Nokia vs Apple

I was browsing yesterday through Rafe (from AAS) detailed reviews of the N95 features, when I stumbled on a very nice paragraph in his part 2 - music review  comparing leading music industry provider Apple and Nokia:

The N95 integrates well with third party services and its capabilities can be extended through third party software. It is theoretically possible for any software-based DRM mechanism to be added to the N95. This reflects an important difference in attitude between digital music market leader Apple and Nokia. Apple prefers a proprietary ‘walled garden’ approach whereas Nokia has chosen to integrate with other products via open standards. Consequently Apple is able to closely control all aspect of the user experience, but locks customers into its own solutions. Nokia’s more open minded approach will appeal to the technical, but may not resonate with the wider public since the user experience can be less cohesive. However, experience in other areas does suggest the open approach does offer better longer term prospects.

I have been asking myself for a long time the same question: why does Apple prefer this 'walled garden' approach? And I found my answer there. Having owned a video 30GB iPod for quite a few months now (I waited for it to have really top specs in order to purchase one) I must say that when first using the iPod, the 'walled garden' didn't make me feel frustrated. The problem came when I saw at a certain shop a chinese replica of the iPod nano, that featured the same iPod options, while still bearing an FM radio, a voice recorder, an ebook reader and quite a few more. That's when I noticed how much my lovely iPod was missing and how much could be instaured in it but was not. In order to add those options to the iPod, you would need to buy a couple of other Apple or Belkin accessories, which Rafe clearly states in "Apple... locks customers into its own solutions" that cost quite a good fortune.

Still Apple manages to attach you to this little white wonder and when it comes to me, I will always prefer the iPod among any other music player, no question about that. Music quality is unquestionnable, and you'll be sure it won't break down or have a software problem after a couple of months of heavy usage.

I wonder whether Apple will manage to make its iPhone such a blockbuster. With such a high retail price, I believe not, especially among US users. Lebanese will always buy an iPhone: it's about looking kewl. But any mobile aware person will of course wonder what Apple will offer software-wise in order to counter balance the huge Symbian application / game directory. Still for now, the iPhone seems to be another "walled garden" device, and there is no clue as to whether Apple will ever get out of this strategy and use open standards.

My thoughts on the matter: too bad. Apple has always had the best of ideas: the iPod spinwheel, the touchscreen, the automatic landscape/portrait detection, the zooming system on the iPhone,... all GREAT ideas. Too bad they were all parts of a device that will never be a convergent one (for the iPod) or of a platform that will never be open for developpers (the iPhone). Although these great ideas won't, I suppose, threaten Nokia's marketshares, it's good and bad to see them: good because it tickles Nokia and Symbian developpers, bad because it makes us, users, jealous of the Apple devices' specs.