The Urge To Merge: Should Symbian And Android Join Forces?

In June, Nokia made an odd little announcement: It was buying the Symbian operating system and turning it—eventually—into an open-source cell phone platform. Blogs everywhere erupted immediately with a vocal “Huh?” Nokia was spending more than 400 million U.S. dollars to buy the operating system of which it has been a long-running partner, then giving it away to a nonprofit foundation. Does Nokia have money to burn? The public reaction might have been different a year ago, but since then, all eyes in this space have been glued to what might come from Google’s Android platform, an open-source smart phone operating system that will see its official debut this fall. That is, when said eyes can be pried away from the iPhone. So what the heck is going on here? Most observers figured that this was actually Nokia’s way of firing back against Android, offering hardware makers and carriers another choice for those seeking a no-cost OS; one which has been around for a few years and has proven that it actually works. Giving away the OS presents a challenge for Nokia. Not only does it cut into the revenue stream, it means Nokia is giving free reign to other hardware manufacturers to compete with itself. (I mean, seriously, it’s not like Nokia hardware has ever been anything to write home about.) Already 40 companies have said they plan to join the foundation, including Sharp, Opera, Korean mobile operator KTF, and all major mobile phone makers. And $400 million is a lot to spend just to tell Google to get stuffed. Of course, motives in the tech world are complicated, and some have begun to speculate whether this might actually be a step toward a project that combines the forces of Symbian and Android. It makes a lot of sense: Symbian has stability, history, and installed base. Android has goodwill, massive third-party developer support, and the muscle of the Google juggernaut behind it. Now that the iPhone has gone global, Apple is muscling its way into Symbian’s turf. Symbian has more than 60 percent market share everywhere but the U.S.—and Nokia is right to brace for impact. A conjoined “Symboid” may just be the last, best hope for staving off the iPhone steamroller. Is all of this actually good for consumers? It will take a while to find out, but I would like to think that this kind of merger would have a positive impact. First, Apple needs a challenger that’s focused on open and flexible software (unlike Windows Mobile) and an easy way to add applications on the fly (unlike BlackBerry). The hope is that a Symbian-Android hybrid would give consumers a vast and robust library of apps from day one, and a wide array of hardware designs. I don’t know if any Symboid device would actually be any better than the iPhone, but the healthy competition could spur all sides into continually improving their respective OSes. Everybody wins. Of course, that’s the dream. Worst case, the new open Symbian fails to catch on with developers as more of them flock to the iTunes App Store. Android is endlessly delayed. iPhone grabs market share and rests on its laurels. I’m cautiously optimistic. The technical hurdles alone make a project merge doubtful for the future, but I think open-source Symbian will indeed become attractive to developers, particularly overseas. Symbian may be all but meaningless on our shores right now, but as a free alternative to bloated options like Windows Mobile, it could be just the thing to give consumers some much-needed choice in a rapidly stagnating market. Christopher Null is a veteran technology journalist. He writes about tech daily at tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null.