Bill Gates: Cellphone will Beat iPod 1017
93,000 writes "CNN is running an article featuring Gates' prediction that the iPod is on the way out. From the article: 'As good as Apple may be, I don't believe the success of the iPod is sustainable in the long run.' His prediction for a successor? Mobile phones-- powered by none other than Windows Mobile 5.0, of course."
40 Gigs of Ring Tones (Score:5, Insightful)
But I'm sure Apple would be fools not to follow Gates' prediction, after all Microsoft is the leader in innovation.
Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Cellies - Yes. Windows - No! (Score:2, Insightful)
It's coming. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you look at Nokia's cell phones [nokiausa.com], about half of them have cameras. A few years ago, a camera phone would've been pretty rare. I think that's where things are heading with hard drive cell phones, and once you have a hard drive, playing music off of it is pretty simple. Sure, the iPod is fairly entrenched as of right now, but when people's iPods break, they'll already have a device that can play music, making another iPod purchase much less lucrative. As more iPods break than get replaced, these Windows Mobile phones will be waiting to take the MP3 player market away.
Bill's 1/2 right (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the part about them all running Windows, let's just say that remains to be seen.
I call bullshit. (Score:2, Insightful)
However, a phone will not replace the iPod, not unless it can run DRM-less media. Too many people know about DRM these days, and more and more people are avoiding it like the plague.
Not only that, the iPod doesn't have goddamned annoying ringtones that go off in the worst places.
Even though this is slashdot.. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm shocked!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Ignore him...his predictions are merely him using corporate feelgoodspeak in order to try to convince MBAs to follow his product line.
Picture him in a wizards hat and cloak, making dire predictions, selling the cure-all for those ails in his cloak. Kinda suspicious...
Sure, they may...or at least they'll try... (Score:3, Insightful)
No carrier wants to touch it. Let people sync their *own* files with their *own* phone?? Unheard of!
They want to charge $2 or more per song [businessweek.com] that you download to your phone. "Paying for convenience", as it were, or so they say...
Re:40 Gigs of Ring Tones (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not a huge fan of format-restricted Ipods, but (Score:5, Insightful)
The Ipod interface is excellent, and with manufacturers producing quad-channel-GSM cell-phones-on-a-chip, Apple is going to have a much easier time adding cell-phone functionality to an Ipod than Microsoft is ever going to have adding an equivelently easy-to-use and satisfying interface to their so-called smart-phones.
I like my Motorola A700 PDA/Phone, but I don't use it to listen to music despite the fact that it is a capable MP3 player. The Ipod and Rio Karma are optimized for music playback--I've yet to see a cell phone that is so optimized without giving up PDA or cell-phone features to do it. I suspect Apple will be the first out with something that does just work, and it will probably be some variation of the Ipod.
Re:Anyone else... (Score:5, Insightful)
Very few of his predictions have ever been accurate. I'm surprised that Apple's stock didn't go UP when this bit was published.
Never happen (Score:5, Insightful)
What I don't buy is that people will use it as an iPod replacement. Why? Because it's designed by committee. The headphone jack is on the bottom of the phone. It's 2.5mm so you have to carry around a bulky adaptor.
The phone ships with Media Player 9 as default which sucks. You have to navigate to Media Player to change a song, and if someone rings you have to unplug the headphones. (I guess this wouldn't matter but they provide such shit ones with the one that you have to use your own.
other Gates initiatives (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Cell Phones over iPod? (Score:3, Insightful)
That doesn't mean Apple will be out of the business, they'll probably swing a deal with Nokia or something.
Quacks (Score:2, Insightful)
It's getting boring to see the same group of people drone on how they will be the best/worst and so on and so forth.
Re:40 Gigs of Ring Tones (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It's coming? (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Cellphone service still hasn't really come down much in price. Years ago, everyone seemed to think the emergence of more competing services would bring monthly charges way down, but it hasn't really worked out like that. Anyone can buy themselves a music player or even a PDA and get lots of use out of it, out of the box, without subscribing to anything. Cellphones, on the other hand, are useless paperweights as soon as you stop paying for monthly service. You can argue that cellphones are much more of a "necessity" - but that really depends on who YOU are. For quite a few people, they're just a convenience - as they could wait until they got home or to work to make/return their calls.
2. Cellphone makers have been horribly clueless in building a "convergence device" that really meets people's needs. Look at the latest "cream of the crop" PDA/camera/phones, for example. Take the Treo 650. Still so new, you can't even get on through many major carriers like Verizon, but if you do - you find out it's very fragile/breakable, not to mention still almost too large to carry around comfortably. Battery life could be better too, and as a portable music player, it doesn't hold a candle to something like even a first generation iPod. Meanwhile, like most all other camera phones, it takes lousy low-resolution photos. Where's the desirability in that??
I think the truth is, cellphone makers are really only interested in one thing
Re:Will it also follow that... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Cell Phones over iPod? (Score:2, Insightful)
Portable electronics devices, yes - there is somewhat more of an overlap between a PDA and an iPod than there is between a PDA and a cigarette lighter.
What Bill (yeah we're on a first name basis) is saying here is hardly a risky prediction - for instance the merging of cell phones and PDAs was an absolute no-brainer. PDAs and MP3s - well PDAs have been full featured MP3 players for years. Taking on the iPod has far more to do with cultishness and simplicity than it does technical capacity.
All powered by Microsoft Windows Mobile 5.0
OMG...the Chairman of Microsoft pushing the Microsoft option...what an outrage.
Has anyone ever done any reseach on how often Bill Gates has been right in his predictions?
Bill Gates is not a columnist for ZDNet - he's a large shareholder and chairman of Microsoft Corporation. Of course he's going to push, and probably believe, the Microsoft vision of things. This surprizes you?
10 gigs for wince, 15 for bugs, 15 for spam (Score:2, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Cell Phones over iPod? (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that Gates has done some great things in his time, but when I read articles that he has written over the years, I am struck by how often he has been dead wrong. The Microsoft Global Network vs. the internet is a case in point.
It seems he made a few bucks off that,..
So because he is rich that makes him right on everything he says? Probably not. Just as people who support gun ownership. They find his support for gun control to be way off base.
Bill has done some great things, but prognostication isn't his strong suit.
Microsoft Must Be Nervous (Score:5, Insightful)
As to Ipods, whatever Apple's flaws, the marketing of the IPod has been a marvel to see. Apple has managed to brand themselves, and I don't think MS is going to be bashing into that market as easily as they think.
Design and Apple (Score:3, Insightful)
So imagine doing the convergence that gates is talking about but with Apple's design people running the show. Imagine a device slightly smaller than comparable products with elegant apple design, and an intuitive interface. Dock your phone with your computer and not only does it sync your music but it also syncs your e-mail and address book now. Plust what about using MMS to do limited sharing of music files with your friends?
Computers are mostly functional devices. Style is a minimal concern. With phones though, style is as much a part of it as the function. As long as the phone can answer calls, view e-mail, and have an address book, the rest is just fluff. So I think Microsoft will have quite a fight on their hands.
Re:Cell Phones over iPod? (Score:4, Insightful)
So being rich makes you right?
I guess you would be running your computer on DC power if that were true. Edison made that prediction and he was rich as well.
Re:It's coming. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sure... (Score:3, Insightful)
Give it a radio, so I can listen to my traffic report or (wishful thinking) hockey game.. then let me record from that radio. Then give it a voice recorder
Re:Sure... (Score:2, Insightful)
Simplicity of design (Score:3, Insightful)
Disclaimer:
Yes, I use an ipod, the interface could even be easier.
Yes, I use windows, linux (kde) and OS X: They are all bloated. OS X certainly is not the easiest of the three when you want to find a program.
Re:40 Gigs of Ring Tones (Score:2, Insightful)
But MP3 players are a different story. Our hearing isn't getting any better, so as storage tech improves, we'll be better and better able to cram enough gigs into a phone that we can listen to top notch music.
So camera + phone = bad
MP3 + phone = good
That's the beauty of their success (Score:4, Insightful)
Where can you go from there? Anywhere you want to. You are invisible.
I wouldn't worry about product 'stagnation'.
When the iMac first came out, in 'bondi blue', it didn't look like a box.
The other PC makers couldn't match it. They were stuck with their beige boxes. Then they tried putting colored plastic panels around the same chassis that used to be in those beige boxes.
We have seem the iMac morph twice, the 'football' and the half ball with a scren slung in front of it, and now its just a flat panel on a pedestal. It was obvious what was happening but the PC makers are still selling their boxes.
I'm thinking that the MacMini and the tablet that Apple just patented, using a wireless network to hook up the devices are the future of home computing.
PCs are still stuck in their old chassis, requiring a desk and a chair in a 'work station' and instead Apple is offering invisibility.
If you had to change a house around, which would you rather have, a monolith with a big footprint or something you can't see except for a portable tablet?
I'm not ever going to touch the iPod, iPod Mini and iPod Shuffle. And neither can the PC manufacturers.
Apple 'gets it'.
Re:Cell Phones over iPod? (Score:3, Insightful)
Only if the cellular providers aren't involved (Score:3, Insightful)
Cell phones are not yet a commodity product the same way PCs are. There are at least 3-4 major operating systems, there is no dominant hardware platform, incompatible radio technologies, and the main buyers of cell phones (cellular providers) are far less fragmented and more powerful than any buyer of PCs. It's a very different market. The only way I can see a iPod-replacement-phone taking off is if it if the developer (Palm, MS, Motorola, Nokia, etc) can somehow get the carriers to fight each other for it.
A huge problem with cell phones replacing the iPod is that there is almost zero financial incentive for the cellular providers (Cingular, Verizon, etc) to offer iPod/iTunes functionality on their networks unless they can make money off it. I don't see them being flexible enough to make that happen. They'll want a business like the ringtone business and they'll want it captive so you have to buy it from them. Witness Verizon with their disabled bluetooth functionality on one of their phones. They have no interest in services they can't charge for and are afraid of subsidizing development on a service one of their competitors will benefit from. One of the main reason's the iPod is successful is that you don't have to rely on any third party to use it. You can *choose* to use iTunes, etc but you aren't forced to. This is the exact opposite of how the carriers think.
Another factor is that most phones are subsidized by the providers. Now it's possible someone might produce a device people are willing to buy without subsidizing but I think they can't charge much more than an iPod or Treo. People are obviously willing to carry devices that cost as much as $400-$500US (Treo, some iPods) but if the cost is more than that, I think you are getting outside the sweet spot and most want devices that are much cheaper. It's possible it could happen, I'm just dubious it will happen if the cellular providers have much say in the matter.
Re:It's coming. (Score:3, Insightful)
Thing is, if my iPod breaks, I still have my phone. If my phone breaks, I still have my iPod.
Intergration is fine... but the downside is that one failure can bring everything down.
Nothing Lasts Forever (Score:3, Insightful)
Any emerging technologies out there for cell phones are going to have to consider several factors if they want to compete and beat the iPod as a music player (or if Apple wants to morph the iPod into a cell-phone):
1) Battery life. With all the stuff these uberwidgets are doing, they are going to have to find a good, stable, non-explosive power source. The iPod or other music players have a dedicated purpose--if you multiply the purposes, multiply the power consumption (probably by an exponent). I'd rather have a separate music player than to chance losing all my juice in my phone.
2) Portability--by that, I mean music can be moved from/to an iPod or computer to/from my new music phone easily. The interface has to be easy to use and it will have to be compatible the dominant music sources. Otherwise it's going to have hell catching up because re-inventing that wheel has not proven to be a match for iTMS. People won't switch products if it's not easy or they feel to heavily invested in or loyal to another product/service.
3) Availability & Pricing. If you can't get one from or working with your provider, it doesn't matter how good the product works or doesn't. [Look how long it took the Treo to get ubiquitous support]. The price dictates availability, too. The market demographic for people who want music and cell phones may not have the disposable income to afford it if it's not priced right. (i.e., cheaper than a nice cell phone + an iPod).
4) Fashion. MS's devices aren't ever as slick looking as Apple's--that will definitely be a factor in its appeal to both vendors and consumers. The "cool" factor enjoyed by the iPod is something Microsoft's money just can't buy. They'll have to compete in quality and design--two areas they don't do well in.
Should one device do everything? (Score:5, Insightful)
The trouble is, all of these features saddle the poor little device with a complexity that will boggle even the veteran cell fan. You have to wade your way through a staggering 583 menu commands, along with far too many pointless "Are you sure?" confirmations, to find them all. Just looking up your own phone number requires eight button presses, for goodness' sake.
Re:It's coming. (Score:5, Insightful)
Integrating music players into cell phones would, if well implemented, put a major dent in the market for low end MP3 players but probably wouldn't touch the iPod. People who buy iPods aren't looking for some freebie toss-it-in music player.
And this assumes that the phone manufactures, wireless service providers, and Microsoft can all get together and form a business model that they can all agree on that doesn't completely turn off the consumers. If they overburden it with DRM, use limitations, limited song libraries, and per-use fees, then the iPod will continue to reign supreme. These are the same companies that want to charge you for each custom ringtone, SMS message, or picture transferred. How much will it cost me to load my CD collection into my own phone?
Easy answer for Apple (Score:2, Insightful)
He's Right... (Score:3, Insightful)
And he's right that Apple is not positioned for the long haul (ooooh, here come the Apple fanboys). Steve Jobs will be off to make some other neat, shiny thing.
Here's how That Works (Score:3, Insightful)
I would think that once their competitors are aware of this strategy, they would counteract it simply by not resting in their laurels but instead developing cool new features for their devices so that Microsoft can never catch up to the point where their crappy device is good enough to compete. The biggest danger when competing with Microsoft is that you'll be lulled into a false sense of security by how shitty their revision 1 products inevitably are.
Apple's already experienced this once at the hands of Microsoft -- Windows prior to 3.0 was a joke, 3.0 was just good enough to put a hurtin' on Apple and once Apple got smacked down Windows didn't change appreciably for well over a decade. Oh I know they had NT, but it's not like THAT was ever marketted at the home user.
Re:Sure... (Score:1, Insightful)
Will Windows Mobile 5.0 be the thing. MS's track record in the mobile market (see Windows CE) does not make one optimistic.
Remember though, we diss Mr. Bill because he HAS in fact steamrolled everyone else (with, in many people's opinions, inferior product). Like him and his products or not, he is a formidable competitor.
Re:Design and Apple (Score:2, Insightful)
- Features. iPod has less than everyone else. No radio, less compatibility with ToGo services.
- Design. Totally opinionated. Creative Zen offers more color than every generation of iPod.
I am confused as to why people think other companies can't deliver on these specs. Apple always had a marketing dominance in the mp3 player sector, not a technological one.
The new evangelical Bill Gates (Score:5, Insightful)
The trouble is that Gates assumes that everyone else is dumb and he's smart, so no matter what someone else has done, he can start with their ideas and improve upon it. He doesn't take into account that others are doing the same thing, and that by the time the MS version gets out the door the innovator has moved on.
Witness:
At least some journalists are taking notice [macobserver.com]:
Cell phones need to be upgradable (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't progress. PCs and TVs are popular partially because you can add new things on to them. But today, to add something to a cell phone requires buying a new cell phone. That aint cheap. Soon, we will need a standardized expandable cell phone so that we can add the drink mixer attachment easily without replacing the whole device.
Until then, I won't waste $1000 to buy the ultimate integrated device, knowing I will need to throw it out very soon.
Re:That's the beauty of their success (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple 'gets it'.
Except when it comes to price, which is why I have never personally owned a single Apple product.
I like Apple, but their products are too expensive. There are plenty of alternatives to Apple, which is what Apple marketshare confirms.
Re:Sure... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Design and Apple (Score:3, Insightful)
seriously, the organizational structure and the interface to the ipod is damn near perfect. extremely long battery life, and a slim case.
the ipod haters really dont know what they're looking at.
Too big and bulky? Bullshit... (Score:5, Insightful)
But if you think of it as a PDA with a built-in phone, which is how you should be looking at it, then there's nothing at all wrong with its size at all.
Look at it this way, if it were any smaller then it would be useless as a PDA, right? So what good is making it smaller?
Seriously, I don't have huge hands (I'd describe mine as being of average size) and I find myself looking at most phones, PDAs, etc (not just the Treo range) and wishing the buttons were a little bit bigger: I'd hate to think how unusable these devices would be to a lot of people if they became any smaller and the buttons were to either become smaller still or be less well-spaced out.
Too big and bulky? You're kidding, right?
One thing is being ignored... (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple and Motorola have already had trouble finding takers for their iTunes capable phones because service providers want to sell music to the customer, rather than have them load it off of their computer. It doesn't gain them a whole lot if you can upload your own music.
Plus they are selling crappy ringtones for $3 or more, so can you imagine what would happen if they sold whole songs? They would have to lower their profitable ringtone price point, or sell songs for an outrageous amount, and I'm guessing on the latter assuming they only let you buy music from them. (And probably charge you for the internet access that you will have to use to browse for songs)
Service providers don't want you to have your own music. You hear people whine about iTunes music store, this would be Cingular Music store. $5 single songs at 64k that are DRM's to only your phone.
And as for Bill Gates, he doesn't care about the music player. He wants you to get the phone for the music player and then be tied to microsoft products to sync it. And since you'll also have Word on your phone, you'll need it on your computer... Excel, Outlook,
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the same thing in the stereo world; the best stereo are power amp + preamp + source + etc..
cheaper stereos have everything in one, so you can't just upgrade your power amp but have to scrap the whole thing, and usually everything is compromised and corners are cut to make if affordable.
Re:It's coming? (Score:1, Insightful)
Especially in North America where every single carrier seems to have a different standard. At least in most of the rest of the world everyone uses GSM so it's possible to switch companies.
Here in NA some phones work with some companies and not others.
Heck, I went with a GSM phone up here in Canada because we had two companies that did that (Rogers and "Fido"). A couple of months back Rogers bought "Fido"s parent company and now we have three carriers all with different protocols. (One of the companies actually uses two protocols because they grew thru an aquisition -- so we have four protocols for three companies.)
Letting the market decide is one thing, but this is ridiculous.
do what you are best at,dont try to rule the world (Score:2, Insightful)
Why did Apple succeed with the ipod?, i believe because they concentrated on the music lover they segmented their market, created the perfect tool for that segment, keeping this in mind the whole design, technology, etc is based on the profile of the music lover..does a phone maker like nokia have music lovers in mind when they create a communicator? sure they add mp3 support since its a minor addition..but these are two different things and the communicator is aimed at business people so its best for them.
Given the point that apple now rules the portable music market, they didnt start with a million ipods sold, the success came gradually over a period of time where all the marketing and technological efforts of s. jobs settled in, due to the fact that the device had a clear target market. a "all in one device" cant win since nowone can satisfy everyone at once, its not possible...stick with what you know best and go ahead and create synergies but dont try to rule the world, it never works, history has shown that
Re:Design and Apple (Score:2, Insightful)
> had a marketing dominance in the mp3 player sector, not a technological one.
Maybe you are not the target market, because I and many others love the technology of the iPod. What gets most people hooked on buying an iPod is playing with the wheel on their friend's iPod or at the Apple store. It is vary easy and intuitive to find songs and play them.
Besides, I can get a tiny FM radio with headphones from Walgreens for $10 if that's what I want.
jfs
Re:Moving target (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, I think there's the real point. Maybe he's right that PDAs and MP3 players will eventually disappear, and in the end we'll have cell phones with PDA features and MP3 playback. Maybe the cameras in phones will become good enough that amateur point-and-shooters won't ever buy stand alone cameras again. And maybe it will be cheap enough that these phones will even be the free phones you get with a 2 year contract. In fact, I'm not sure "maybe" is quite right. I think all this will "probably" happen sooner or later. As tiny cameras, mp3 players, cell phones, and everything else get smaller and cheaper, we'll probably see more and more multifunction all-in-one type devices. So in that sense, yeah, Gates is probably right.
Of course, pretty much everyone has been saying this for years and years on top of that. Wasn't the reason Steve Jobs didn't like the Newton was that he thought the functionality should just be built into cell-phones? (I remember reading something to that effect)
So considering how blatantly obvious it is, who's to say that Apple won't get there first? I mean, that's the real question, isn't it, who will get there first? Will it be the phone companies building MP3 players into their phones, or will it be the MP3 companies building phones into their players, or will Palm release a hard-drive based version of the Trio?
Well, Apple's already built some photo functionality into their iPod, and it seems like it's only a matter of time before we see a iPod/camera hybrid (I think so, anyway). Motorola is releasing an iTunes phone in a few months. Apple has address-book and calendar syncing in the iPod, and it's not hard to imagine essentially integrating the tech from an iPod shuffle into a cell-phone. So I don't know, I wouldn't count Apple out yet.
So, I guess I'm saying that I don't think this is an issue of Bill Gates' vision of the future of technology being different that others'. It's solely an issue of who can put all the pieces of hardware together, write software that will run it in an easy and intuitive manner so people are comfortable with it, and put it all into a reasonably-priced physically-small package. It's anybody's game right now, but I'd certainly put Apple (either by itself or by partnering with another company) among the top contenders.
Re:Not everyone has (or wants) a cell phone (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:40 Gigs of Ring Tones (Score:3, Insightful)
This use to be true. However, as sensors become smaller, but gain higher resolution and lower noise, the optics can be shrunken in proportion. Take a look at the examples of what the upcoming Nokia N90 can do [nokia.com] (scroll to the bottom), for an idea of where camera phones are heading.
I'm not saying camera phones will replace professional cameras, but they have a good chance of replacing point and shoot -class devices.
Re:Sure... (Score:2, Insightful)
Therefore, different criteria pertain.
Re:40 Gigs of Ring Tones (Score:2, Insightful)
Erm. The point of having a cell phone with those devices isn't to replace the ones you've got, I have no idea why people here always assume that's the case.
The fact of the matter is that crappy pictures, for example, are totally better than no pictures at all. I don't know about you, but I don't tote my digital camera around everywhere I go like I do with my cell phone. As a result, I have some amusing photos. Heck, I've even got a video of the dog spontaneously heckling my cat. I would NEVER have captured that. It was over before I had time to run to the other room, dig out the video camera, power it up, and check the tape.
In other words, you're looking at cell phone convergence in entirely the wrong perspective. Heck, my 0. Not all of us carry around a digital camera, an iPod, a Game Boy, a video camera, and a Palm every waking moment of our lives.
Re:That's the beauty of their success (Score:4, Insightful)
Correction, their products are too expensive for you, which is very different.
Considering the marketshare of the iPod, it seems a lot of people agree with me.
m-