Nokia

[sgd]

The next market segment still open for grab and can be market changer is the tablet that works like ipaq but able to do productive work.
If i am going to put my free money, it will be HP, Microsoft, Lenova, Intel, Samsung ... that have such product exposure.

how does anybody really work on a tablet? I think tablet useful for e-reading, short note taking and entertainment but for real work people still fall back to using a notebook, I mean how do you type on a tablet with your head looking down all the time.

The jury is still out what the next craze will be I'm guessing a docakble tablet like the Envy x2 from HP or they could build a generic docking station that is compatiable to all tablets that will really take it to the next level but whatever I'm just glad this tablet craze is fuelling the demand for indium

[corydorus]

This is still hindsight. Nokia can also choose to go Android+windows mobile model 2-3 years ago and they will probably be doing ok now.
There's nothing wrong with their hardware but windows mobile is simply a hype till date.

I do agree about the hindsight part, though my counter-argument would be that if you were investing in technology companies, then one should demand an even greater margin of safety as new technology moves so fast as to render old ones completely obsolete. History has shown this - an example would be the CD/DVD replacing casette tapes.

The next market segment still open for grab and can be market changer is the tablet that works like ipaq but able to do productive work.
If i am going to put my free money, it will be HP, Microsoft, Lenova, Intel, Samsung ... that have such product exposure.

how does anybody really work on a tablet? I think tablet useful for e-reading, short note taking and entertainment but for real work people still fall back to using a notebook, I mean how do you type on a tablet with your head looking down all the time.

The jury is still out what the next craze will be I'm guessing a docakble tablet like the Envy x2 from HP or they could build a generic docking station that is compatiable to all tablets that will really take it to the next level but whatever I'm just glad this tablet craze is fuelling the demand for indium

Docking Station is the enabler. Similar to MS Surface. Not sure about compatibility though. Yes Jury is still out.

[KopiKat]

Just for fun, can take a look at the history of Mobile Phones in wiki.

To a non-tech person, a mobile phone may be just the same product that'd evolved over time from 1G to 2G to 3G and now 4G. As simple as 1-2-3-4? From the point of technology, definitely not! Each generation changes involves complex changes and that may explain why in each generation, the original leader gets replaced and never seems to be able to return...

AFAIK and can remember, the 1st Mobile phone I saw was dominated by MOTOROLA. Remember the clunky HP? Almost the size of a Sports Water Bottle and rather heavy? The image that lingers in my mind is the HK movies where the Big Brother used it to bash up underlings who'd betrayed him... Yes, it was made to be rugged, prob. cos' the original leader, Motorola was good at making rugged comms equipments.

What happened to Motorola? They got kicked off the leader board by Ericcson. Today, Motorola Mobility is part of Google...

I remembered my first HP was an Ericcson, issued by my company. In comparison to the original Motorola HP, it was real sleek! Tiny and light weight. BUT, they still have that irritating antenna that gets broken off so often....

In a very short time, Nokia appeared with their HP that don't have that irritating antenna. Hey! that became the HP everybody wants. Yes, I finally got issued one by my company. Nokia very soon became No.1.

What happened to Ericcson? They subsequently became part of Sony-Ericcson... They never regained their No.1 position.

Nokia stayed at No.1 for the longest time... till... Smart Phones became the HP that's desired by all. Guess who was able to capitalise on this shift? Apple, a non-telecom co. introduced their iPhone and it became a hit. Who'd have ever believed that could have happened? Not me! The PC and Telecom market were 2 different segments and well.. everyone thought it's 2 different expertise... But, it converged...

IMO, Apple's strength is developing products that non-techies find easy to use eg. for those who uses computers, how often do you have to reboot a Mac vs a Wintel one? The smart phone can be intimidating to a non-techie. But, iPhone and Android phones has simple to use UI and that's why they'd become so popular. Contrast that to a WinPhone when it was first launched....

So, now we have iPhone, Androids dominating the market. Will it stay like that forever? Looking at the history, very unlikely... With 4G slowly coming online, perhaps we'll see a new leader emerging?

What will happen to Nokia? They dominated the No.1 for the longest time. Will they recover? Looking at history alone, I think very unlikely... Their fortunes are now tied to Windows (they can still break away and have multiple platforms, like Android), will they succeed? Will they even survive? Based on history alone, they may end up like the last 2 previous leaders.. ie. merge or taken over by...? Microsoft?

PS. I know, the past may not be an indication of the outcome of the future... But, if you also look at the PC industry, the previous No.1s like IBM, Compaq, HP,... I don't remember anyone ever coming back to regain their No.1... Even in Consumers Products, the US/European brands got replaced by Japanese, Koreans... Cameras also... The Tech Industry is a ruthless one..

[swakoo]

Just for fun, .....
.
.
... The Tech Industry is a ruthless one..

Your solid observations are reflected in this chart (just for fun)

[Image: z?s=NOK&t=my&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=AAPL,HPQ,MSF...&region=US]

[CityFarmer]

Technology product survivability does not depend on existing market share and popularity, but on other factors.

I am still in mid of learning curve on two (2) of the factors which are related.
- stickiness
- tipping point

A product will secure its stickiness, when its popularity reaches a tipping point. The ability to spot the tipping point is more than a art than a science. These two factors exist in all products, but due to rapidly changes in technology product, it become much more prominent factors.

The leadership changes of hand-phone market is rarely due to technology changes, rather changes in user experience. In other words, it is the total solution that obsolete previous leader, rather than telecom technology alone.

None of the previous leader except Nokia reaches a tipping point IMO, thus Nokia manage to survive longer. Nokia is well-known for its ease-of-use in non-graphical UI, but now it seem losing out to ease-of-use in graphical UI

[sgd]

am thinking for fun

the next global leader for phone will come from asia maybe samsung from Skorea. Samsung has been on the war path for years and have gobbled up many technology companies whatever they could not make or invent they just went out and bought it and their products are really making a presence. But the problem as everybody knows is that electronic gadgets are built using rare earth elements and china has virtual monopoly sooner or later they gonna want to bump up their own products and Samsung will meet the fate like Nokia and Ericsson.

I'm putting my eggs on huawei becoming the next global leader after Samsung.

[CityFarmer]

am thinking for fun

the next global leader for phone will come from asia maybe samsung from Skorea. Samsung has been on the war path for years and have gobbled up many technology companies whatever they could not make or invent they just went out and bought it and their products are really making a presence. But the problem as everybody knows is that electronic gadgets are built using rare earth elements and china has virtual monopoly sooner or later they gonna want to bump up their own products and Samsung will meet the fate like Nokia and Ericsson.

I'm putting my eggs on huawei becoming the next global leader after Samsung.

Interesting view, but i have a different view on Huawei

No amount of effort and resource is capable to "bump up" a hand-phone market leader IMO

Huawei is a technology company, and having success in telecom market especially in 4G recently, but i doubt its capable of becoming a leader in hand-phone market which need more than technological capability

[yeokiwi]

If resources are the keys to world dominance, we are already the slaves to the Middle East.

Rare earth elements are not rare anyway. Many countries, especially developed countries, have rare earth elements but since the extraction process is particularly environmental damaging, most will not embark on it unless they are being forced to.

Our northern neighbours are getting into this business.
So are the americans..
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jackperkowsk...ntroversy/

[KopiKat]

Technology product survivability does not depend on existing market share and popularity, but on other factors.

I am still in mid of learning curve on two (2) of the factors which are related.
- stickiness factor
- tipping point

A product will secure its stickiness, when its popularity reaches a tipping point. The ability to spot the tipping point is more than a art than a science. These two factors exist in all products, but due to rapidly changes in technology product, it become much more prominent factors.

The leadership changes of hand-phone market is rarely due to technology changes, rather changes in user experience. In other words, it is the total solution that obsolete previous leader, rather than telecom technology alone.

None of the previous leader beside Nokia reaches a tipping point IMO, thus Nokia manage to survive longer. Nokia is well-known for its ease of use for non-graphical UI, but now it seem losing out with ease of use in graphical UI

From wiki link posted earlier,

Digital cellular networks - 2G
Coinciding with the introduction of 2G systems was a trend away from the larger "brick" phones toward tiny 100–200g hand-held devices. This change was possible not only through technological improvements such as more advanced batteries and more energy-efficient electronics, but also because of the higher density of cell sites to accommodate increasing usage. The latter meant that the average distance transmission from phone to the base station shortened, leading to increased battery life whilst on the move.

The second generation introduced a new variant of communication called SMS or text messaging. It was initially available only on GSM networks but spread eventually on all digital networks.

I believe this technological change must have allowed Ericcson to dislodged Motorola from pole position. Nokia subsequently dislodged Ericcson by coming out with a 'better' product by embedding the antenna as a loop, without the need for one that's sticking out. This may have become possible due to the higher density of cell station?

Next, 3G, from simple data like sms to higher volume data...

Mobile broadband data - 3G
As the use of 2G phones became more widespread and people began to utilize mobile phones in their daily lives, it became clear that demand for data services (such as access to the internet) was growing. Furthermore, experience from fixed broadband services showed there would also be an ever increasing demand for greater data speeds. The 2G technology was nowhere near up to the job, so the industry began to work on the next generation of technology known as 3G. The main technological difference that distinguishes 3G technology from 2G technology is the use of packet switching rather than circuit switching for data transmission. In addition, the standardization process focused on requirements more than technology (2 Mbit/s maximum data rate indoors, 384 kbit/s outdoors, for example).

Now, ask yourself, why do you need graphical UIs? With Nokia during 2G, we were only using the HP for Voice and simple data like sms. But with 3G, the HP becomes a smart phone. We're now using it also for Internet access, MP3 player, Camera, Video Player,... A simple UI is no longer enough as there'll be too many steps (key presses) required. On hindsight, Nokia was slow to realise that their Symbian OS was unable to scale up to the task?

My take is that Technological changes is the key that allows other players to dislodge the leader from their pole position. Look at any tech product, it's always history repeating itself. For eg. CRT TV -> Flat Screen TV -> Plasma TV -> LCD TV -> LED TV -> Smart TV / 3D ; Camera from Film -> Digital. Audio from Cassette Tape/Records -> CD -> DVD. The leaders seldom stay the same...

IMO, only those leaders that are constantly on the prowl and is alert enough to gobble up potential threats from new technologies are able to stay in their dominant pole position. Look at how Intel, Google,... acquires new biz before they grow huge enough to become a threat..

[sgd]

If resources are the keys to world dominance, we are already the slaves to the Middle East.

Rare earth elements are not rare anyway. Many countries, especially developed countries, have rare earth elements but since the extraction process is particularly environmental damaging, most will not embark on it unless they are being forced to.

Our northern neighbours are getting into this business.
So are the americans..
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jackperkowsk...ntroversy/

We are all slaves to middle east oil, no oil the lights will go out. Singapore oil refining capacity is around 1.3 million barrels per day one of the top 3 in the world if there is no oil to refine they will declare a recession here.

Rare earth are not rare per se however the means of extraction them are currently only china and india can really deliver because there are no environment laws and labor is cheap. The malaysians are trying and already stirred up a lot of opposition and protest big challenges ahead I think. The americans can do it if they can get around their environment laws ... nah I doubt