Is the author completely unaware that MS has a mobile operating system that supports versions of all its key programs and plays nice with its desktop suites?

Did the reader miss the part where I discussed Windows Mobile?

Apparently he did miss that small section. However, the premise of the article appears to be that MS should by Palm to take their technology and build a new OS that runs on multiple manufacturer's phones and allows 3rd-party software development with the iPhone app store being held up as a model. However, some items of note that should have been included in the discussion:

1. Third parties have been able to use a real SDK (Visual Studio) to develop apps for devices running the windows mobile OS for years before the iPhone came out
2. There are no restrictions on what kind of application 3rd parties can produce
3. 3rd parties can sell their applications anywhere - their own website, a website that collects apps - you don't need Apple's authorization to sell it through their exclusive portal for which they take a cut of the sale
4. Windows Mobile ships with most smart phones - Nokia, RIM, and Apple are the exceptions
5. Palm generally makes two versions of each smart phone already - one with PalmOS and one with Windows Mobile (e.g. Treo 700 and Treo 700w)
6. An OS is not sexy - it's the apps and the user interface that are sexy or not.
7. Windows Mobile has multiple browser options - Pocket Internet Explorer, Opera Mobile, Opera Mini, Netfront, and Skyfire to name just the ones that I've tried. These have different levels of sexiness - and w/Opera Mobile and Skyfire better flash capability.
8. There is nothing stopping a 3rd party from putting a better user interface on Windows Mobile - something HTC has down with their Touch-Flo (aka Manilla) interface. This comes standard on the Diamond and Touch Pro/Fuze (<link>)
9. According to <link>, as of 2Q08, Windows Mobile had 12% of the smartphone market compared with PalmOS's 2.3% (Apple: 2.8%, Linux 7.3%, RIM 17.4%, Symbian/Nokia 57.1%). The article's brief mention of Windows Mobile implied that it wasn't a big player in the smart-phone market.
10. Last I checked, MS is mainly a software company and Palm is a hardware company abandoning it's OS for Windows Mobile.

So the article suggests that MS - a software company - should buy a hardware company that already uses MS's OS as their proprietary OS is dying in order to be able to look sexier - something manufacturers (HTC and their TouchFlo interface) and 3rd-party app producers (Opera, Skyfire, millions of others) already do.

What is interesting is that Apple (and other OS providers like RIM and Nokia) and MS are following the same strategy they used for PCs in the early days. That is Apple (and others) are selling a hadware product, tying it to their proprietary software, and making 3rd-party app writers have their apps authorized before selling them. They are betting that their software will help drive their hardware sales. MS is selling software only, with the ability to sell to multiple hardware vendors. They are betting that once the hardware differences become indistinguishable (like the rise of the IBM PC clones) their willingess and ability to sell to any manufacturer and having a much more open approach to 3rd-party app development will make them the de facto OS for the mobile market.

Frankly, given the history of the PC vs. the Mac, plus the observation that MS doesn't have to build any hardware (i.e. they have half the work that others have), I think its only a matter of time before MS dominates the smart phone market - at least in the US where Nokia doesn't have a strong foothold.

Zarni, you're using old data. The iphone passed all winmo devices in the 3rd qtr (http://www.engadgetmobile.com­/2008/12/04/smartphone-numbers­-are-in-iphone-sales-exceed-wi­ndows-mobile-sa/). My guess is that the lead will have grown in the 4th quarter.

You say that winMo ships with most smart phones, with RIM and Nokia being the exception (and now Apple), but those three companies make a large majority of the smart phones sold in the world.

In regards to points 1-3, in spite of this apparent advantage, people still choose other phones over WinMo in large numbers.

Yes, there is nothing to stop a third party from putting a better UI on WinMo, except for maybe a viable business model. MS wouldn't be happy with a carrier that shipped a WinMo phone with a third party GUI.

In light of Palm's recent announcements, I wouldn't characterize them as a company that is abandoning their OS for WinMo. If you read about the Pre, you would come to the conclusion that they will be abandoning their WinMo products, for a linux-based system. They are basically betting the farm on the Pre, and there is no WinMo involved.

People do care about their phone, more than you concede, and while they may not be able to name its OS, they also do care about its UI. It's not just the apps. And they seem to choose in large numbers anything but WinMo. Also, it's not just Nokia is beating them outside of the US ( a pretty large market), but they are losing in the US, and that's with Apple only selling through one carrier, and android only available on what is basically a beta software device (I have one).

So while I disagree with your rejection of the idea of MS buying Palm, it is for much different reasons. I also do not see WinMo dominating any smartphone market.

kgsbca:

Zarni, you're using old data. The iphone passed all winmo devices in the 3rd qtr (http://www.engadgetmobile.com­/2008/12/04/smartphone-numbers­-are-in-iphone-sales-exceed-wi­ndows-mobile-sa/). My guess is that the lead will have grown in the 4th quarter.

Good link, though I couldn't find the report itself. It does state that Apple slashed its production for 4Q 2008 with 2 million unit in inventory indicating that Apple expected its 4Q numbers to drop off.

kgsbca:

In regards to points 1-3, in spite of this apparent advantage, people still choose other phones over WinMo in large numbers.

My point was that WinMo, latest sales results notwithstanding, is a major player in the smartphone market. The article implied that MS should buy Palm in order to become a major player in the smartphone market.

kgsbca:

Yes, there is nothing to stop a third party from putting a better UI on WinMo, except for maybe a viable business model. MS wouldn't be happy with a carrier that shipped a WinMo phone with a third party GUI.

HTC has a viable business model and installed a better UI on WinMo (Manilla TouchFlo3D) for several devices for Sprint, Verizon, and AT&T (notably the Diamond and Touch Pro/aka Fuze) with no complaints from MS. Why would they have any objection to that?

kgsbca:

In light of Palm's recent announcements, I wouldn't characterize them as a company that is abandoning their OS for WinMo. If you read about the Pre, you would come to the conclusion that they will be abandoning their WinMo products, for a linux-based system. They are basically betting the farm on the Pre, and there is no WinMo involved.

They may be abandoning WinMo for linux, but they have also abandonded PalmOS for linux. Plus they have such a small market share. So why should they buy Palm to get a linux OS for mobile platforms.

kgsbca:

People do care about their phone, more than you concede, and while they may not be able to name its OS, they also do care about its UI. It's not just the apps. And they seem to choose in large numbers anything but WinMo. Also, it's not just Nokia is beating them outside of the US ( a pretty large market), but they are losing in the US, and that's with Apple only selling through one carrier, and android only available on what is basically a beta software device (I have one).

I couldn't agree with you more that people care about their phone quite a bit. The differentiation between phones involves multiple aspects. Style, features, size, compatibility with work infrastructure, etc. The advantage that WinMo has - along with linux - is that it is not tied to a particular handset or manufacturer. Any manufacturer could build a device and then use WinMo as its OS - or linux for that matter. Apple, RIM, and Nokia all have their OS's tied to their own hardware - for better or for worse.

you probably saw Apple's Q4 earnings report today, they sold almost 4.4 million iphones in the qtr. they may have cut production, but they still sold alot.

yes, I agree MS is a major player in smartphones, but not the dominant one, and I don't think they ever will be dominant, unless they start making phones (I could see Android becoming dominat, because it's free).

And yes, Palm is abandonding PalmOS, but you will notice they are replacing it with their WebOS, which is based on linux, which is what android is based on.

And yes, any mfr could build a phone and use WinMo, but then they would have to pay licensing fees to MS. This scheme lets hardware vendors get into the market without the huge investment in sw that RIM, Apple, Nokia, and google have made. but it won't make any of them market leaders.

But we're both in agreement that MS should not buy Palm.