Analysis says operators should not develop operating systems

Hu Leming, deputy dean of China Telecom Guangzhou Research Institute since 2007, the mobile phone industry has undergone profound changes. The first strong iphone was a huge success, followed by the advent and rapid development of the Android phone operating system. In the process, with the mobile phone intelligent and mobile Internet development, smartphones are becoming mainstream. As the mobile phone industry has been rocked, rethinking of the value chain and business model of mobile services has been triggered, as the new situation is starting to make operators restless. Therefore, the corresponding countermeasures are also emerging: 2009, China Mobile High-profile announced the development of "independent and innovative mobile phone operating system OMS" and "OPhone", Unicom also developed "Uni-plus operating system" and "Uphone" rumors, And China Telecom has repeatedly been asked whether there is the same strategy.　　Indeed, whether to develop own mobile phone operating system is a very important strategic decision-making problem that operators are facing.　　The idea that operators develop their own mobile operating systems the operator has the user, therefore has the huge influence and the superiority, may through develops own handset operating system to solve the terminal and the business bundle the question, may further realize to the industrial chain control, thus changes the profit pattern, avoids becomes the mobile internet "the pipeline".　　However, this is just a naïve idea of the lack of a deep understanding of markets, technology and industry. A mobile operating system to achieve success, in addition to the technical success, more crucial is whether the formation of a good industrial ecosystem-that is, the operating system can be accepted and recognized by the market, the industry chain to the support, and the rich application software is constantly emerging.　　And the ecosystem must be global, not just China. In addition, global markets will eventually be able to accommodate around 5 mobile operating systems (the world's top five mobile operating systems are ranked Symbian Symbian, Android Android, Apple iOS, BlackBerry BlackBerry OS and Microsoft Windows Mobile and the latest WP7), so for the successor to join the competition of the new operating system, the eventual success depends on whether it has achieved breakthroughs and beyond, squeeze out the original operating system, to replace the way into the top five, otherwise it will not be possible to achieve survival and development.　　At this point, not only the development of mobile phone operating system side needs to judge and weigh, and the entire mobile phone industry chain will be evaluated and judged. So, do operators have an advantage in developing their own mobile phone operating systems? Can you achieve these goals?　　This needs to be based on the operator's value chain and the nature of industrial chain Division of labor, its necessity and feasibility analysis. 1 user to the operating system choice, not by operator control that operators have users, the corresponding can be in the mobile phone operating system has control and advantage, this view in the industryis very common, but also operators decided to develop their own mobile phone operating system premise. In fact, this is entirely a specious misconception.　　Indeed, an operator can have as many as hundreds of millions of users, but the operator has no control or influence over what operating system the hundreds of millions of users choose. The user's choice of operating system is actually the choice of mobile phone. Because the design of the mobile phone is closely related to the operating system: what kind of operating system is used for a mobile phone, which is determined at the time of design of the handset and even the design of its main chipset. The operating system also determines the most important feature of the smartphone, becoming the primary factor in the user's choice of mobile phone. The user chooses a handset, also chooses the handset the operating system, for example chooses the iphone to choose the iOS operating system. And the user exactly how to choose, entirely by the user's own needs and preferences, basically with the operator has nothing to do with the price problem is another matter. This choice is entirely a "different strokes of the turnip greens" problem, no right or wrong, only like it or not.　　Therefore, in the mobile phone and even the choice of operating system, and then large operators can only do their best to meet the needs of various users, and can not replace their users to choose, if you only have "radish" and no "green vegetables", then like "green vegetables" users may be transferred to your competitors, and this is against your interests.　　Therefore, the operator's role, role and interests, although the user, but the user in the mobile phone operating system is not actually the choice of influence and control, want to be the operator-led development of an operating system, or as a guarantee of confidence, nature is completely not established. 2 The competitive nature of the operating system, which is incompatible with the neutrality of the operator, is naturally competitive.　　However, operators in the face of mobile phones and operating systems, but should be neutral, operators to develop their own mobile phone operating systems and operators of industrial chain division of responsibility is inconsistent. In the mobile phone industry chain and value chain, the vast number of manufacturers responsible for mobile phone technology and product development and innovation, and operators responsible for the application and business innovation and implementation, and in turn to promote the development of new mobile phone new products.　　According to this position and division of labor, the relationship between operators and handset manufacturers is similar to that of referees and athletes.　　Therefore, in the mobile phone operating system is not exclusive, for operators is a necessity, which of course also contains a neutral, this neutrality is also the basis of the operator and industrial chain cooperation. However, for the developers and suppliers of operating systems, exclusive competition is a necessity. The aim of competition is naturally to defeat other operating systems in the market, in technology and in industrial development. One sign of success is the retreat of another, which is the essence of competition. If the operator develops a mobile operating system of its own, it declares itself as a provider of the operating system and joins the competition.　　This is contrary to exclusivity and neutrality. Operators are the application side,Handset manufacturers are product suppliers. If operators have their own operating systems, they will inevitably compete with other operating systems.　　This is like in a game at the same time play the role of referee and athlete, its unfairness and irrationality is self-evident, ultimately to the operator is also harmful. On the other hand, since the operator's own operating system and other operating systems in the market competition, forming an adversary relationship, then, the operator's application and business is to be implemented only on their own operating system, or also in the competitor's system to achieve the same? If the former, then do not want to put other users in disregard? What are the benefits to operators? If it is the latter, then what does it mean to develop a competitive operating system?　　How can the relationship between referees and athletes be able to promote the operation and application of operators on all operating systems impartially and effectively? In fact, the interests of operators are not here at all. The aim of the operators is to sell the business and pursue a variety of businesses that are implemented on all handsets, rather than allowing them to be implemented on one of the handsets and excluding other handsets. It is the operator's interest to have all users like the iphone, BlackBerry, Android and so on.　　At this point, operators want to Blossom instead of a solo show. Therefore, if operators also become operating system providers, it is inevitable to enter the exclusive competition, which is not exclusive with the operator contradictory, not only confuse the industrial chain division of labor, but also with the interests of operators do not match. At the same time, can not get the industry chain of trust and cooperation.　　Operators to the mobile phone operating system, should not be their own to develop monopoly operating system, but actively promote the opening of the operating system, strengthen their own open operating system and the influence of the voice to ensure that its standardization development in favor of their own direction.　　3 is not exclusive, make its own system is not exclusive, but also affect the operator's own operating system a key factor in the success. On the other hand, even if the operator's development of "x-phone" really achieved the same success as the iphone, the operator will not be able to only accept this "x-os", and other operating systems excluded.　　Apple can be exclusive, but operators can not, this is the operator in the operating system is not exclusive. In fact, no matter how successful the iphone is, how attractive it is, there are plenty of users who prefer smartphones with other operating systems, such as Android phones and BlackBerry handsets. As of the end of 2010, the iphone's share of the global smartphone market was only 15.4%, with only the 3rd place after Symbian Mobile and Android handsets. As of the first quarter of 2010, At&t, the US operator, had about 15 million iphone users, compared to 87 million of At&t's total users! Obviously, for all the mainstream operating systems,Operators are not to be excluded, or exclusion is not good for operators.　　If the operator has developed an operating system of its own, even if it has achieved great success, this does not mean that operators can be excluded from the other operating systems-as long as they have the market, excluding them is not in line with the operator's interests.　　It is clear that, in this not exclusive inevitability, operators to develop their own "X-os" or "X-phone", are only in the shelves of a number of products to add one more, for the operator as a shelf operator, is no special significance. As for the development of their own operating system as a solution to the implementation of business applications, but also difficult to establish. Does the operator's business and solve problems on its own "X-os" or "X-phone" do not want to be implemented and resolved on other operating systems and other smartphones? Obviously not. Although the development of their own "X-OS" can be implemented on this operating system operator's business, but does not solve these services on other operating systems implementation problems, so is not the most effective way to solve the problem. At the same time, not exclusive also means that operators in their "X-operating system" to solve problems, and ultimately must be the same on other operating systems to be resolved. So what is the real difference between the other operating systems and their own "X-os" After all is resolved (in terms of the assurance of the operator's business)?　　So what is the point of developing your own "x-os"? Therefore, operators want to ensure that their applications and business can be implemented on all smartphones, the reasonable and effective way is certainly not to design and develop an "x-os" or "X-phone", but should be through the development of requirements and norms to guide, through strategic customization to promote, Finally get the industry chain consistent support, so that their applications and business on all mobile phones can be achieved.　　Therefore, it is not very effective to develop "X-os" or "X-phone" for the operators to solve the demand of the business realization of the smartphone.　　To sum up, operators on the mobile phone operating system can not exclusive monopoly, and only do one of them is meaningless-there is no market significance, and does not solve the problem of business bundling, so operators in the mobile phone operating system is completely unnecessary and meaningless.　　4 operators alone, encounter industrial difficulties operating system is not a simple product, operating system is a platform, a value chain, an industrial chain, an industrial ecosystem. An operating system, in addition to the first in the market to achieve success, for the majority of users to accept, as a basic platform can be long-term development, the most critical factor is that the industry must be widely accepted, the industrial chain to embrace and support. It must be widely adopted by the manufacturer, and be used as the target of design by the chip provider, and get the universal business and applicationDevelopers (such as browsers, search, SNS and other applications) recognition and support, the application software industry has been widely supported by a large number of developers to develop a variety of applications, derived a large number of derivative products. In other words, around a successful operating system will form a market, an industrial chain, a complete industrial ecosystem. Only in this way, the operating system can be developed and become mainstream.　　Some of today's mobile phone operating systems, some have been basically achieved, and some are still struggling. In addition, the mainstream operating systems, including closed systems such as the iphone and BlackBerry, have an important feature that is global and public. In other words, the user of this operating system is all over the world, there is no region limit, and its application is not controlled and restricted by any neutral party.　　Only with global and public nature, an operating system can have the minimum growth of the foundation, with the necessary influence, appeal, in order to enable the industry around it to establish an industrial chain, this operating system may be the success of the large-scale industrial development. Counter-view operator's role and function, in the handset value chain, the operator may reflect the market demand, but cannot control the market demand, in the handset related technology and the product development, the operator also is not the innovation leader. So in the industrial chain of mobile operating systems, operators are not leaders or major players.　　Moreover, no single operator in the world can have a global market, and none of the operators have the least neutrality. Therefore, the operating system industry chain, it is impossible to be led by operators, and by an operator to control more impossible. Conversely, if an operator controls the industrial ecosystem it is impossible to establish, there is no need to discuss its success or failure. Android phones are spread around the world across a wide range of operators, and even the temporary exclusive iphone has a global user profile. Which carrier's products have the potential to achieve global applications?