How do OEMs stand out in the highly competitive mobile device market?

Since its launch in 2008, the Android operating system has rapidly emerged as the world's most installed mobile operating system and is now the system of choice for many handset OEMs, thanks to its open-source and open concept and its rapid ease-of-use in the world of smartphones . However, for OEMs, how to stand out in the highly competitive mobile device market?

An analysis by Benedict Evans, an analyst with Andreessen Horowitz, a few days ago, argues that OEMs should learn to "loosen" innovation, High level to strive for more opportunities for development. The following is the main content of the article.

After years of rapid growth, Android's OEM industry has become more and more like the traditional PC manufacturing industry, beginning with "loosening" of innovation activities in the parts, equipment, operating systems and application software and services. Parts and components have been Are commoditized, and OEMs find it hard to differentiate themselves in the software, so their costs to Android manufacturing get lower and lower, a situation that is very similar to PC manufacturing.

Interestingly, Android was born in the hope that OEMs can avoid this situation, its fully open source system allows OEM manufacturers to customize, so that their products on the same platform to make a distinction, but very Obviously backfired, I think there are several reasons.

"To catch the enemy" Google

First, the concept of "differentiating OEMs on the same platform" is paradoxical in itself. Such as Microsoft has never allowed OEM manufacturers to change their Windows operating system, after all, if OEM manufacturers make drastic changes to Android, then it can not be called on the same platform, and look at the Amazon Kindle Fire tablet The fate of this know, this equipped with a deep custom version of Android devices are blocked by Google almost all Android-related applications, tools and API interface. It's not clear what the consequences of this idea were 4 or 5 years ago. No one knows how much value a smartphone system can have for metadata services and cloud services, but its value now stands out. Clearly, For most smartphone OEMs, if you do not use Android, you probably only have feature phones, unless you are a wealthy company like Amazon or Microsoft with enough money and resources to develop your own system platform.

So, as an Android OEM, objectively speaking, like those Windows OEMs, it is impossible to make fundamental changes, and you can do just add some additional value above the system level, but in fact it is not too Great meaning, because:

Most OEMs are not good at software and services, so it's hard to build an operating platform centered on their own products or services.

② Any software or service attached to OEMs, even if they are well done, also competes directly with the massive software services available in the app store and the Internet, so even if they are good at software and are great at the same time Products, but it is only one of many applications, it is actually very difficult to stand out. The most important feature of open platforms and the Internet is "allowing unlimited innovation," so if OEMs get involved in software and services, it means competing directly with countless developers on the massive platform of Android.

③ If OEMs make some really cool products, you'll find that they are equally hard-pressed to have third-party support because the Android ecosystem has a dominant presence at the platform rather than the OEM level, so few Third-party developers support products that look cool but only work on Samsung Android phones.

So from this point of view, Nokia was relying on its own S40 operating system swept the arena has gone, OEM manufacturers have been very difficult at the system level to make their own products and competitors are distinguished, because in addition to Apple IOS and Microsoft's Windows Phone, the smart phone field is already Google Android world.

Nothing as a mobile operator

Let us look at the second important reason, I believe that there have been changes in mobile network operators. Back in 2000, mobile operators of that time had come to realize that there was going to be a drastic change in the mobile and Internet fields. They predicted many things with great accuracy, but they thought they could do it. (It turned out to be a wishful thinking Nothing). Now that happens again, product innovation and differentiation have been relaxed, and we see a host of innovative products and services in the mobile space, but it's hard for OEMs and mobile operators to see them ,the reason is:

① mobile operators are not good at services;

② Even with good service, we also need to face extremely fierce market competition.

③ their service needs to be accepted is the test of the entire Internet, not just their own customers test.

In other words, mobile operators in the field of Internet service innovation is actually very scarce, and this is not their area of ​​expertise, we can not expect them to make a great video sharing site or a cool photo message application. One metaphor I often mention is that having mobile operators get involved in applications and content services is like having a water company go for a new soda business, even if they know the water well and have enough resources and consumers Trust, but they are still hard to do soda business, after all, there is a qualitative difference between tap water and soda water.

"Era of Innovation and Relaxation"

When you loosen an industry, there are different types of innovations at every level, and those that work well in the "era of bundling" may still apply to the "unbundled era." For example, Samsung not only brought us a variety of interesting and impressive parts, but also in the field of mobile devices continue to innovate, introduced many familiar products. Similarly, Dell is gaining ground in the PC space that can not be changed at the operating system level with its highly customized ideas and strong logistics resources.

However, the most obvious changes that have taken place in the PC, smartphones and mobile networks actually take place at the top level, which is where PC OEMs, Android OEMs and mobile operators have always wanted to enter as the industry is in their industry Differentiation of the top priority, innovation in this area are often more opportunities for their products to stand out. However, it is precisely in this area that both handset makers and mobile operators think they can do well, but they are not able to seize the opportunity, leaving other competitors to take advantage of, taking up the "commanding height" of the entire industry.

Specifically, Samsung, Apple and Microsoft each have distinct advantages at two levels: Samsung is good at parts and equipment manufacturing, Apple is good at equipment manufacturing and operating systems, and Microsoft is good at operating systems and applications. The strengths of these three companies, albeit cross-cutting, have brought these benefits to the limit, so they not only created a great product but also gained a very strong market position. Samsung takes advantage of its own parts and components to promote its business in equipment manufacturing. At the same time, Samsung has made some achievements in software differentiation after obtaining a certain user scale, which in turn has a positive impact on the production of parts and components It is by virtue of this virtuous cycle of development model, Samsung won half of the Android device market.

A highly competitive Android market

However, the mighty Samsung now faces stiff competition from one-vote OEMs in Shenzhen, China, who today have not only built economies of scale but also have their own ecosystems. Prior to this, Samsung's competitors were individual companies like Nokia, but today's competitors do have a number of OEM manufacturers formed an industry alliance, and this alliance has clearly found on top of the Android ecosystem to create a new type The new method of mobile device business, which will undoubtedly threaten the status of Samsung.

Take Samsung, one of China's biggest competitors, for example. The handset maker, which was founded in 2010, has now gained a good reputation in services, software and hardware manufacturing, but in fact it is also facing millet A system "compatibility" problem, how to deal with this issue will be related to the future development of millet, so most of the current millet Android system to do the work is to beautify, at the same time without changing anything to add some new Functions and services, because the only way it would not let Google treated millet like Amazon Kindle Fire, which will ensure its future for more overseas users the possibility of recognition.

In addition to China's mobile phone manufacturers, there are many other very interesting Android manufacturers in other countries, such as India's Micromax and Karbonn, the United States Blu and France's Wiko, etc., compared with the mainstream OEM manufacturers, most of them in the low-end grade The phone and the price has a very obvious advantage, which is somewhat Dell's practice in the field of PC.

This can not help but think of Facebook's practice. Facebook's social networking platform, although home-grown on the desktop, has "loosened" itself by expanding its mobile presence while creating a social platform that can reach every corner of the user's life by allowing access to all social applications, It is also with this innovation, we will see a lot of fresh, interesting applications and services. Facebook's success shows that in this area to create high-quality innovative services do not necessarily need a completely different type of company, the same token also applies to the mobile space, as long as the user's needs from the start of their own innovations for a full range of "Loose", then there is hope to create a prosperous ecosystem, and in the highly competitive Android market have a big act.

Translator: Tang Ke

Baidu News and NetEase science and technology manuscripts, please indicate the source.