. TBH im quite happy with the built in sms app, as long as it didnt delete my sms! I turned off the auto delete funtion and see if that makes a difference. If not, I will just use a different program like the ones mentioned above.

This has turned into a bit of a symbian vs Android/other os debate here it seems. Ive been using symbian for years, and really do think its lost its magic. After switching back to my N97 it feels absolutely ancient in terms of hardware and os, however, I do hope that the N8 will change all of that.

Anyway, enough about symbian. :)

[The Mullet of G]

I used an N97 yesterday and it felt pretty guff compared to my 5800 which runs much the same OS. :)

As to the Galaxy S, I had a play about with one while I waited for the guy in the shop to go get my iPhone 4, and if he hadn't returned as quickly as he did, then I might have left the shop with a Galaxy S, its a nice phone.

[Hands0n]

To be fair I've been using Symbian in the same way for over half a decade, minus the app store. I would however still expect basic things like text or data backup to come as standard on a decent smartphone.

Although that sounds a fair proposition at the outset it does rather belie the notion of the modern "smartphone" OS to be more akin to a desktop OS than anything previous. And that also means that any number of backup regimes are possible, rather than being constrained to one, and that being the original manufacturer's notion of what a backup is or should be. Surely one should be praising the era of choice that Android brings? :) That backup is not built in is therefore not significant.


The N8 is an interesting prospect indeed, and it'll be interesting to see how the retail model shapes up. Also aren't both Nokia and Symbian still market leaders in their respective fields? With that in mind its up to the rest of the pack to catch them. :)

Symbian and Nokia may well be the current market leaders but for how much longer? The erosion that has taken hold is not insignificant, nor is it slow. Sitting here looking at my company-supplied Nokia 6303c with its Symbian OS I can see nothing in it that makes it a smartphone when held up against my Nexus One or iPhone (or prehistoric :D G1 for that matter!). There is no comparison.

So if that is what Nokia is using to claim superior numbers of Symbian well I say "go for it!". But it is a meaningless statistic compared to Android and iOS - a true eggs and onions comparison in my opinion. And the buying public realise this also as the rise of the Android and iPhone are able to testify.

Having gone completely OT its probably best to comment on the Samsung Galaxy S. Whilst I do indeed like the Android OS immensely and was [probably] the first Talk3G member to get one I do still question Samsung as a quality handset maker. I've had many of theirs in the past, the last being their Z540 (very nasty quality and firmware), I remain rather put off their product. A lad at work has the first Galaxy and is stuck on Android Cupcake, never to see the light of any later OS.

There is some discussion and argument that suggests that people should just make do with the version that is supplied with their device and not anticipate endless updates. That may have been okay four years ago but no longer. With the handset OS being updated so rapidly, several times a year, it is not unreasonable for the punter's expectation to be that they will receive the new OS version. Samsung have history of not doing so. And with 18 and 24 month contract lock ins it is an even more unappealing proposition.

[The Mullet of G]

Although that sounds a fair proposition at the outset it does rather belie the notion of the modern "smartphone" OS to be more akin to a desktop OS than anything previous. And that also means that any number of backup regimes are possible, rather than being constrained to one, and that being the original manufacturer's notion of what a backup is or should be. Surely one should be praising the era of choice that Android brings? :) That backup is not built in is therefore not significant.



Symbian and Nokia may well be the current market leaders but for how much longer? The erosion that has taken hold is not insignificant, nor is it slow. Sitting here looking at my company-supplied Nokia 6303c with its Symbian OS I can see nothing in it that makes it a smartphone when held up against my Nexus One or iPhone (or prehistoric :D G1 for that matter!). There is no comparison.

So if that is what Nokia is using to claim superior numbers of Symbian well I say "go for it!". But it is a meaningless statistic compared to Android and iOS - a true eggs and onions comparison in my opinion. And the buying public realise this also as the rise of the Android and iPhone are able to testify.

Having gone completely OT its probably best to comment on the Samsung Galaxy S. Whilst I do indeed like the Android OS immensely and was [probably] the first Talk3G member to get one I do still question Samsung as a quality handset maker. I've had many of theirs in the past, the last being their Z540 (very nasty quality and firmware), I remain rather put off their product. A lad at work has the first Galaxy and is stuck on Android Cupcake, never to see the light of any later OS.

There is some discussion and argument that suggests that people should just make do with the version that is supplied with their device and not anticipate endless updates. That may have been okay four years ago but no longer. With the handset OS being updated so rapidly, several times a year, it is not unreasonable for the punter's expectation to be that they will receive the new OS version. Samsung have history of not doing so. And with 18 and 24 month contract lock ins it is an even more unappealing proposition.


Praising what? I've always had a choice of backup apps on Symbian, I could use the built in one, or I could download and use a 3rd party one, how is that any different from where Android is now? Only its half a decade late to the party. This is what confuses me, Android and iOS seem to have given people collective amnesia, this leads to hilarious moments where people credit Android or iOS for features that became standard half a decade ago.


The erosion has actually been pretty insignificant, considering the amount of companies now trying to chip away at Nokia they have struggled to take 10% over the past 3 or 4 years, thats an embarrassing statistic for Apple or HTC or Samsung, or just about any other company you want to chuck in there.

Also you should probably take a step back as your iPhone is missing some vital features that mean it is more of a feature phone than a smartphone, while I respect your opinions I have absolutely no respect or time for people trying to retroactively downgrade smartphones due to iPhone or Android.


Also no offense, but if the buying public have realised that iOS and Android are the way forward, then why is the majority of said buying public still buying Symbian? Seriously, you should at least try and match statements with some factual evidence.


As to the Galaxy S, I would agree that I don't consider Samsung to be a provider of quality phones, most of the Samsungs I've dealt with have been pretty horrible to be fair, mostly due to Samsungs own OS. The biggest problem I see with the Galaxy S, and indeed Android in general is the fragmented platform. This is especially apparent when you look at the gaming scene on Android, its pointless having sweet hardware if the games are all designed to run on the lowest hardware spec. Having spent some time over the last few days looking at what was available, its basically just a collection of lazy and downright shoddy iPhone ports, which wouldn't be so bad but seeing a game look and run worse on a Galaxy S than it does on an iPhone 3G really isn't impressive. :)

I would also agree that it isn't acceptable for a smartphone to be stuck on the same OS/Firmware for the duration of its life. The first smartphone I ever bought was a Nokia 7650, and even it had firmware updates. :)

[Hands0n]

Praising what?
iOS and latterly Android have brought Apps into the mainstream like Symbian and Windows Mobile never ever did. Thinking back to the Nokia N95, for instance, how many of its buyers actually loaded new apps onto it? What are the recorded stats for apps availability and accessibility before these two latecomers? Hobbyists and enthusiasts of the Symbian platform knew how and where to get the apps - but the general public didn't, or at the very least didn't bother.

So, the fact that you had a choice all those years back is somewhat moot. At one time I used to code in Hex, still probably can, but who the hell does that these days? Fact is, anyone could have, but the vast majority of those who even had the computers of that day didn't do so.

At the risk of repetition, what iOS and Android in turn have done is to bring apps on mobile handsets into the mainstream. The respective apps stores, and overwhelming support from developers who would have never countenanced developing on Symbian, have changed the world almost overnight. Symbian has no part in making that happen and, if anything, is a comparative dinosaur in that respect. What Nokia are trying to do with Symbian now, after the fact, is to play catch up and is not doing a terribly good job of things.

The erosion is steady and ever more sure. Like all erosion it is not revolutionary but rather evolutionary. Nokia know this, that is why they're scrabbling about trying to answer the past four years of development. If Symbian was so assured of a place in the future why the big effort to make it look like the more recent OS? Why not just stay as it was in Symbian 3, launch an apps store (oops, so they did!), flash it all about the place with some decent and performant handsets (N97 leave the room now!).

Bottom line, Symbian tried to be all things to all men and failed. iOS and Android try to be most things to most people and succeeds. The future for both of these OS is relatively bright unless those who control the direction blow it and kill the golden goose. What cannot be done in iOS and Android today is more than likely to be delivered tomorrow. But the buying public don't particularly care. These devices are doing things that Symbian owners can only look on at. The wealth and depth of apps for iOS and Android outstrips anything Symbian can offer today. Developers even moved off from Symbian to go to iOS and Android, so what is Symbian's apps future destined to be like?

Worse still, for Symbian and Nokia, is that there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in that OS to attract developers away from iOS/Android and back to Symbian. Purists will say otherwise, and they'll be howling at the moon until the end of time.

Symbian's future is consigned to be the baseline OS for all Nokia devices - and that will have people citing Symbian as the biggest all time seller in the mobile OS world. It is an irrelevant statistic, meaningless.

Turning to the buying public then, they have indeed realised that these two new OS as delivered on modern day handsets is the way forward. So have the manufacturers who have all but abandoned the traditional market. Certainly the bulk of R&D is going into these new "smartphone" handsets and there really will be no looking back. The handsets may appear extraordinarily complex than predecessors but they are becoming commodity items - especially now that the Chinese have entered the fray. These devices are no longer premium product - okay, the iPhone is, but it is meant to be just as the Rolls Royce is a premium automobile.

And so the buying public are gravitating to these new devices. As their contract commitments end and they have a choice of new device they are typically going for the iOS and Android platforms over and above others. Of course, there are plenty of people who just want to use a mobile as a phone/text device only, want buttons and have nothing to do with touchscreens, couldn't care two hoots about apps, yadda yadda yadda. These same people don't use the cameras that have been in almost all handsets for the past ten years, they don't send MMS (much to the annoyance of the operators) and just don't get, or want to get, the reasons to have Internet on the move.

But all over the world the new generation of handset has a mass appeal that has yet to be realised. There are nations that cannot afford the array of technology that we typically have in our homes. A modern smartphone will give them access to apps and content like never before, and the manufacturers know it. Forget the $100 laptop, the future for those nations is a low-cost handset with a modern OS such as Android (unlikely that Apple will ever supply to that market).

I'm not seeking agreement to any of the forgoing, it is my opinion and speculation of what the future holds, I may be 1,000% wrong but only history will tell it out. But that said, the "evidence" is in the increased world sales of this product - and as the breadth of manufacturers increases, as it is inexorably doing, the prices will (are) fall making these devices accessible to a wider range of people all over the world. Perhaps in ten years time the candybar with Symbian S40/S60 will be a quaint memory.

[Hands0n]

Allow me one bijoux example of why I think Symbian is ultimately doomed in the smartphone market ...



October 2009

Layar heads to Symbian with $1m+ funding round

But the augmented reality company doesn't exactly sound enthusiastic

Mobile augmented reality firm Layar has announced that it's about to complete a funding round of more than $1 million, from (as yet) unnamed European investors.

The news came during a panel session at yesterday's SEE Symbian conference in London, reported by VentureBeat.

Layar plans to release its Layar Reality Browser for Symbian next March, although van der Klein's comments that existing platforms iPhone and Android are like two full-speed trains while Symbian is stalled "in a gutter" don't exactly hint at confidence in the platform.

Van der Klein also tells VentureBeat that Layar has already racked up 250,000 downloads on iPhone and Android, and is attracting 100,000 unique users a week.

The company is working with Motorola and Sony Ericsson among other handset vendors to promote its app to their Android users.

Source: http://www.mobile-ent.biz/news/34856/Layar-heads-to-Symbian-with-1m-funding-round

Then fast forward to today (21st August 2010) and a visit to Layar's website in eager anticipation http://www.layar.com/ and what do we find for Symbian? Nothing at all.

I know, I know, this is but one example, there are countless others. But it serves to illustrate my contention that the developer community is not seeing Symbian as a major market(able) force for smartphones - regardless of the semantics that surround that little word :D

[The Mullet of G]

Well thats an impressive wall of text for sure, but, be that as it may it seems like your side stepping my key points. So I'll state some of them again, if the buying public realise that Symbian is not the future and they don't want it anymore, then why did the majority of them in the last quarter still choose to buy a Symbian device instead of an Android or iOS based device? :D

I also don't really care about the mainstream, the point I was making is you aren't doing anything now with your Android device that I wasn't doing 5 years ago, except maybe using the native text and data backup app, as you don't have one. ;)

So not content with retroactively downgrading smartphones, you are now deciding that market share data and the number of phones a company sells is irrelevant? That sounds a lot like something I might come out with and we all know my trolling credentials....are you trolling me? :)

I'm trying to ignore the Layar related post as I don't think it strengthens your case, the whole augmented reality thing is actually pretty dull so far, and its not like Layar are winning many fans on the iPhone with its underwhelming effort, 2.5 stars on the App Store pretty much says it all and I doubt Nokia are missing much here.

Anyways I'll finish off by highlighting a common thing that both Symbian and Android share, and thats a fragmented platform. It hasn't done Symbian any favours it also didn't win them any fans in the dev community and it certainly isn't helping Android, the high end Android devices are being held back by the wealth of junk phones still kicking about, this is more so apparent when it comes to games.

[Hands0n]

Symbian stats include the likes of the Nokia 6303 - anything and everything running Symbian, which is a lot. I don't think that for a moment it is fair, reasonable or even sensible to hold those up against the likes of iPhone and Android.

Where are the stats for the peer smartphones that Nokia sells against iPhone and Android sales? For convenience the statistic of "more Symbian sales than any other OS combined" is entirely specious to say the least. If you refuse to compare like for like then the discussion point you're trying to make becomes entirely moot.

The Layer app example is but one of many that serves to illustrate that developers are all but ignoring Symbian. Of course there are Symbian developers but big names have walked away from the platform. And so one year on and where is that $1m fund? Did they get it? If not why not? Where are the peer apps on Symbian that we are seeing on the iOS and Android devices.

The fragmentation of Android is a very real risk and one that Google has already spotted. I reckon that it will take a number of full releases, maybe as late as Android 4.x to resolve. But I think that Google have the will and determination to at least secure the core OS and stop the manufacturers and mobile operators causing the ruination of the OS - highlighted perhaps by Orange's crippling of much of the location "stuff" with their branding [which is very much more invasive than simple branding].

It is, perhaps, the highly criticised draconian control of iOS that both infuriates and draws developers. On that platform they are assured a consistency not matched on other OS that allow them to develop code that will work across all iOS devices. It is unavoidable for that level of OS consistency to have constraints that some will not like.

[Ben]

Even Nokia is replacing Symbian in the high end with MeeGo. It's not that Symbian is lacking in terms of features and functionality; it has always been pretty impressive in that regard and power users have been able to do almost anything with it for nih-on a decade. It's mostly UI issues, and the technicalities of what is a very old OS that has been developed over many years by many many people. Hell, that causes enough problems for Linux, but with a mobile OS we're talking about something that has to be ruthlessly tuned and efficient.

Nokia/Symbian's market share still being high, despite having dropped 10 points in a year, is nothing to do with customers choosing to buy high-end Symbian smartphones instead of high-end Android/iOS/Blackberry. It has everything to do with Nokia's success at squeezing Symbian into sub-£100 handsets being eaten up by explosive demand for mobiles in Asia.

Yes, Android is a fragmented platform. That's the necessary evil of any multi-manufacturer (or even multi-device, to an extent) OS. However, Android's minimum requirements give developers at least a drop of grease. 2.2, for example, wont run on some of the ~£100 Android's currently around - and quite right, too.

I'm really not sure where this is going.

One thing I do know is that the Samsung Galaxy S doesn't run Symbian!

[The Mullet of G]

Symbian stats include the likes of the Nokia 6303 - anything and everything running Symbian, which is a lot. I don't think that for a moment it is fair, reasonable or even sensible to hold those up against the likes of iPhone and Android.

Where are the stats for the peer smartphones that Nokia sells against iPhone and Android sales? For convenience the statistic of "more Symbian sales than any other OS combined" is entirely specious to say the least. If you refuse to compare like for like then the discussion point you're trying to make becomes entirely moot.

The Layer app example is but one of many that serves to illustrate that developers are all but ignoring Symbian. Of course there are Symbian developers but big names have walked away from the platform. And so one year on and where is that $1m fund? Did they get it? If not why not? Where are the peer apps on Symbian that we are seeing on the iOS and Android devices.

The fragmentation of Android is a very real risk and one that Google has already spotted. I reckon that it will take a number of full releases, maybe as late as Android 4.x to resolve. But I think that Google have the will and determination to at least secure the core OS and stop the manufacturers and mobile operators causing the ruination of the OS - highlighted perhaps by Orange's crippling of much of the location "stuff" with their branding [which is very much more invasive than simple branding].

It is, perhaps, the highly criticised draconian control of iOS that both infuriates and draws developers. On that platform they are assured a consistency not matched on other OS that allow them to develop code that will work across all iOS devices. It is unavoidable for that level of OS consistency to have constraints that some will not like.

See I completely disagree with that view point, it doesn't matter what form factor you squeeze a smartphone OS onto, its still a smartphone. There is no fixed definition of what a smartphone is, but most would agree that Symbian meets all of the expected criteria, iOS on the other hand fails on a few, so if Symbian based devices aren't smartphones then neither is iPhone.

I don't think you have to be a genius to see where Nokia are selling the most phones, they are hardly going to be shifting a huge amount of N97's and as they don't really have any other high end devices, they are instead focusing on the mid to low end, as they have always done, Nokia didn't make its money on the back of selling high end smartphones, its bread and butter has always been the mid to low end.

I hope Layar didn't get the $1m fund, if they didn't I'd conclude its because their app is somewhat disappointing and not worth $1m.

I'm not so sure Google can sort out the fragmentation issue all that easily, not to mention their OS is always going to be running on hardware that ranges from blazing fast to slow as cack on a cold day, and your platform is only as good as the weakest link in the chain. :)


Even Nokia is replacing Symbian in the high end with MeeGo. It's not that Symbian is lacking in terms of features and functionality; it has always been pretty impressive in that regard and power users have been able to do almost anything with it for nih-on a decade. It's mostly UI issues, and the technicalities of what is a very old OS that has been developed over many years by many many people. Hell, that causes enough problems for Linux, but with a mobile OS we're talking about something that has to be ruthlessly tuned and efficient.

Nokia/Symbian's market share still being high, despite having dropped 10 points in a year, is nothing to do with customers choosing to buy high-end Symbian smartphones instead of high-end Android/iOS/Blackberry. It has everything to do with Nokia's success at squeezing Symbian into sub-�100 handsets being eaten up by explosive demand for mobiles in Asia.

Yes, Android is a fragmented platform. That's the necessary evil of any multi-manufacturer (or even multi-device, to an extent) OS. However, Android's minimum requirements give developers at least a drop of grease. 2.2, for example, wont run on some of the ~�100 Android's currently around - and quite right, too.

I'm really not sure where this is going.

One thing I do know is that the Samsung Galaxy S doesn't run Symbian!

I don't see Symbian being replaced in high end Nokia's by MeeGo as being a surprise, this was always going to happen, and was fairly obvious when they started releasing Linux based tablets years ago, this slowly evolved into the N900 which is a largely misunderstood phone, I don't think it was ever meant for the masses, it was simply an evolutionary stepping stone and was more aimed at geeks and fans of previous Nokia Linux based tablets. I would agree Symbian definitely doesn't lack features or functionality.

Due to the fragmented platform Android is suffering the same fate as Symbian, games on Symbian had to run on the lowest spec hardware, meaning that you saw very little advantage from owning a high end device, Android has the same problem. It probably isn't so much of an issue with apps, but I expect it still isn't an ideal situation. It wouldn't be so bad if there was a better level of scalability, where more powerful devices could benefit with better graphics etc, but currently it doesn't seem to be the case.

Currently in terms of apps and games Android is basically the poor cousin getting hand me downs from iPhone, and I have little tolerance for lazy ports and cash ins. :)

[Ben]

I don't think you have to be a genius to see where Nokia are selling the most phones, they are hardly going to be shifting a huge amount of N97's and as they don't really have any other high end devices, they are instead focusing on the mid to low end, as they have always done, Nokia didn't make its money on the back of selling high end smartphones, its bread and butter has always been the mid to low end.
Why don't Nokia have any other good high end devices? In the first half of 2009 Apple had just 2% of the handset market. They took 8% of the revenue for the whole sector. But profit, oh, they took a whopping 32% (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/05/apples-share-of-cellphone-industry-profit-estimated-at-32-for-first-half-of-2009/). Apple took more profit from the handset sector than Nokia did by selling a tiny fraction of the number of phones.

I disagree on your definition of a smartphone. The OS does not a smartphone make. If you're cramming something as boated as Symbian onto a sub-£100 piece of hardware with no RAM and at best a memory card for storage, not to mention a CPU that could be outclassed by Michelle McManus on a running machine, then it's not a smartphone. That's what Nokia is shipping to Asia. By. The. Boatload.

[Hands0n]

See I completely disagree with that view point, it doesn't matter what form factor you squeeze a smartphone OS onto, its still a smartphone. There is no fixed definition of what a smartphone is, but most would agree that Symbian meets all of the expected criteria, iOS on the other hand fails on a few, so if Symbian based devices aren't smartphones then neither is iPhone.

On that point you and I are coming from two different ends of the spectrum entirely. it seems that you are seriously going to ask me to accept the likes of a Nokia 6303 or 1208 running Symbian as a smartphone. By any definition of the word smartphone that class of handset is not one. Even without a "fixed definition of what a smartphone is" the conventional wisdom is that we're looking at the class of device that would include the N97 (urgh!), the upcoming N8, iPhone and the whole slew of Android devices.

Right now, Nokia do not have one single device in the market place that adequately competes with any of the Android, and I'd go as far back as the T-Mobile G1 made by HTC that would wipe the floor with Nokia.

As I said, there is no like for like comparison and Nokia's place in the smartphone market has all but been usurped (and I'm being very kind to Nokia in that).

[The Mullet of G]

Why don't Nokia have any other good high end devices? In the first half of 2009 Apple had just 2% of the handset market. They took 8% of the revenue for the whole sector. But profit, oh, they took a whopping 32% (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/08/05/apples-share-of-cellphone-industry-profit-estimated-at-32-for-first-half-of-2009/). Apple took more profit from the handset sector than Nokia did by selling a tiny fraction of the number of phones.

I disagree on your definition of a smartphone. The OS does not a smartphone make. If you're cramming something as boated as Symbian onto a sub-�100 piece of hardware with no RAM and at best a memory card for storage, not to mention a CPU that could be outclassed by Michelle McManus on a running machine, then it's not a smartphone. That's what Nokia is shipping to Asia. By. The. Boatload.

That statistic doesn't impress me as a customer, in fact it gives the impression that Apple are up to their old tricks selling £20 worth of hardware for £500+, I'm sure from a business standpoint its impressive though. I'd rather buy from a company that wasn't trying to screw me out of every penny they possibly could.

I counter disagree and state that the OS is exactly what makes a smartphone a smartphone. Also what sub £100 handsets are you talking about? And by that I mean give me model numbers. Its worth noting that Nokia's sub £100 smartphones like the 5230 have a 434Mhz CPU and 128MB of RAM, iPhone 3G only has a 412Mhz CPU and 128MB of RAM and it certainly doesn't cost less than £100, are you saying the iPhone 3G isn't a smartphone either then? Also why is it a bad thing only having a memory card for storage? I personally think its vastly superior to having a phone with a fixed amount of storage ala iPhone, I also don't really care where a phone stores my stuff as long as it does.


On that point you and I are coming from two different ends of the spectrum entirely. it seems that you are seriously going to ask me to accept the likes of a Nokia 6303 or 1208 running Symbian as a smartphone. By any definition of the word smartphone that class of handset is not one. Even without a "fixed definition of what a smartphone is" the conventional wisdom is that we're looking at the class of device that would include the N97 (urgh!), the upcoming N8, iPhone and the whole slew of Android devices.

Right now, Nokia do not have one single device in the market place that adequately competes with any of the Android, and I'd go as far back as the T-Mobile G1 made by HTC that would wipe the floor with Nokia.

As I said, there is no like for like comparison and Nokia's place in the smartphone market has all but been usurped (and I'm being very kind to Nokia in that).

I'm never going to ask you to accept that a 6303 or a 1208 is a smartphone, as neither of them are, as far as I'm aware the 6303 runs on S40 and the 1208 on S30, I've yet to meet a single human being that would class an S30 or S40 device as being a smartphone. I would recommend reading up on some information about the differences between S60, S40 and S30 as I suspect you are somewhat confused here.

No offense but the G1 wasn't just an ugly phone, it was also equally dull. I don't recall any Symbian device in recent times having a limit on how much storage I could use for apps, sorry but thats hilariously bad. Its hardly a smartphone with unlimited possibilities if you in fact have a ridiculously small limit on what you can install. Then there is the shoddy 320 x 480 screen resolution.

I appreciate you guys taking the time to indulge in some Symbian related banter, but I feel you are either attempting to troll me, or you are badly informed. :)