| Does “openness” really matter? |
| Written by Yuki Endo, International Business Development Manager, Acrodea |
| Friday, 27 November 2009 13:44 |
|
I am questioning the importance of the term "Open". Is it really important to be "Open" in the mobile industry? "Open Source", "Open networks" "Open platform" – these terms have become the favourite vocabularies of all the stakeholders in the industry and are being tossed around at the slightest opportunity. The question remains “what is Open?” Android, Symbian, iPhone..... these are all actually “closed" environments calling themselves "open" while maintaining some sort of control. "Open" in the above cases has nothing to do with what “open” means in the PC and Internet world. Going back to basics, the Mobile Industry itself is not easy to enter, unless you are providing components given that the initial cost of entry is incredibly high. Even amongst the MVNOs, the only player that can be called a huge success is Virgin Mobile. Closely linked to the question of "Open Source" is the revenue generating potential of the different systems - "Closed systems" or “closed systems called Open". In the end, whether these systems are closed or open, without continuous business revenue streams, they are not sustainable. Currently there is a tendency for people to challenge you, with questions such as "How Open are you?" Isn’t the real question “how much value can you bring to the end-user?” I do question the advantages of being "Open". CLOSED and HAPPY! =NINTENDO DS
Nintendo DS is an example of the resounding success of a completely closed system. On the 6th of March 2009, Nintendo DS became the first game device manufacturer to achieve sales of 100 million units within 4 years, 3 months and 2 weeks. Without a huge line-up of good contents and well designed device interfaces dedicated to playing games, Nintendo DS would never have gone this far. The Games consoles don't get attacked for being closed or making money based out of a closed environment. They are happy people!! Poorly designed products or services have nothing to do with whether the networks or service environment is open or closed or whether open source is being used or not. Why do we keep thinking "Open" is so wonderful? Would it be a social pressure from the PC world? I have to say that the golden business model of all times involves vertical integration and a "closed business within an open platform" (e.g. AOL= i-mode = iPhone) The most profitable business models are about user experience and applying real life know-how to the phone. The way this translates is in terms of services that do not require a manual as they provide guidance (step by step learning experience). Nintendo DS is a beautiful game console which has achieved worldwide acceptance and this has translated into massive sales. Nintendo DS is closed. So why should closed mobile systems be frowned upon?
|
