Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 28th Jul 2014 14:39 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless

The technology press and bloggers really seem to have no idea what to make of Tizen. First, it was a huge, credible threat to Android (*), but now that even people who really, really, really want to see Android in trouble can no longer maintain that Tizen is a serious threat, it's now apparently magically a sign of Samsung's weakness. Or, if you believe Reuters, it's a sign of... Both? Or something?

Samsung Electronics Co. suffered another blow to its efforts to cut the dependency of its smartphone business on Google Inc.'s Android operating system, postponing the launch of a new model that runs on its own Tizen software.

The news is the latest disappointment for the Korean giant which is trying to defend its position as the world's largest maker of smartphones from the twin challenges of Apple Inc. AAPL and, at the other end of the market range, Chinese companies such as Huawei, ZTE and Xiaomi.

Of course, those of us who have even a minute understanding of what it takes to create a successful and viable operating system and platform know full well just how unrealistic it is to see Tizen as anything but a fringe experiment that will, in all likelihood, never bear any fruit. You can ask BlackBerry and Microsoft just how hard it is to create, introduce, maintain, and grow a mobile platform in the current Android-iOS duopoly.

I would love for Tizen to be a success, but the cold and harsh truth of this world is that all evidence - both historical and current - points towards it not making any headway whatsoever in smartphones and tablets. Tizen may very well play a role in Samsung's more embedded efforts - like TVs - but don't expect it on any serious phone any time soon, let alone it being a threat to iOS, Android, Windows Phone or even BB10.

However, I want Tizen to be a success not because of some hand-wringing desire to see iOS or Android or Google or Samsung stumble and fall. No, I want it to be a success because the market - and thus consumers - always benefit from choice. The more platforms compete for that precious space in your pockets, the better all of them will become. Without Android, iOS would still be stuck at the level of version 2. Without Windows Phone, Android would still look like a cartoon. Potential other platforms would push the big three to even greater heights.

I've made my desire to buy a Tizen device very clear. Not because I believe it will change the world or because I consider it an "Android killer", but because I believe diversity in the marketplace benefits us all - whether we're an iOS, Android, or BeOS user.

Order by: Score:
TV
by vivainio on Mon 28th Jul 2014 15:13 UTC
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26

While smartphone and tablet game has been pretty much called already, Tizen could indeed be interesting on TV. Delivery of apps as HTML5 makes good sense if you want to lock down the playground your apps get, and plan 10 year lifecycle for the device itself (without updating too many things as you go).

As a competition for Tizen, Panasonic is going with Firefox OS for their upcoming tv's: https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/01/06/mozilla-and-partners-to-bri...

Reply Score: 3

RE: TV
by tkeith on Mon 28th Jul 2014 16:55 UTC in reply to "TV"
tkeith Member since:
2010-09-01

Don't forget the other html based OS, WebOS is going on LG TVs.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: TV
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 29th Jul 2014 15:14 UTC in reply to "RE: TV"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

I purchased one recently, I've been using it for about a week or so. Still putting it through the paces. I might try writing a review for OSNews once I feel I've mastered it.

So far so good. As a previously fierce opponent of smart tv, I haven't regretted the purchase yet.

Reply Score: 2

Reminds me of something I saw
by Vanders on Mon 28th Jul 2014 15:19 UTC
Vanders
Member since:
2005-07-06

Every time I see a Tizen story now it reminds me of http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-28483217

Reply Score: 5

mistersoft
Member since:
2011-01-05

Analagous to how people seem to really WANT more say, perhaps more of a direct-democracy if you will in the political arena. But then stick with two, three at the outside not-so-different offerings in reality

Thus I think people have a similar tribal -or even Herd- mentality to the smartphone/tech arena too. But when it comes down to it - I really don't think people (in the main!) and excluding gaming - need or want access to any apps in mobile that require much heavy lifting.

Why people don't refine and expand the webapp capabilities and experience and keep almost universal compatibility I really don't know..

Current performance is 'enough' to get away with this.

And I'd so much rather (Tizen or anything else) that is as near to open source, and code transparency as possible.. [don't mention baseband please]

And that may require separation - perhaps not to the project Ara extent - but a little module about this size:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bluetooth3-0-compatible-IEEE802-11n-corresp...
that contain bluetooth, wifi and 4g (and that "part" - a device in it's own right should have all the FCC and similar requisite radio network certifications) ...which would plug into a computer-and-screen module running all the rest of the higher level functions and OS. Have them connect via a simple universal USB driver model that is common across mobile OS's and let the computer side of things be open and flourish - as the PC has done. That's what we should want and should demand as consumers - in my stupid opinion.

Edited 2014-07-28 15:54 UTC

Reply Score: 2

If choise is the question
by protomank on Mon 28th Jul 2014 16:26 UTC
protomank
Member since:
2006-08-03

If choise is the question, I would like more to see WebOS. While I worked on a contracted company for HP, I had the chance to test it on an emulator and device and learn a bit how it worked. It is the true "linux on mobile" with a good idea for the platform (games on SDL/OpenGL as Steam Linux does, Web/HTML for apps with a well tought framework). It was not without its share of problems, but it was a neat concept, that Tizen is not.

Reply Score: 5

Meego/Jolla
by jgfenix on Mon 28th Jul 2014 16:43 UTC
jgfenix
Member since:
2006-05-25

I would rather see Meego/Jolla/cousin or even Openmoko, something that offers a native Linux experience and not that HTML crap.

Reply Score: 9

Teamwork
by Jbso on Mon 28th Jul 2014 20:32 UTC
Jbso
Member since:
2013-01-05

Despite the media focus on Samsung, let's not forget that this was an open source project with many sponsors. Granted, it seems clear that Samsung and Intel were bear the vast majority of the labor, but it's not exactly a Samsung-owned OS.

Presumably the loss of interest from Samsung's partners is an important factor - Samsung never wanted to go it alone, otherwise they'd not have created Tizen in the first place.

Samsung may not be entirely satisfied with Google's control over Android, but full control of the alternative wasn't their goal, so I don't think this is as big a blow to their strategy as suggested - they may have negotiated more influence over Android's future which would probably satisfy them.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Teamwork
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 29th Jul 2014 15:17 UTC in reply to "Teamwork"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Well, from all reports I've read, Samsung hasn't been great to work with. Tizen was supposed to be a continuation of Meego. Basically, Samsung had commit privileges and overwrote huge swaths of Meego with Bada without communicating what they were doing or why to Intel devs. The enthusiasm for the project from non samsung devs left very quickly after that.

Reply Score: 3

End of history
by spiderman on Tue 29th Jul 2014 07:14 UTC
spiderman
Member since:
2008-10-23

If you guys think we are at the end of history with smartphone OS, I can not even start to express how wrong you are. You don't even realize how your current smartphones suck. Every point in time feel like the end of history until you see the next point. Just a few years ago the iPhone was unstopable and Apple was going to put all other manufacturers out of the market and it was the end of history. Today I hear a lot of silly stuff like "There is no room for another OS", or "The market has settled for a duopoly iOS/Android". I look at my smartphone and man I hope my grand children will not have to deal with such a crap.

Edited 2014-07-29 07:15 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: End of history
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 29th Jul 2014 15:19 UTC in reply to "End of history"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

The right thing to say, is "There is no room for another mobile os thats just as good as IOS/Android". It has to be much better in the same way that the iphone was much better ( for most non tech geeks ) than everything else upon its release.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: End of history
by spiderman on Tue 29th Jul 2014 16:32 UTC in reply to "RE: End of history"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

It doesn't have to be way better. It has to be better at something, that is all. The iPhone was better at web browsing, worse at everything else. And there is room for plenty of other OSes. Steve jobs said capturing 1% of the market would have been very profitable. If a new OS is better for old people, there is room for it ; if a new OS is better at privacy, there is room for it ; if the new OS feels better on curved screens, there is room for it and if the new OS does not require a damn touch screen, there is plenty of room for it.
Now Tizen is not better at anything but Samsung has the market power to sell it and it will sell.
I think people have that view about smartphone because of the Nokia debacle, but Samsung is not Nokia. Nokia fell after years and years or retarded effort to sink the ship. The managers did everything in their power to make sure nothing would work and yet despite all their efforts they still sold a lot of phones with alternative OS. They just feared that their OS would succeed so they killed them all as soon as they started gaining momemtum.

Edited 2014-07-29 16:39 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: End of history
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 29th Jul 2014 19:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: End of history"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

It doesn't have to be way better. It has to be better at something, that is all.

Absolutely, true.

The iPhone was better at web browsing, worse at everything else.


No, it was easier to use too. Had visual voice mail, maps with gps, etc.


If a new OS is better for old people, there is room for it ;


No, not big enough of a market.

if a new OS is better at privacy, there is room for it ;


No, not big enough of a market. Too difficult to verify. Existing platforms already do this & have lack luster adoption.


if the new OS feels better on curved screens, there is room for it


No. No one really cares. Its not an obvious benefit.


and if the new OS does not require a damn touch screen, there is plenty of room for it.


Not big enough of a market.


Now Tizen is not better at anything but Samsung has the market power to sell it and it will sell.


No, Samsung does not. See Bada.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: End of history
by spiderman on Wed 30th Jul 2014 06:55 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: End of history"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

Samsung sold 30 million devices with Bada.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by zima
by zima on Sat 2nd Aug 2014 21:29 UTC
zima
Member since:
2005-07-06

Chinese companies such as Huawei, ZTE and Xiaomi.

And Lenovo/Motorola.

Reply Score: 2