“It’s a small world after all”, so goes the song in Disney World. And that song is completely ridiculous when you think about how small the world was when that song was written and how microscopic it is today. The Internet has connected us all in ways that were ridiculous to comprehend in 1966. Put in context – we hadn’t landed on the moon yet. But there is one area where the world is not so small. That is in the world of mobile device distribution. In those terms, the world is not nearly small enough.
Already this year, we have seen two major OEMs have geological restrictions for pretty significant features that they wouldn’t be shipping with phones. Sony’s new phones will ship to the United States without fingerprint sensors due to some mysterious handshake that happened somewhere with someone. And LG’s new flagship will ship to various parts of the world with wireless charging or the fancy Quad DAC or neither. So what gives? Why must different parts of the world deal with different hardware?
Not clear
The question is not all that easy to answer because we don’t work at LG or Sony or any other OEM that ships differently to various parts of the world *cough* *cough* Samsung 6GB RAM *cough*. Sony’s seems to be the most obvious and the most mysterious at the same time. When asked about the fingerprint sensor in the US, a Sony executive commented:
“That was very much about us consciously deciding that we want to continue our business here, and [that’s] one of the conditions for us to be able to do business”
Oh, well that makes perfect…wait, what?! In order for Sony to ship unlocked phones into the United States, it had to agree to ship without fingerprint sensors? There is probably a world in business where this makes sense, but I clearly don’t live in it. Further digging seems to indicate that this is a carrier restriction in some deal that was made that resulted in the loss of a basically useable phone in the US – in this writer’s opinion anyway.
Decisions, decisions
Then there are other conditions in which a certain region might get device features that other regions won’t. This seems less clear cut as the Sony situation – there don’t seem to be any contractual obligations to put 6GB of RAM in the Chinese variant of a SKU, or exclude wireless charging in Europe. So then why? That’s the part that is the most irksome if you’re a consumer that can’t travel willy nilly to whatever part of the world happens to sell your favorite configuration.
Android itself already has a fragmentation problem. Adding hardware fragmentation is just muddying the works that much more. It’s bad enough that single OEMs will have different features on their devices. Adding to that a single OEM producing multiple SKUs of the same device is ridiculous. Some might argue that different areas of the world have different demands. Maybe Europe isn’t all that interested in great sound or wireless charging. Why waste the money to send features that are not in demand?
Parts, parts, and parts
There are two reasons. First and foremost, these parts can’t possibly be expensive enough to justify leaving them out. In an era where we’re selling $250 worth of parts for $750, that just doesn’t hold water. I know, I know, bottom line, investors, profit margins. Blah, blah, blah. This is probably why I’m not a CEO, but you could consider it a marketing expense because of what I’m about to say next.
Creating a single unified brand around the world would be a wonderful thing for all customers. We wouldn’t have to worry about our zip code to know whether or not we were going to get whatever specs. I’m not saying this would drive Samsung levels of popularity, but to a brand – Android – that is already plagued with issues of fragmentation, being a unifying force as a single brand could help to win hearts and minds. Even an end to things like Snapdragon vs. Exynos would be a win in that category. I still remember when one of the Galaxy S phones came out (I don’t recall which one), and I overheard a customer asking the salesman how they could get the octa-core processor, only to learn that it wouldn’t be available here. Stifling this kind of fragmentation could go a long way in building brand and customer confidence.
The dreaded handshake
I get the circumstances that Sony finds itself in. I don’t get why it came to this, but I understand there was some kind of agreement made with someone that is now preventing Sony from moving forward. But honestly, OEMs need to keep the design of their phones to themselves, and not let outside influences change or alter anything on the inside. I’m looking at you Verizon. If a carrier wants to insist on branding – like a big stupid red check mark in the middle of the freaking phone, then fine. But leave the internals alone – take them off the negotiating table.
Maybe once the hardware fragmentation subsides, we can get to addressing the software fragmentation. Then Android can really start to move forward as a platform and customers can start to have confidence in their phone choices again. Otherwise, Android will remain a mess, and customers will continue not knowing who gets what and when, because when that’s the case, nobody wins.
No comments:
Post a Comment