<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Smartphone, and Why it Will Never Be King</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bradkellett.com/p/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bradkellett.com/p/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 12:09:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad Kellett</title>
		<link>http://bradkellett.com/p/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/comment-page-1/#comment-7950</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad Kellett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 03:19:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pantsland.com/2007/05/29/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/#comment-7950</guid>
		<description>@Pat - A smartphone, like Michael says, is defined more by the &#039;open&#039; nature of the platform, so I don&#039;t know if you could call the old monochrome phones smart, but I see your point.

@Michael - I agree that it makes perfect sense to have a focused platform strategy, but as my last paragraph and your comment says, the smartphone platform needs to have a &#039;dumb&#039; mode. The UI will still match market needs, but the platform can progress.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Pat &#8211; A smartphone, like Michael says, is defined more by the &#8216;open&#8217; nature of the platform, so I don&#8217;t know if you could call the old monochrome phones smart, but I see your point.</p>
<p>@Michael &#8211; I agree that it makes perfect sense to have a focused platform strategy, but as my last paragraph and your comment says, the smartphone platform needs to have a &#8216;dumb&#8217; mode. The UI will still match market needs, but the platform can progress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://bradkellett.com/p/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/comment-page-1/#comment-7949</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 13:05:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pantsland.com/2007/05/29/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/#comment-7949</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think that most current phones are smartphones, by any stretch.  I do believe that most/all future phones will eventually be smartphones.  The trick is just that many (most?) of them will run simplistic shells that dumb them down.  What makes a smartphone is the OS and the openness of the platform.

Consider the upcoming BlackBerry application for Windows Mobile.  It turns a WM5/6 device into a BlackBerry with the full BlackBerry UI.  Now dumb that down a bit, and you could easily have the SE or Nokia S40 UI running on top of WM6 or S60 or something.

In the end, it will be cheaper for manufacturers and developers alike to support fewer platforms.  Dropping support for the proprietary ones will make huge sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think that most current phones are smartphones, by any stretch.  I do believe that most/all future phones will eventually be smartphones.  The trick is just that many (most?) of them will run simplistic shells that dumb them down.  What makes a smartphone is the OS and the openness of the platform.</p>
<p>Consider the upcoming BlackBerry application for Windows Mobile.  It turns a WM5/6 device into a BlackBerry with the full BlackBerry UI.  Now dumb that down a bit, and you could easily have the SE or Nokia S40 UI running on top of WM6 or S60 or something.</p>
<p>In the end, it will be cheaper for manufacturers and developers alike to support fewer platforms.  Dropping support for the proprietary ones will make huge sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat</title>
		<link>http://bradkellett.com/p/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/comment-page-1/#comment-7948</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 12:26:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pantsland.com/2007/05/29/the-smartphone-and-why-it-will-never-be-king/#comment-7948</guid>
		<description>I can see how people can imagine the loss of the &#039;dumbphone&#039; - I mean, you could even say that we already had the smartphone even back when we had monochrome screens. I do think you&#039;ve hit the nail on the head with saying that smartphones will take over as long as it has a &#039;dumb&#039; mode - I think that already exists, since almost every phone in the market now comes with a cd and pc sync cable, but not using these won&#039;t take away from the basic, &#039;dumb&#039; functions of the handset. I think that the smartphone has already taken over, its just that most of the phones available now are in denial :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can see how people can imagine the loss of the &#8216;dumbphone&#8217; &#8211; I mean, you could even say that we already had the smartphone even back when we had monochrome screens. I do think you&#8217;ve hit the nail on the head with saying that smartphones will take over as long as it has a &#8216;dumb&#8217; mode &#8211; I think that already exists, since almost every phone in the market now comes with a cd and pc sync cable, but not using these won&#8217;t take away from the basic, &#8216;dumb&#8217; functions of the handset. I think that the smartphone has already taken over, its just that most of the phones available now are in denial <img src='http://bradkellett.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
